I am glad to see so many of you have responded to my e-mail, I hope all of you have taken the time to also let the USGA know how you/we feel. Maybe John or Tom or both of you can get a web sign up sheet going that we can send "around the world" and EVERY time someone adds their name a copy gets sent to the USGA. We may not win, but we might crash their web site. That might get them to pull their head out of that dark spot! George Huson ByGeorge Custom Clubs Dave Tutelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Following up on Tom's reply...
At 06:37 PM 3/21/2007, Tom Wishon wrote: >The USGA and many golfers too have always wanted to have one set of >rules for ALL golfers. There are certainly arguments pro and con >about that, with good points on both sides. I had the opportunity to find out the official party line from Alastair Cochran in 1998. He said that the R&A had taken a survey of its membership, and the survey said that the members wanted the rules to be the same for all golfers. The USGA and R&A have agreed to keep their rules consistent; I think that's a VERY GOOD THING. But here we have the situation that a majority of R&A members who responded to a survey at least 10 years ago are driving the USGA with this. Furthermore, I don't know: * How long before 1998 the survey was. But even 1998 was just the beginning of the spring-face debate, so the survey was taken before all the activist tinkering with the equipment rules. So I don't know if it would come out the same today. (BTW, my meeting with Cochran was hosted by Dick Helmstetter at Callaway R&D HQ, so spring faces were a major component of the discussion. You can see my writeup of the meeting at http://www.tutelman.com/golfclubs/SanDiego98.php?ref=clubmakeronline#Callaway ) * How many members responded, nor what cross-section of the membership, nor how overwhelming the majority was. Anyway, I'm pretty sure that is what is driving the USGA position. I doubt there is new information, just the survey that by now is at least 10 years old and probably more. >...since the PGA Tour has agreed to conduct all events under the >USGA Rules, therein lies the rub in this... Both had their own >rules, both in essence competed to be the ruling body of the game >until for whatever reason the USGA "won out". I believe this is the fallout from the PGA Tour's ill-advised war with Karsten Solheim -- over SQUARE GROOVES, of all things. Ping sued the Tour, and would have won except that the Tour entered into a settlement. One of the points of that settlement was that the Tour would defer to the USGA in the matter of rules, wherever the USGA had rule-making authority. (Those curious about the background can read my -- admittedly biased -- account at http://www.tutelman.com/golfclubs/squaregroove.php?ref=clubmakeronline ) >Right now, the 15 people who make the rules have their heads up >where the sun don't shine on some of these things. I agree with that assessment 100%. If the USGA wanted to resolve the matter equitably, they have a couple of options: (1) Recognize that the problem is the Tour -- nobody else, really -- and tell them to solve it with grass height, as suggested already in this forum. (2) If they MUST do it by re-ruling the grooves, make a "model local rule" for V-grooves. It would not be a Rule Of Golf, but the organizers of any given tournament (e.g.- the PGA Tour) can adopt it as a local rule. They already have a lot of model local rules; they are called Appendix I. The only equipment rule I recall there is the One Ball Rule -- which the PGA Tour enforces and almost nobody else does. I don't think #2 is a very good solution, but it is infinitely better than what they propose. Cheers! DaveT -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.446 / Virus Database: 268.18.15/728 - Release Date: 3/20/2007 8:07 AM
