[Mike_Young]

I'm good with music too, my favorite after a chip in for birdie is Feeling Good by Nina Simone

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8tuTSi6Sck

Me too.  Just small changes creeping....like baseball and softball...it's coming...

doubt it, it's one thing to have music on an iPhone

I'm referring to iphone music on bluetooth speakers....they will come with the carts soon...IMHO

[Connor Dougherty]

I'm referring to iphone music on bluetooth speakers....they will come with the carts soon...IMHO

There is a member at my club who has boat speakers attached to his golf cart. I've considered trying to integrate some bluetooth speakers into my golf bag for when I play alone but have never taken the time.

[Mike_Young]

Mike,

What's in the water these days?

Mark King made zero case against the USGA's behavior/actions other than to say they're not going along with him. What else are the CEO's fed up with?

Jim,
Here's the way I see this and I can bitch about it.  But many cannot.  TV can't and will not.  Many vendors will not.  But the problem is the way the USGA is perceived on a site such as this and by the average golfer.  No matter how they spin it , the USGA really only cares about private golf.  Now we have gone from 7 million private golfers in 1995 to 2.1 million last year.  They are about to have a handicap battle with the R&A.  And yet most US golfers could care less about a handicap card.  It's a classic case of allowing an association to become bigger than the parts.  Club manufacturers, owners and other vendors want golfers.  And that means they need to make it conducive to play.  Which means various rules and elements will change on the average golf course in order to promote such.  Think about it....Little League, Pony League, american Legion Baseball, College baseball, National League, American League, all have different rules or equipment.  Golf will go that way.  And the PGA tour will prevail on rules that will matter for most.  The game of golf was here before the USGA.  A few private clubs in the NE ( and Chicago) got together and started it.  I can appreciate what it does for a few but it will not prevail as it does today.  The game will pass it by. JMO

[Bryan Lewis]

The USGA really doesn't care about public golf other than lip service and "feel good" promotions for corporate America.

What would make you say this?  The USGA cares dearly about public golf.

[Mike_Young]

The USGA really doesn't care about public golf other than lip service and "feel good" promotions for corporate America.

What would make you say this?  The USGA cares dearly about public golf.

Bryan,
IMHO your opinion is the perception but not the reality.  The USGA cares about the USGA.  Sure it may do a few small things here and there but most is lip service.  If they cared, why would they ban the putter?  Why do they need corporate sponsors?  They haven't grown the game.  RE has grown the game.  Having a US Open at Bethpage or Torrey doesn't mean they care about public golf.  JMO
Cheers.

[JESII]

Mike,

Let's dig into this a little more because, while I don't have any facts it doesn't look like you do either.

What actions do you see the USGA make that look inclusive to private golfers and exclusive to public golfers? I don't think public golfers anchor more than private golfers, do they?

[Bryan Lewis]

Bryan,
IMHO your opinion is the perception but not the reality.  The USGA cares about the USGA.  Sure it may do a few small things here and there but most is lip service.  If they cared, why would they ban the putter?  Why do they need corporate sponsors?  They haven't grown the game.  RE has grown the game.  Having a US Open at Bethpage or Torrey doesn't mean they care about public golf.  JMO
Cheers.

Mike,

Both ruling bodies agreed it is best for the game to put restrictions around that type of stroke, because it is contrary to the traditional golf stroke.  It isn't a done deal and isn't done in a vacuum.  They are considering this BECAUSE they care about the game.  What other motive would there be?  Corporate sponsors bring in funds so more could be done for programs like The First Tee, Girl's Golf, turf grass research, affordable golf, sustainable golf, etc.  All to help the game thrive in the future.  The USGA is an association of it's member clubs.  I don't know the numbers, but I think you might be surprised the percentage of public golf clubs that make up the USGA.  To you it may seem like lip service.  I understand that is your perception, which is your reality.  I like to think that if you were closer to the situation that perception would change.  I do appreciate hearing your opinion, because you are not alone I'm sure.

