[Emile Bonfiglio]

"8 minute abs?"
"7 minute abs would be better"
"How about 6 minute abs"
"that's stupid-who would believe 6 minute abs"

Ever get the feeling the marketing genius behind 15" cups watched Spinal Tap the night before his presentation--but didn't realize the movie was satire?

These cups go to 11....

[Peter Pallotta]

"8 minute abs?"
"7 minute abs would be better"
"How about 6 minute abs"
"that's stupid-who would believe 6 minute abs"

Ever get the feeling the marketing genius behind 15" cups watched Spinal Tap the night before his presentation--but didn't realize the movie was satire?

Yeah, he stumbled up groping and confused in a drunken stoney haze from the basement bowels of some souless convention centre only to be met by three six-month-product--cycle-producing clones in suits who whispered into his ear "15 inch cups" just before shoving him through the curtain to face a bank of lights and a crowd of reporters, to whom he shouted "We love you, 15 inch cups!"...with the speakers turned to 11. 

[JC Jones]

Im thinking it was the choreography that was the problem.

[Jud_T]

You know what they say- 


Big Cup.......


Big Balls......

[jeffwarne]

So I go to Hack golf.
first comment i see is a player who says he'd like to improve on his "average" drive of 285 yards----to 350 yards.
He proposes superballs.
Now there's credibility.
What happens when 350's not enough (or whatever fantasy yardage he thinks he hits it)

It seems to me that time and time again there is always the excuse that golf takes too long, and that Hack golf and 15 inch cups would speed it up and grow the game.
If we grow the game and participation soars, how exactly will that speed up the game?

There was an unnatural growth in the game 10-15 years ago. It naturally contracted.
Golf will be just fine, and a slow quality growth is much preferred to an unsustainable surge of participation by a group looking for easy and quick unearned  success.

[Peter Pallotta]

I find myself wondering, what's worse: the kind of nut jobs they have over at Hack golf, or the kind of nut jobs we have here?

I want to log on over there as Fredrick J Mipsypants and reply: "Good god, man, have you never heard of the spirit of the game?! Do you understand the craftsmanship that went into a persimmon driver? Would you have Garden City and Myopia become wholly obsolete? Superballs indeed! What's next - 15 inch cups? Excuse me - I'll retire to Bedlam!"

[DMoriarty]

Colbert mocked Hack Golf a couple weeks back, starting at about 2:25 in the following clip:  http://www.hulu.com/watch/614336

His suggestion to make golf more fun? Divide golfers into two teams, play for each others greens, lose the clubs, raise the holes to ten feet in the air, and make the balls big and orange.

Colbert also shows a clip where the Taylor Made guy blames the decline in golf on lack of innovation. It occurred to me that the timing of the decline in golf directly corresponds to perhaps the greatest period of golf "innovation" in history of the game.


(This is the same Colbert segment where he proposed his now infamous and controversial "Ching-Chong Ding-Dong Foundation for Sensitivity to Orientals or Whatever.")    

[Peter Pallotta]

Thanks for that link, David - that was very funny.

Unbelievable, huh? Trouble with golf says the guy who churns out new 'innovations' every 3 months is that golf doesn't innovate. Ugh.

Peter

[Garland Bayley]

Shorten the distance the ball goes. More golf, less walking! Bring back the floater!


Shamelessly stolen from Dr. Mac

[Greg Murphy]

Shorten the distance the ball goes. More golf, less walking! Bring back the floater!


Shamelessly stolen from Dr. Mac

Absolutely irrefutable Garland. Golf has real issues. Heads in sand won't make them go way. Time and cost deter. Both would be addressed if the ball didn't go so far. Reduce the distance travelled over the course of a round and you reduce capital costs, operating costs and time to play. Where the equipment manufacturers could really make a difference, is if they used their marketing muscle to change attitudes so that, instead of playing from multiple tees, we played multiple ball styles. The best would eschew playing the "longest ball" like they now eschew moving to the forward tees from the tips. The game itself need change very little, since the Bubba's of the world will still hit it way past everybody else, but instead of walking 7500 yards a round after their blasts, 6500 yards will cover the distance and because distance is relative, the game will not feel diminished in any way as it might if we were playing with something like Cayman balls or a truncated game like pitch and putt.

[Ken Moum]

Colbert mocked Hack Golf a couple weeks back, starting at about 2:25 in the following clip:  http://www.hulu.com/watch/614336

His suggestion to make golf more fun? Divide golfers into two teams, play for each others greens, lose the clubs, raise the holes to ten feet in the air, and make the balls big and orange.

