[Joe Hancock]

Will it be a roll back of the clubs and balls, or will a US, high profile tournament venue be maintained more along what we expect from The Open venues? To clarify the latter circumstance, I'm talking long term maintenance regimes vs. the regime that is implemented by the USGA or PGATour just weeks or months ahead of a tournament. And, yes, I am thinking of  TOC and Merion changes as I type....

Joe

[Jason Thurman]

My guess is the hourly posting of a new thread about rolling back equipment on GCA happens before either of those things.

[JMEvensky]

I'd guess the odds are slightly better for an equipment rollback--maybe 999,999:1 versus 1,000,000:1.

A club would be very disinclined to host a big tournament and watch the players shoot nothing.The members would take it as a sign their golf course wasn't any good. I can't imagine a club would invite a high profile tournament without trying to make the golf course as hard as possible--and I can't imagine the governing body (USGA,R and A) not insisting on the same as a pre-condition to hosting.

I'd be curious to see which constituencies (aside from the manufacturers) are really opposed to an equipment rollback. If you took the threat of lawsuits off the table,would the USGA be in favor? The PGAT/EPGAT? The players themselves?

[Peter Pallotta]

Hi Joe! I hope you and the family are well, and that work continues to satisfy.

When I try to answer the question, I find myself re-framing it this way: will the USGA be more likely to tackle the manufacturers (and risk losing) than they will be to custom-build 4 or 5 open courses and thus (definitely) lose the cozy relationships with and blue-blooded charms of courses like Merion and Shinnecock? As hard as it is to believe (even for me), I think the USGA would rather take on the manufacturers!!

P.S. - I'd be interested to know, Joe: which of those options would you, personally, PREFER?

All my best
Peter

 

[Joe Hancock]

Peter,

My preference lies within the realm of my knowledge; I don't know much about clubs and balls, but I know a little about maintenance. So naturally I lean towards golf courses going leaner and drier and less rough.

However, I don't know which of the two I mentioned affects the enjoyment of the game for the vast majority of golfers. I suspect that golfers, in general, would rather roll back their equipment than to see "less" maintenance. I also don't know which of these two hypotheses would be better for the future of the game, as far as growth, speed, enjoyment, etc. Once again, my personal preferences may or may not be what the game needs to thrive.

Thanks for the greeting, and all is well here; family and work are better than I could hope for.

Joe

[Peter Pallotta]

Joe - I was writing quickly and didn't explain how I turned your "long term maintenance" possibility into "custom-built open courses".  Simply put, I think it -- juts a guess of course -- least likely of all that those type of maintenance regime will be instituted; and more likely (though less than for a roll back) that we'll see special US Open courses being designed and built in years to come.

So glad to hear all is well, though not surprised that good things continue to come your way.

Peter

[Patrick_Mucci]

Joe,

Rollback = Potential lawsuits

Maintenance = No Lawsuits

I'm voting with you

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()