Bryan

[Mike_Young]

Start with the handicap revenues.  A private club can usually just charge the members for enough handicap fees to cover the annual State association dues(as part of the USGA system).  Yet many of the public courses have to eat the fee and can't recoup because they don't have enough players wanting a handicap card.  For example the annual state dues may be $2000 for a golf course.  The private club sends out a $40 handicap fee to 400 members and makes money off the deal.  The public course pays the dues and has 35 people sign up for a handicap.  He loses.  I see no examples of where the USGA enhances the average public golf course in America.  Have you read the entire context of Mark King's interview?  I though it was spot on.

[JESII]

Mike,

Putting the actual $$ figures aside, unless you're confident of the $2,000 club figure and talking about the structure...there are plenty of private clubs whose members don't want to pay every pass through fee the club wants to assign and have a voice to stop it. In addition the available market for public courses to charge that fee to is much greater...not limited to 400 members so it goes both ways probably. In addition, I bet the state and local golf associations offer that service on an individual basis...they do here for $40.

I thought I read the whole thing but will go check...I didn't see anything that was both insightful and relevant.

[jeffwarne]

Mike,
Out of curiousity.

If we went back to an era where you replaced your driver when it was broken, worn out, or you found something that looked and performed better, would that hurt or help the average public course?
As opposed to now where you either replace your driver every 1-2 years, or feel as if though you don't you are missing something.


i.e. do public courses make much money selling equipment?

Does the money the consumer spends on equipment, cut into what he could be spending on green fees?

I'm just not sure what an irrelevant USGA and an unregulated golf club arms race does positive for the average public golfer.
Thanks

[Mike_Young]

Mike,

Putting the actual $$ figures aside, unless you're confident of the $2,000 club figure and talking about the structure...there are plenty of private clubs whose members don't want to pay every pass through fee the club wants to assign and have a voice to stop it. In addition the available market for public courses to charge that fee to is much greater...not limited to 400 members so it goes both ways probably. In addition, I bet the state and local golf associations offer that service on an individual basis...they do here for $40.

I thought I read the whole thing but will go check...I didn't see anything that was both insightful and relevant.

The problem is there is no putting the $$$$ aside.  My association dues are the same as any other club in Ga.  If I can have 100 guys sign up for handicap then it will pay the dues.  Yet a large private club signs up and makes money on the deal.  Sure there is the possibility for public to have more potential handicap fees but for most courses it doesn't happen that way.  I think presently the PGA is represented in about 6000 of the US courses and the GCSAA in 55%.  I wish the USGA were different but they are hindering so many of the clubs and yet they have no skin in the game.  JMO

[Mike_Young]

Mike,
Out of curiousity.

If we went back to an era where you replaced your driver when it was broken, worn out, or you found something that looked and performed better, would that hurt or help the average public course?
As opposed to now where you either replace your driver every 1-2 years, or feel as if though you don't you are missing something.


i.e. do public courses make much money selling equipment?

Does the money the consumer spends on equipment, cut into what he could be spending on green fees?

I'm just not sure what an irrelevant USGA and an unregulated golf club arms race does positive for the average public golfer.
Thanks

Jeff,
I don't think the average public course sells much equipment. 
You know the south and it is probably similar in other parts of the country.  BUT there will be a day when the "gamblers" have had a few beers and some guy loses a hole and is called a "cheater" by the other because of his putter.  Somebody will get hurt. 
Did you just receive the PING press release a few minutes ago?  It's a nice picture announcing the signing of Michael Phelps by PING.  A swimmer.  I can't think of a single reason most public golf courses need the USGA as they exist today.  There will be golfers that need them but not the clubs.  The clubs need people paying green fees and enjoying the game without feeling like they are cheaters. 
My gut feeling is that Mark King has hit the nail on the head.  I do think the tour will end up with their own rules.  And the USGA should be free to continue on as they please.

[jeffwarne]

Mike,
Out of curiousity.

If we went back to an era where you replaced your driver when it was broken, worn out, or you found something that looked and performed better, would that hurt or help the average public course?
As opposed to now where you either replace your driver every 1-2 years, or feel as if though you don't you are missing something.


i.e. do public courses make much money selling equipment?

Does the money the consumer spends on equipment, cut into what he could be spending on green fees?