Colbert also shows a clip where the Taylor Made guy blames the decline in golf on lack of innovation. It occurred to me that the timing of the decline in golf directly corresponds to perhaps the greatest period of golf "innovation" in history of the game.


(This is the same Colbert segment where he proposed his now infamous and controversial "Ching-Chong Ding-Dong Foundation for Sensitivity to Orientals or Whatever.")    

Re. the connection between " innovation" and the decline...

Two other popular participation sports have done the same thing. Tennis and bowling went from being simple sports focused on technique and finesse (mostly) and they both were transformed into power games in which technologically advanced equipment became ever more important.

And the bottom fell out of participation.

Now it's golf's turn.

K

[jeffwarne]

Shorten the distance the ball goes. More golf, less walking! Bring back the floater!


Shamelessly stolen from Dr. Mac

Absolutely irrefutable Garland. Golf has real issues. Heads in sand won't make them go way. Time and cost deter. Both would be addressed if the ball didn't go so far. Reduce the distance travelled over the course of a round and you reduce capital costs, operating costs and time to play. Where the equipment manufacturers could really make a difference, is if they used their marketing muscle to change attitudes so that, instead of playing from multiple tees, we played multiple ball styles. The best would eschew playing the "longest ball" like they now eschew moving to the forward tees from the tips. The game itself need change very little, since the Bubba's of the world will still hit it way past everybody else, but instead of walking 7500 yards a round after their blasts, 6500 yards will cover the distance and because distance is relative, the game will not feel diminished in any way as it might if we were playing with something like Cayman balls or a truncated game like pitch and putt.

+1

was talking with another pro yesterday(who owns a pro shop and is a long hitter) about the article in the NY Times and how pathetic the President of the PGA came across in the article.
He said, it's really simple
1.Roll back the ball to shrink the field of play everybody walks
2. Grow the game the way it used to be with kids caddying and junior programs
3.Still trying tp get my arms around banning athe anchored putter but enlarging the hole.

and Ken is right, though I'm not sure golf was ever intended to be anymore popular than bowling and tennis (in the 70's)
Lots of knuckleheads out there-I'm OK if they keep playing SuperMario, skateboards, Motocross or whatever "cool" things they're into.
Some will eventually gravitate to golf and its appeal, but many won't-that's OK

[Doug Siebert]

How did the size of 15 inches come about? What I find frustrating is puts that I miss 1 inch short/left/right or hit a bit too hard and pop off the back edge. So give me an inch on all sides and a little extra to spare and go for 7 inch cups. I've hit many good even great putts that burn the edges. But if I miss a putt 5 inches offline my stroke, speed or read was off enough that I don't deserve to hole the putt. Imagine an Driver that is allowed to be struck over 15 degrees open/closed and always find the fairway because they are 200 yards wide. I'm open to the idea but it needs to be slimmed down a bit.

Let me preface by saying I hate the idea of 15" cups, and think it will do zero to increase participation.

That said, I think you're looking at this based on biases of scale from the current cup size.  You wish that a 1" short or grazing the edge putt would drop, because you feel like you "hit a good putt" and maybe it deserves to go in, but something 6" short or over a full cup right/left don't.  Well, maybe that makes sense from inside 10', but what about a 50' putt?  Don't you feel like you hit a pretty good putt if it misses a cup to the side or comes up 6" short?  A putt of that length "deserves" to go in if its that close, does it not?

Consider if golf today had a 2" cup (we'll ignore the issue of there being no place to put the flag)  The idea of going to a 4.25" cup would be the same magnitude of change as going to a 9" cup today, and would seem as ludicrous.  Today's knee knocking four footer would be a knee knocking one footer, and getting up and down from around the greens would be much much harder than it is today.  It would still be golf, putting would take on greater importance however since it would account for a higher percentage of your total score.

[Doug Siebert]

I agree 100% with those saying that if you want to grow the game amongst kids, you have to address the cost and length of rounds.  The cost has gone up faster than the rate of inflation, and the time it takes to play has lengthened.  Kids don't want to play a game that has a lot of standing around and waiting, but that's what golf has become in a lot of places.

If people who golf are having trouble getting their kids interested in the game, what are the chances for a kid who doesn't have anyone in the family playing?  Imagine a kid who has a friend who plays (because his family does) and he tells his parents he's interested in golf.  They look at how much it costs per round (they're hardly going to consider season passes unless they're sure he'll stay interested) along with even used equipment, balls, potentially lessons.  They'll probably encourage him to play basketball, baseball or soccer instead, or offer to buy him a PS4 or iPad if he'll give up the idea of golf, because it'll save them money.

