What did Pete Dye learn this week?

[Tom_Doak]

The problem with all these discussions is they are in the context of pros.  Short of equipment roll backs, the only way to change the pro game is to stop supporting it and accommodating for the pro game.  Hitting the pocket books of pro athletes is all they understand.  The problem is with the pro game.  Instead of requiring pros to figure out how to deal with the problem, everybody else runs around like headless chickens looking for solutions.  Why - its a money and ego game.  Nobody wants to park their ego or take a financial hit. 

Ciao

Sean:

This is undoubtedly true.  Unfortunately, it's also a trap that Mr. Dye fell into, because so many of his clients wanted him to build tournament courses throughout his career, and he started focusing on those players too much.  That's one reason I am so fond of Long Cove -- it was sort of a reaction to just having built the TPC at Sawgrass -- a course in a retirement and vacation-home community where there was clearly no need to design for the pros.

The best move I made in my own career was to start out on my own thinking that my clients had no realistic interest in professional tournament play, and just think about what would be interesting for the other 99%.  Of course, now too many people assume I don't know how to design for the pros, which is wrong, but it was still a good trade overall.

[Patrice Boissonnas]

I have a question from my far away France where we rarely see world top players in action :
Why don't they build stronger defense in the 300 yards area to prevent them from freeky driving?
More bunkers could help but I understand you need to think of regular players who will play the course the rest of the year. Then what about growing high thick roughs where the long drives would normally land ? Would it really be a problem to mow it back into fairway the week after the tournament for regular players?
This shouldn't apply on every hole but it would be great if pros where pushed to use more 3 woods or even long irons off the tee.

[Patrick_Mucci]

I have a question from my far away France where we rarely see world top players in action :
Why don't they build stronger defense in the 300 yards area to prevent them from freeky driving?

Because it would unduly penalize the weaker players on their second shots, is very expensive to do in conjunction with constructing bunkers for everyday play and most courses were built for their members not today's PGA Tour golfers


More bunkers could help but I understand you need to think of regular players who will play the course the rest of the year. Then what about growing high thick roughs where the long drives would normally land ? Would it really be a problem to mow it back into fairway the week after the tournament for regular players?

Yes, the grass would burn out/die.

You just can't cut the grass back to it's original height in one cut in season, it has to be done gradually and usually in the off season with cooler temps

This shouldn't apply on every hole but it would be great if pros where pushed to use more 3 woods or even long irons off the tee.
At a number of tournaments, that's what they do, but the fans aren't attending or watching them on TV, hitting 4-irons off the tee.
The fans WANT to see 300+ yard drives, the fans want to see eagles and birdies.
PGA Tour golf is entertainment as much, if not more than a competition.

[Tom_Doak]

I have a question from my far away France where we rarely see world top players in action :
Why don't they build stronger defense in the 300 yards area to prevent them from freeky driving?
More bunkers could help but I understand you need to think of regular players who will play the course the rest of the year. Then what about growing high thick roughs where the long drives would normally land ? Would it really be a problem to mow it back into fairway the week after the tournament for regular players?
This shouldn't apply on every hole but it would be great if pros where pushed to use more 3 woods or even long irons off the tee.

Patrice:

The answers to your question are

1)  The sponsors [equipment manufacturers] surely wouldn't like it if the players were not brandishing their expensive drivers on every hole and showing how far you could hit them if only you bought one, and

2)  If you took the drivers out of the players' hands, they would moan about it so loudly that you would have trouble sleeping over there in France. 

[Tony Ristola]

The problem with all these discussions is they are in the context of pros.  Short of equipment roll backs, the only way to change the pro game is to stop supporting it and accommodating for the pro game.  Hitting the pocket books of pro athletes is all they understand.  The problem is with the pro game.  Instead of requiring pros to figure out how to deal with the problem, everybody else runs around like headless chickens looking for solutions.  Why - its a money and ego game.  Nobody wants to park their ego or take a financial hit. 

Ciao

10-years ago Finchem commented that the tour would act on its own on the ball if something wasn't done. How time flies and too bad someone hasn't done something.
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,4827.0.html

Hitting the tour might work but it's never going to happen. The magazines and all the associated businesses won't let it.

It's a job for the USGA and R&A but these folks don't seem too interested in solving the problem. The solution would take a week. The problem is known, as is how to address it. There might be court cases, but so what? That's the era we live in. The USGA has the money to fight this in the courts. They do not need to consult with the manufacturers on this either; set the law on the New Ball, and have the mfg.'s conform.

If the USGA loses (which would seem odd don't you think), then we know the manufacturers run the game.. and golf can reorganize.

Do you think the manufacturers would want that fight? Trying to bring down golf's governing bodies as they try to bring sanity back to the game? I don't.

[Sean_A]

Tony

I am skeptical that the governing bodies will do a meaningful rollback.  Increases in distance have been incremental and essentially sanctioned by the governing bodies.  Where would they draw the line in admitting their shortsightedness?  There is also the issue of a lot of non-elite players not wanting a rollback and there is a strong argument in favour of this stance.  That of course leaves bifurcation on the table.  The folks who run the USGA and R&A plus their core supporters are not in favour of this seemingly drastic move.  I personally don't see what the big deal is, but then I accept that my game and that of a touring pro are so different that formalizing that difference wouldn't matter at all to me.  A perfect world solution doesn't exist, so the next best thing has to be an imperfect world solution.  To me, that is the world of the rank and file golfer, not the elite golfer. 

Ciao

[Yancey_Beamer]

Tom,
Played Long Cove last year with a friend and our wives, on your advice.Truly magical.
Playing a course designed for pros while on vacation would be as much fun as playing water polo in a pool filled with sharks.
Totally agree.
Yancey

[mike_beene]

I enjoy pro golf now as it is. In fact I am probably one of the lucky people who over 30 years have not lost distance because equipment has improved.Hypocritically,I want them to get control of it now but not roll back.