I'm just not sure what an irrelevant USGA and an unregulated golf club arms race does positive for the average public golfer.
Thanks

Jeff,
I don't think the average public course sells much equipment. 
You know the south and it is probably similar in other parts of the country.  BUT there will be a day when the "gamblers" have had a few beers and some guy loses a hole and is called a "cheater" by the other because of his putter.  Somebody will get hurt. 
Did you just receive the PING press release a few minutes ago?  It's a nice picture announcing the signing of Michael Phelps by PING.  A swimmer.  I can't think of a single reason most public golf courses need the USGA as they exist today.  There will be golfers that need them but not the clubs.  The clubs need people paying green fees and enjoying the game without feeling like they are cheaters. 
My gut feeling is that Mark King has hit the nail on the head.  I do think the tour will end up with their own rules.  And the USGA should be free to continue on as they please.

Well certainly banning  anchoring is one of a series of actions (and especially nonactions) by the USGA that are truly baffling.
By (potentially) creating a stupid ban which golfers will ignore, it opens up the box for golfers to ignore any rollback on clubs or balls.
To your example
"You cheat with your putter, I'll cheat with my driver"
Also, if the ban isn't implemented due to it being shot down during the commentary period, whatever balls they have left to rollback balls and clubs, will probably be effectively cut off.
Seems a stupid battle to risk so much on.
the whole idea that "it's not traditional" is so ridiculous,it harms no one.    Are 400 yard drives traditional? they disfigure courses and cause serious safety and corridor issues-to say nothing of rendering much of the architecture irrelevant.

I've never used a long putter, but with 2 herniated disks, if I ever were going to actually spend some time practicing putting, I'd certainly entertain the long putter and/or anchoring.
How those knuckleheads can allow hot drivers that trampoline and not reregulate the balls, yet worry about freaking grooves is beyond me.

Nobody is disfiguring greens and using ever increasing real estate because of grooves and anchoring.
Sadly, the average golfer thinks taking his trampoline would ruin his enjoyment,but he wouldn't even notice unless his clubhead speed was over 95 mph. he could still have his oversize waffle iron with a light, long shaft, the lightness and length which is still responsible for any gain he gets in distance-unless he has higher clubhead speed

[Mike_Young]

Jeff,
Do you take the Pellucid report....best report in golf...I just emailed you today's report.  Read it...Mike

[jeffwarne]

sounnds like a hemmoroid treatment...

[Mike_Young]

sounnds like a hemmoroid treatment...

read the damn thing and subscribe for a year...he doesn't hold back...

[Garland Bayley]

Mike,
Wouldn't you say courses got harder partially as a misguided respose to equipment?
I'll take a 6750 yard back tee  Athens or Augusta CC with a wooden driver and balata over a fescue lined, lake filled, 7300 yard modern beast with hot equipment any day

Jeff,
sure they did.  No doubt.  ...

And here we naive types thought courses got harder from RTJ heroics, and pinching fairways with bunkers. 7300 yards just being additions of new back tees.

[JESII]

Mike,

Putting the actual $$ figures aside, unless you're confident of the $2,000 club figure and talking about the structure...

The problem is there is no putting the $$$$ aside.  

Mike,

Is it $2,000? That would be 50 golfers at $40 per. What's it get you? Recognition and access as a participating in the only game on earth with a very sound mechanism for measuring golfers on a level playing field. If you're local courses can't find 50 people that want to/can do that then they have much bigger fish to fry.

Should it be mandatory? Not at all!

BUT...

The handicap system facilitates the most valuable aspect of golf...competition & camraderie across the entire spectrum of players.

If your local clubs looked at it like that they might actual be able to generate some additional revenue as well...

[Mike_Young]

Mike,

Putting the actual $$ figures aside, unless you're confident of the $2,000 club figure and talking about the structure...

The problem is there is no putting the $$$$ aside.  

Mike,

Is it $2,000? That would be 50 golfers at $40 per. What's it get you? Recognition and access as a participating in the only game on earth with a very sound mechanism for measuring golfers on a level playing field. If you're local courses can't find 50 people that want to/can do that then they have much bigger fish to fry.

Should it be mandatory? Not at all!

BUT...

The handicap system facilitates the most valuable aspect of golf...competition & camraderie across the entire spectrum of players.

If your local clubs looked at it like that they might actual be able to generate some additional revenue as well...

