Finchem On Furrowed Bunkers

I'm fascinated by the part about the it not being interesting for spectators if the guys are getting up and down a lot...

Q. We haven't had a chance to talk to you since what happened with the Memorial with the bunkers. What were your feelings? How do you think the test case worked out? Is there anything that you regret in regards to most specifically maybe not notifying the players beforehand?

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: I think if you just stand back and look it from a strictly competitive standpoint, it's hard to argue with our team, our officials, who feel strongly on this point, Nicklaus and his people, who feel strongly on this point, which is that bunkers are hazards, and you play the ball as it lies. (Indiscernible) competitively play the hazard. There was a growing sentiment, I guess, that this may be fueled by (indiscernible) over the last 12 years, but there's a growing sentiment that bunker play has become too routine.

I hear it on two levels: one is that it's not competitively challenging enough, and number two, it's not interesting enough to the spectator if guys are getting up and down a lot. The problem with that thinking a little bit is, however, that they'll always get up and down.

If you stand back and look at Memorial, 2005, players got up and down I think 47% of the time on greenside bunkers. This year they got up and down 42% of the time. It's not a huge falloff.

It seems to me it's a different issue in the fairway bunkers. How you want the fairway bunkers to play in my mind is a different issue than the greenside bunkers.

This is all I think healthy, positive for the game, to have this discussion, to have this focus on variety in setting up a golf course, including raking of the bunkers. I think it's fair game. I think a lot of players feel that way.

Now, having said that, I was not comfortable in hindsight about the way we went about it. I think if we're going along with a certain philosophy for a certain number of years, it's only reasonable to inform the players in advance if you're going to make some major shift in that philosophy, allow them to take the steps, whether mentally or physically, in terms of practice or getting their heads together in terms of how to play.

Now, if there was one isolated thing, it might be one thing. But we have a pattern of setups. I think you need to tell the players. If we were coming to Avenel this week and we put every tee back 50 yards, I think we should tell the players that was happening. I think that's not unreasonable. I don't think there's anything unhealthy about having our players involved in discussions to that point. Not that they make the call, our rules team makes the call in most instances.

I don't have any problem with the application, the process. I think we should be a little bit more careful. Bottom line is, I think it was a reasonable, healthy exercise that stimulates discussion and focus on different parts of setup philosophy that can contribute to challenges that are good for the competition and also interesting to the spectators.

Kostis: Leave The Courses Alone

Peter Kostis is mad as hell and can't take the bastardization of courses via extreme setups anymore. Seriously! Here's a great rant from Kostis on Winged Foot's ridiculous lack of width.

Let these classic golf courses stand, as designed, and let these players play. Sure, grow some rough—just not the same amount for every hole. Sure, narrow the fairways—just not all of them the same way regardless of the hole's design.

"We don't want it to be a lay-down course"

Gary Baines looks at the technology debate and talks to the tournament director at The International, who has some interesting things to say.

Winged Foot, a course dating back to 1923, proved anything but obsolete. It played plenty long (7,264 yards for a par-70 layout), but it was obvious that wasn't the main reason that the Open produced its highest score relative to par (5 over) since 1974.

Instead, the key to protecting par was narrowing the fairways and growing the rough so that the long bombers on tour have to think twice before ripping a driver as hard as possible on every hole over 300 yards. Winged Foot did that with many fairways 25-28 yards wide and rough as deep as 51/2 inches.

Oh yes, you can see where this is going.

Larry Thiel, executive director for the International tournament in Castle Rock, was at Winged Foot during U.S. Open week and liked what he saw in the way of a course set-up for the Open.

"I thought the set-up was fair," Thiel said. "You don't have to have 7,800-yard golf courses. The rough is supposed to be penal, and I don't think it was overly penal. If you can't drive the ball straight into a 30-35-yard-wide opening, you ought to do something to your game, downsizing your club until you can."

Of course that was the U.S. Open, a once a year event designed to be a unique test. The International, with its Stableford scoring meant to elicit heroic play, would never look to Winged Foot for inspiration, would it?

They don't want to see the players always swing as hard as they can from tees on par-4s and par-5s because the reward is so great and there isn't a big downside.

That's why even at Castle Pines the fairways have been narrowed over the years. That's undoubtedly part of the reason the winning scores at the International have come down in the last couple of years. After cumulative winning totals of at least 44 points in every year but one from 1997 through 2003, the winning numbers have been 31 and 32 the last two summers. Other things that have factored in are additional water hazards and the lengthening of the par-5 eighth hole.

As Thiel said several years ago, "We don't want it to be a lay-down course."

No, because God know, the ratings aren't low enough yet. We've got to get them into the NHL's league before we can rest  assured.

On many courses on the PGA Tour, players "can stand on the tee and whale on it," Thiel said this week. "We're guilty of it too. The players aren't penalized for errant shots. What you think is a monstrous hole is far from a monstrous hole for these guys."

Thiel estimates the fairways at Castle Pines are mostly 30-50 yards wide, which is generous but not as wide as they used to be.