If he does start playing, how long before it gets old getting stuck behind a foursome of guys who think they're too important to let mere kids play through and having to stand around and wait 10 minutes per hole?  Kids want to play, not wait, and they're quickly going to conclude golf is a game for old boring people or jerks based on the way I see kids treated on the course today and remember occasionally being treated myself when I was a kid.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Doug,

I think that there's almost universal agreement that the time to play 18 holes is a major impediment.

YET, NO ONE, except a few are willing to do anything about it.

Clubs will NOT take the hard line position on the time to play.

Last week a fellow from Arizona sent me a request to forward him the scorecard from GCGC because he's trying to get the rounds down from 5 hours to 4:30 to 4:00 to 3:30.

He knew that the back of the scorecard at GCGC states the following:

3 1/2 hours is SUFFICIENT TIME FOR A 4-BALL MATCH TO FINISH 18 HOLES.

I think earlier scorecards may have indicated 3 hours.

But, the problem remains, few, if any clubs are willing to implement and enforce fast play guidelines.

The "WILL" just isn't there and I don't understand why.

Now, I love a round of golf, with 4 or 5 other guys, a foursome, threesome, twosome or by myself.
The comraderie is the icing on the cake.
As much as I love being on the course, I don't like slow rounds where I have to wait to hit a shot, any shot.

Between guys who watch too much TV golf and emulate every slow playing golfer they see, to the mechanical golfers who go through a routine that doesn't produce enhanced results, the pace of play over the last 6 decades has deteriorated.
And, what's interesting is that the golfer, vis a vis equipment, is hitting the ball farther.

So, it's the culture.

If I see another guy take 10 minutes to line up the line he's put on his ball, when it's his turn to putt, I'm going to go bonkers.

It's the culture.

We need to make fun of people who line up the line on their ball.
We need to abuse people who are slow players.
We need to ostracize people who are slow players
We need to move slow players to the last tee off times of the day

End of rant

[Garland Bayley]

What many high handicap slow players don't realize is that they play worse by playing slow. I have had a regular that I play with, whom I have mentioned to that he plays slow. He takes his stance grounds his club and then stands there forever staring at the ball. IMO he is tensing practically every muscle in his body before he swings, and it is no wonder that he makes bad swings. He particularly does this on the last few holes of a close match, which he invariably loses. Methinks he thinks deep concentration will allow him to guide the muscles of his body to a better shot. IMO nothing could be farther from the truth.

Anyway, he has stopped playing with us, and plays by himself trying to get his game better. He says if he can't get better, he's quitting.

[David Kelly]

The "WILL" just isn't there and I don't understand why.

Because the game is in a period of decline and everybody is afraid to scare away customers because they know that there is nobody behind them to take their place.

[Doug Siebert]

The "WILL" just isn't there and I don't understand why.

Because the game is in a period of decline and everybody is afraid to scare away customers because they know that there is nobody behind them to take their place.

I specifically choose a course in the area, especially on weekends, because I know that I can often get around it in three hours as a twosome, and only a handful of times more than four hours, versus a couple other courses that are overall probably of equal quality where four hours is a damn fast round, and over five hours is not unusual.

I'm sure there are others who feel the same way.  Any course who is "afraid to scare away customers" is run by morons who think that such actions can only chase golfers away, and not attract other golfers.

The interesting thing about the "fast" course is that they don't do anything special for pace of play.  I think the main reason is because there aren't a lot of trees "in play", and the rough is only about 3" deep most of the time, and the tall native grass requires a particularly long and wild shot to get into.  There isn't a lot of time wasted looking for balls, and I think that somehow pushes players to not dawdle in general because they're used to moving along at this course.  If you play a course where you're waiting for five minutes for the group ahead to look for balls on the first couple holes, you get into a slow mindset and you aren't going to worry too much about keeping the group behind you waiting for whatever reason, and pretty soon you have 4.5 to 5 hour rounds.

Despite the fact this course has six par threes, and six par fives (three quite reachable for longer hitters, two out of range of anyone not named Bubba) and two par 4s that are driveable by long hitters, play moves along quite well most of the time.  The course is interesting, challenging, and well designed, but not unnecessarily penal and designed to cause tour pros to work to shoot in the 60s like too many modern courses - there are only three tour pros (two former, one current) I'm aware of who have ever played this course, which is probably the case with most such modern courses, so designing it to challenge them is wasteful as well as a fool's errand!