Jim,
"However, according to www.golfchannelsolutions.com, less than 20% of all golfers keep an official handicap. Further, the average score for all golfers is an even 100, with only 22% of golfers consistently shooting better than 90. In other words, many golfers feel they are not good enough to warrant keeping a handicap."
So many just don't see it that way.
Will you send me an email address?  I would like to send you something.  thx

[Greg Tallman]

Mike,

To be clear are you stating that you represent a club that pays a state golf asscoiation $2000 before you pay the individual fees for those who keep handicaps at your club/course?

[jeffwarne]

So I get my Golf World today.
Cover story-THE USGA's BOLD MOVE
flattering article, tells you how great and powerful the leaders of the USGA are.
lots of bold talk-interesting stuff.
"If we don't do it,who willl ?"
"Governance is not a popularity contest"
I begin to get a feeling they REALLY are going to do something about the ball/hot drivers/cor, etc.
I'm excited.

Then I read from Mike Davis "We are OK with where things are right now. "If it continues to increase, we will do something, but distance is fine. It has basically stopped at the elite level. We don't see equipment innovation in the future going to change distance that much. I've talked with Tim Finchem. He couldn't be happier with his product."


That blurb could have been written by any of his predecessors of the last 20 years, perhaps they passed on the same pit to bury their heads in sand.

Then the piece de resitance
The USGA has a 274 million investment portfolio for possible legal battles and emergency funds in case a natural disaster
THREATENS THE STAGING OF A US OPEN.

or something really serious like a kid learning the game with an anchored putter......

I don't want Mark King to be right.
and was sure after seeing the headline and reading a couple pages that this article would be the antidote to his statements, now, well..........
Let's just say that article did NOTHING to convince me he's not right.

[JESII]

Shivas,

The butt of a putter shaft stuck in your gut as a fulcrum represents a significant shift in the mechanics of putting...the fact that they didn't think of this previously means little in writing the rule.

[Garland Bayley]

Mr. King,

We prefer the people occupying our golf courses to be playing golf, not belly ball.
 

[Mike_Young]

Mike,

To be clear are you stating that you represent a club that pays a state golf asscoiation $2000 before you pay the individual fees for those who keep handicaps at your club/course?

Greg,
I pay a fee of a couple of thousand to a state golf association and it includes up to 100 registered handicaps. All clubs pay the same.  But the private club can send out a bill of say $40 dollars to each and collect from maybe 400 members.  They would send the $25 fee out of the $40 to the association  YET the public course tries to find enough handicap seekers to cover his annual fee and has a very difficult time.  AND therefore some are deciding they don't need to join.  

[Bryan Izatt]

Mike,

"However, according to www.golfchannelsolutions.com, less than 20% of all golfers keep an official handicap. Further, the average score for all golfers is an even 100, with only 22% of golfers consistently shooting better than 90. In other words, many golfers feel they are not good enough to warrant keeping a handicap."

I'd guess that the USGA isn't relevant at all to the 80% who don't keep handicaps or who don't think they are very good.  Conversely, it is probably relevant to the 20% who do and think they are.  What would 'golf" be if there wasn't some governance from somebody.  If the USGA becomes irrelevant, what happens then - anything goes?  If the USGA is irrelevant why don't TM and other manufacturers just make the longest straightest clubs and fastest straightest balls they are capable of and let the marketplace decide what they want to buy?  For the 80% who are not constrained by USGA membership, handicaps or competition, why would they not buy the latest greatest, conforming or not?  Many on here don't seem to mind the USGA regulating, they just seem to think that they are regulating the wrong things - roll back the ball but don't regulate anchored putters or grooves.


For whatever it's worth, TM, in the last couple of days have announced their "Lethal" golf ball, "the ultimate tour performance golf ball" for $50 a dozen.  How does that grow the game of golf or make it more inclusive?  They have also announced the RBZ Stage 2 driver for $350 that they say that "last year they gave better players 17 yards.  This year they are giving you 10 more.  17 + 10"  Interesting wording.  It could be read several different ways.  How come these distance claims never seem to prove out in the Tour driving stats?  How does this grow the game of golf or make it more inclusive?  And,

IMHO, I think I'd rather take the USGA and its warts than the Mike Kings of the the world who are focused on separating me from my money for equipment that makes precious little difference to me.

P.S.  I have a lightly used R11S for anybody who wants it at a very good price.  

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()