Gentlemen,
I looked at this thread and dug out a column I wrote some years ago for the S.M. Times/ANG Group. Some of the comments seem dated now, but there might be some relevance here:
IS GOLF STAGNATING?
-Gib Papazian
Is golf in a rut? I think so, judging from reader comments on the declining interest in the LPGA and Senior Tours and the lack of overall growth of the game in America.
Any activity, regardless of how satisfying, eventually becomes less interesting if done the same way time after time. Perhaps golf suffers from a form of mind-numbing repetition, as week after week the professional tours mostly play the same medal play format.
Amateurs in America take their cues from the Tour professionals and despite regular Nassau games, most everyone in America is still obsessed with their total score against their handicap index.
Ah, but the very root of the problem may lie in this overly formalized way we approach golf in this nation. We have gotten stale and several readers suggested the most obvious improvement would be to experiment with different formats - especially on the LPGA and Senior Tours.
"This is fine for the professionals," you say, "but what about the necessity of accurate posting of scores for handicapping?"
The USGA is quite proud of its system for establishing fair competition between different skill levels, but this illusory premise (and promise) of numerical equality through some convoluted mathematical formula is 90 percent fiction and 10 percent manure.
For instance, two 18 handicappers might have vastly different styles, one suited to a cunning links course that rewards the ground game and the other a high-ball hitter who feels at home on courses that encourage the aerial approaches.
Though two golf courses may rate identically in terms of difficulty as adjudged by the governing golf association, these mathematical equations do not work in practical application when extrapolated out to individual situations.
The so-called “Equitable Stroke Control” system is ridiculously complicated and therefore is used by less than half of those posting scores. Like all inaccurate computer data, garbage-in guarantees garbage out.
Handicaps in America are less accurate than those under the jurisdiction of the Royal & Ancient - which tends to more heavily weigh tournament scores than casual rounds and asks players to post their hole by hole scores. The difference is that the USGA does not embrace nor encourage a more elastic perspective of how the game can be played and handicapped.
They have played golf across the pond for 500 years, we have for about 110. We play in 5 hours on public courses and they play in 3. It comes down to a fairly simple exercise in historical perspective.
Research indicates that one of the most commonly stated reasons for quitting golf, or not taking it up in the first place, is the time it takes. What better way for the USGA to attack the problem than start here? So-called "ready golf" and all the dry lectures they preach to the average player have proven a waste of time.
A round of golf takes just as long today as 25 years ago, before "game improvement" technology that was theoretically supposed to make the game easier - and by extension faster.
It also loosely follows that the longer a culture has embraced the game, the shorter their rounds. Japan's golf obsession began in the 1960's and by contrast, their rounds are a six hour affair, not including a lavish lunch at the turn.
Match play, alternate shot and even Stableford scoring have proven to produce compelling theatre on television. The old saw that 72 holes of medal play is the fairest way to determine a champion ignores that golf was meant to be more of a whimsical adventure than an antiseptic examination. It is, after all, only a game - a concept foreign to our national temperament.
In Britain, when one is out of the hole in a match, they simply pick up and move to the next hole. Playing out to the bitter end is anathema to the average player because in their most commonly played formats, each hole stands on its own as a separate battle.
Dr. Alister Mackenzie decried what he called "the scorecard and pencil golfer," noting that it delayed the game and required designers to worry too much about creating golf holes that are fair for medal play instead of stimulating match players to attempt risky but potentially rewarding shots.
Across the pond, a golf course is viewed much as we do a billiards table, where any number of different kinds of games can be played. Imagine how deadly-dull pool would become if you played "stripes and solids" every time.
The odd paradox is that the British, hopelessly stodgy in so many other respects, are far less rigid in how they play golf than we Americans - supposedly a flexible and "can do" nation. This may explain why our Ryder Cup team usually digs itself a hole after the first day's play of foursomes and alternate shot.
A miniature Renaissance is already afoot on the major tours, but the LPGA and Seniors especially would be well advised to spice up their weekly death marches - especially the LPGA. With the great Nancy Lopez announcing her retirement and Dottie Pepper and Juli Inkster approaching their dotage, a personality-challenged tour is not a prescription for success.
Where to start for the rank and file amateurs? How about golf professionals and tournament chairmen at the country club level? Go to Muirfield in Scotland on a Saturday morning and the Club Secretary will be busy arranging four-ball matches. After lunch, it is traditional for everyone to play alternate shot, two balls per foursome.
Golf in America is still viewed mostly as a solitary activity - perhaps a byproduct of our societal admiration for rugged individualism. The only time we deviate from this is the dreaded Scramble format - where 36 foursomes of polyester-clad hackers cram onto a golf course, armed with a tasteless box lunch and a sleeve of Top Flites stamped with the company logo. What a colossal bore!
But is America ready to change the way we view our game? Time will tell, but this long journey might begin with the next generation of junior golfers. The game is treading water, a clear signal from potential players that what we are doing is not working.