Is the R & A better than the USGA?

[cary lichtenstein]

It appears to me. that the R & A did nothing special to to St Andrews, no narrowing of fairways, no speeding up the greens, and the Bristish Open in absolutely benign conditions, no real winds, no rain, no cold, was a real test of golf and the best player won.

So why did this happen?

[Patrick_Mucci]

It appears to me. that the R & A did nothing special to to St Andrews, no narrowing of fairways, no speeding up the greens, and the Bristish Open in absolutely benign conditions, no real winds, no rain, no cold, was a real test of golf and the best player won.

So why did this happen?

IT DIDN'T.

You've been traveling on a golf sojourn so long that you have been out of touch.

TOC was lengthened, the fairways were narrowed, areas that were previously fairways were grown to high rough and bunker work was undertaken.

I'd call that substantial alteration.

As to putting surface speeds, when it's light to midnight, you're not in Kansas anymore Toto.[/color]

[Patrick_Mucci]

The R & A is probably a better guardian of the game.

Redanman,

How so ?
Would you expound on your statement ?

They dragged their feet on the COR and other issues.

[JohnV]

Well, they are the ones holding the line on Laser Rangefinders.  They are also holding the line on hole-in-one prizes affecting amateur status.

Decided for yourself if either of those are good or bad for the game.

Seems like a toss-up to me.

[James Bennett]

Cary

I was thinking of a similar thread over the weekend.

I would give kudos to the USGA for playing at Pinehurst, and to the R&A for playing at St Andrews.

How narrow were the fairways at St Andrews?  I can't comment till I see the replay, and of course I don't know how wide they have been (1 & 18 was wide, as did 9, but 17 looked pokey and contrived).

When the Open commenced, my initial feelings were that the R&A were doing a better job than the USGA.  Then I checked myself following the Pinehurst US Open.

Certainly, full marks to the R&A for the green speeds.  The putting and pin spots were full of interest.  The pins seemed accessable, if you were good enough and brave enough.  What amazed me was the performance of the veterans/past champions eg Norman, Faldo, Watson and Daly (forgive me if any of these blew up on day 4 - I slept last night and will see the replay when I get home).

Perhaps we have been more fortunate in 2005 with both of the Opens.  

[cary lichtenstein]

Bill:

Your answer to Pat is a classic

 "No",

I love it

Q

[Robert_Walker]

USGA does a better job. USGA was ahead of R and A on COR among other things. USGA wanted to declare the Futura non conforming.
Laser issue is too hard to fight. I saw distance devices being sold at Royal Porthcawl.
Hole in one is not an act of skill. It is like winning the lottery.

Oh, and does anyone remember Carnoustie 1999?

[Mike_Young]

John,
I think you will see rangefinders legal for USGA in 2008.

[Brad Klein]

By the way, Carnoustie in 1999 was not the result of the R&A, it was largely the result of the superintendent, John Philp, who set the course up as he wanted. The R&A had virtually no staff for agronomic or championship event set up, and as I understand it has only a rudimentary staff now. But generally, they set up much narrower lanes of play than is the norm at these links courses - look at St. Georges (2003) or Troon (2004). What was so weird about St. Andrews is that sometimes the fairways were kept miles wide (1-8, 5-14, 9-10) and other time shrunk to narrow ribbons.

[Tiger_Bernhardt]

I do agree with Pat to a degree. Yes, they added distance and narrowed some farways. However, they did not change the character of the holes and the course. Only #2 seemed to play significantly different to me. They are always doing bunker work and the greens were in good shape. I like the mindset of the R&A much more than the USGA who it seems has an attitude about scoring and ends up taking the architecture and strategy out of the course. I loved the Open as always. the USGA events are now 3rd to me behind the Master and the Open. Of course Hotie seems to want to fool with Augusta National till he finally breaks it.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Bill:

Your answer to Pat is a classic

 "No",

I love it

Cary,

I didn't expect that Redanman would provide anything substantive to support his claim, hence his answer was NO surprise.