[Patrick_Mucci]

The "WILL" just isn't there and I don't understand why.

Because the game is in a period of decline and everybody is afraid to scare away customers because they know that there is nobody behind them to take their place.

David,

There's certainly some truth in that, but, long before the game entered the period of decline, clubs were unwilling to encourage and enforce fast play.

There's an understandable desire to avoid confrontations with fellow members, that's why the time out - time in - differential system we developed worked so well.

[Brian Finn]

We need to make fun of people who line up the line on their ball.
We need to abuse people who are slow players.
We need to ostracize people who are slow players
We need to move slow players to the last tee off times of the day

+1

[jeffwarne]

The "WILL" just isn't there and I don't understand why.

Because the game is in a period of decline and everybody is afraid to scare away customers because they know that there is nobody behind them to take their place.

I specifically choose a course in the area, especially on weekends, because I know that I can often get around it in three hours as a twosome, and only a handful of times more than four hours

The interesting thing about the "fast" course is that they don't do anything special for pace of play.  I think the main reason is because there aren't a lot of trees "in play", and the rough is only about 3" deep most of the time, and the tall native grass requires a particularly long and wild shot to get into.  There isn't a lot of time wasted looking for balls, and I think that somehow pushes players to not dawdle in general because they're used to moving along at this course.  If you play a course where you're waiting for five minutes for the group ahead to look for balls on the first couple holes, you get into a slow mindset and you aren't going to worry too much about keeping the group behind you waiting for whatever reason, and pretty soon you have 4.5 to 5 hour rounds.

+1
Imagine that- a course that can survive without eye candy.

[BCowan]

The "WILL" just isn't there and I don't understand why.

Because the game is in a period of decline and everybody is afraid to scare away customers because they know that there is nobody behind them to take their place.

I specifically choose a course in the area, especially on weekends, because I know that I can often get around it in three hours as a twosome, and only a handful of times more than four hours

The interesting thing about the "fast" course is that they don't do anything special for pace of play.  I think the main reason is because there aren't a lot of trees "in play", and the rough is only about 3" deep most of the time, and the tall native grass requires a particularly long and wild shot to get into.  There isn't a lot of time wasted looking for balls, and I think that somehow pushes players to not dawdle in general because they're used to moving along at this course.  If you play a course where you're waiting for five minutes for the group ahead to look for balls on the first couple holes, you get into a slow mindset and you aren't going to worry too much about keeping the group behind you waiting for whatever reason, and pretty soon you have 4.5 to 5 hour rounds.

+1
Imagine that- a course that can survive without eye candy.

There is truly a ton of common sense on this page, I had to double check and see if I was on the right site.   
   I don't see myself buying any Taylor Made products in the future...

[Paul Gray]

And once again Mucci IS talking sense.   

Two examples:

Having popped down to the club (Hayling) yesterday morning, I bumped into three ladies as they headed to the first tee. I returned three hours later to find them putting their clubs back in their respective cars. A brief conversation ensued in which they confirmed that they had played all eighteen holes. Clearly they'd had a very pleasant time in the Spring sunshine, they just hadn't felt the need to mess about.

In contrast, last year, as some of you know, I spent the summer having what amounted to a mini sabbatical and worked in a Pro Shop. It was something I'd always wanted to try and, by and large, it was a wonderful experience. However, I worked for one of the large chains where money sings louder than anything else and no one dares to "have a word" with slow players as ultimately they are customers. The net result has been for round times to get longer and longer. In part that's down to overcrowding but in part it's down to blatantly unnecessary slow play. Stereotyping massively, the men tend to take themselves far too seriously while the women tend to forget to play golf whenever gossip breaks out. The old folks on a Monday morning rarely get round in less than five hours. Other members moan to the Pro Shop but no one actually acts. In my time there I did try to address the issue but even the simple notice I put up advising players that three and a half hours was long enough (a notice which can be seen in many clubs up and down the land) was met with something approaching a riot. Safe to say that the notice, along with every other attempt I made to address the problem, didn't receive any backing. I came into work one day and, after just a couple of short weeks, my precious notice had disappeared.

Bottom line, slow play (and poor etiquette in not calling quicker groups through) exists wherever no strong culture is in place making it absolutely clear what is and isn't acceptable. Those ladies at Hayling wouldn't dream of stopping for a chat on the green because it's simply not a part of their golf DNA. We all need direction in life but, regrettable though it is, some people need something more akin to herding.

   

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()