[peter_p]

Golfweek says that the R&A and USGA will jointly announce at the Walker Cup (Aug 13-14) that rangefinders will be legal for use as a condition of competition

[Phil_the_Author]

The USGA. At least they don't take preferential treatment at one of the great U.S. courses of the world as the R&A does at St. Andrews.

I know that they existed as their own club going back to Adam, I just feel that if you are going to be the judge & jury for the world of golf that you can no longer have that affiliation.

Imagine if Rick Wolffe announced tomorrow that he & his fellow Baltusrol members were going to start the N&IGA (that's the New & Improved Golf Association), and that they expected every golf course in the world to pay them dues and that they would be the arbiter of the rules of the game, what will be allowed equipment-wise and all else that is good and holy...

Wait a minute, on second thought that might not be such a bad idea... Hmmm....  

[Bob_Huntley]

The USGA. At least they don't take preferential treatment at one of the great U.S. courses of the world as the R&A does at St. Andrews.

I know that they existed as their own club going back to Adam, I just feel that if you are going to be the judge & jury for the world of golf that you can no longer have that affiliation.

Imagine if Rick Wolffe announced tomorrow that he & his fellow Baltusrol members were going to start the N&IGA (that's the New & Improved Golf Association), and that they expected every golf course in the world to pay them dues and that they would be the arbiter of the rules of the game, what will be allowed equipment-wise and all else that is good and holy...

Wait a minute, on second thought that might not be such a bad idea... Hmmm....  

Philip,

Perhaps you would be good enough to tell me what dues British golf clubs pay to the R&A. The R&A did not seek to become the arbiter of golf rules, regulations or anything else, it was thrust upon them, without much of a demurral I may add.

Without the continuing support of the R&A the courses at St. Andrews would have deteriorated to an alarming degree. The preferential treatment received by it's members can be summed up in the adage about the Golden Rule...."He that has the gold rules."

[Phil_the_Author]

Actually Bob, I didn't say that any course paid them dues. My allusion of "that they expected every golf course in the world to pay them dues and that they would be the arbiter of the rules of the game, what will be allowed equipment-wise and all else that is good and holy..." was tongue-in-cheek, as was my entire post.

The USGA, the R&A & the PGA of America are all organizations that have grown overly large by a combination of the game's evolution, necessity and with a fair helping of greed thrown in. The reality is that nothing can possibly replace them, and that was my point. They are under a constant barrage by all who demand a measure of perfection from them. It is very easy to criticize a mistake as it always happens in hindsight.

Each of these organizations work very hard to get it right and do it right, yet inevuitably they will have failures that get overly criticized in the same way that their accomplishments are overly praised.

I would love to ask anyone how to go about establishing a new organization that everyone could work with, would work fairly toward all and serve as a true protector of the game. Then show me how it could actually come about. A brilliant writer I know once wrote that "Logistics are the assasins of ideas." These organizations prove the truth of this.

By the way, I could be mistaken, but isn't there a membership fee that courses in the USA pay to be members of the USGA or PGA of America?

[Michael Moore]

Golfweek says that the R&A and USGA will jointly announce at the Walker Cup (Aug 13-14) that rangefinders will be legal for use as a condition of competition

Did this come to pass?

[Ken Fry]

By the way, I could be mistaken, but isn't there a membership fee that courses in the USA pay to be members of the USGA or PGA of America?

Yes Philip you are mistaken.  The USGA is an organization clubs pay a fee to be members of.  The PGA of America is a private organization of golf professionals who pay to belong.

Isn't comparing the R&A and the USGA kind of like comparing the Presidential election?  Try to choose the lesser of two evils?

Ken

[Mark_F]

I think a better question might be why are they as they are?

Is it really because they are afraid of being sued?

Is it because they truly believe they are helping average palyers play better?

Is it because they really believe the game is more exciting the way that it is now?

Pro golf, to me, is far from boring - however, I don't think it is as interesting as it should be.  Although that is also the fault of the respective tours, of course, as much as governing bodies.

[Michael Moore]

Golfweek says that the R&A and USGA will jointly announce at the Walker Cup (Aug 13-14) that rangefinders will be legal for use as a condition of competition

Come on now . . .  I need an answer . . . did they make this announcement or was this idle speculation? I can't find anything regarding this on the Google . . .