"We've gradually worked them in," Thiel said.

Oh good! 

"We're always thinking about what makes the course more competitive and fair. We're trying to neutralize guys just stepping back and going at it as hard as they can without any fear."

Because the game is just so easy for those flat belly Tour boys! And then Thiel offers this from William Flynn:

"He believed a good shot should be rewarded and a bad shot penalized," Thiel said. "It's a pretty simple formula."

You know...eh forget it. 

An Important Victory For Golf

John Huggan says Geoff Ogilvy's win was an important victory for golf because the Australian has "the potential to be just the sort of wise, high-profile spokesman the professional game needs if it is to rescue itself from the technological black hole into which it is currently headed."

So many great quotes to pull here, so just read it. Some you've read before in other Huggan stories, but to see them all together really makes a powerful statement about Ogilvy's fresh take on things.

And after you read it, contrast it with this nonsense. 

This Week's Sign of the Apocalypse (Apologies To SI)

Greg Stewart in the Peoria Journal Star writes about a Meeks like setup debacle in qualifying Tri-County Junior Boys Championship!

"They almost missed the green with some of those," Wayne Hammerton, following his grandsons, said of cups cut a flagstick from the fringe on several holes.

The apparent culprit was a grounds-crew employee, which left tournament director Terry Ridgely and Madison pro Gene Petty passing the buck.

"We might not get any low scores with the way those pins were set," said Ridgely.

"That's the way they used to do it for the Publinx," said Petty.

But this wasn't a qualifier for the U.S. Public Links Championship. It was a tournament that had entrants as young as 12 years old, many of them playing tournament golf for the first time. Later in the week, I spoke with the man who set the controversial cups, an 11-year employee of the golf course who asked that his name not be used.

"For us, it's a big deal to get the golf course set up correctly," he said. "But I played the other day with a kid who drove every green on the back side. My mouth was on the ground.

And here we go, the money quote.

"There's not much we can do to lengthen this golf course and the old guys would kill us if we grew the rough. About the only thing we can do to make the course more challenging is make the greens faster and put the pins in tough spots. I just hope we didn't tick too many people off."

Probably not. But in the interest of growing the game by creating positive experiences, I would think the tournament committee would be more involved with course setup and save the Sunday pins for the finals.

Tiered Rough Verdict...

Are the trees a better place to end up off the tee than the "first primary cut of rough?" (The three inch stuff.)

Now, part of me says this is not as much a statement about the concept of tiered rough, but more about the excessive density of the 3 inch stuff due to a wet spring, heavy fertilizing and (excessive?) overseeding.

Thoughts? 

The Biggest Lingering Question...

Watching TGC's mostly excellent pre-game coverage (highlighted by Dave Pelz and aerial comparisons between 1997 and 2006), the talk about the super high rough right off of Nos. 5, 6 and 11 fairways reminded me of the most obvious question not asked of USGA officials Wednesday: how come you are not offering tiered rough on these three holes?

You tell us in your press conference how you are working dilligently to make sure conditions are consistent from day to day.

We learn from Brad Klein that you are working hard to make green speeds consistent.

Yet the tiering is mysteriously inconsistent for the three most birdieable holes?

Furyk On USGA Spin

Jim Furyk, talking to Sam Weinman in The Journal News about why the USGA takes so much criticism for their various course setup debacles:

"I think the issue really isn't their theories or their ideas," said 2003 U.S. Open champion Jim Furyk. "It's how they handled it afterward. It's a real hard line. It's 'That's the way we wanted it to be. That's the way it should be.' When even the guys with 20-handicaps are scratching their heads. ... Only later on did they do damage control, but at that point, it was a little late."

An Observation From Muirfield Village

A reader who was at the Memorial wanted to note that another element adding a bit of curiosity to the whole furrowing madness: fairway bunkers were cared for by the grounds crew while greenside bunkers were handled by the caddies. (This would explain why we saw "Bones" walk away from the 6th hole fairway bunker with Mickelson after that miraculous shot Sunday.)

The reader also notes that with the caddies handling the greenside bunkers, players were at the mercy of the players in the groups ahead of them as much as they were at the mercy of furrows. 

In other words, as much fun as it was to see danger returned to the hazards, they needed to think this one through a bit better.

"If the Tour decides to implement furrowing as part of a larger strategy to counteract technology..."

Ryan Ballangee writes about the bunker furrowing at Muirfield Village:

...the question is this - if the Tour decides to implement this strategy in the long haul, is this a good move by the Tour? The answer, like most things, is "it depends."

If you are a purist like I am, then the answer may very well be that it is good. Since there is no action on equipment restrictions, the Tour can add this into its arsenal of setup changes it can make in an effort to discourage bombing and increase the penalty for inaccuracy. The problem, though, is that many Tour stops do not have very significant bunkering. This means that furrowed raking would only be prominent at a percentage of Tour stops. In essence, it's a six shooter with two bullets.

If you are a Tour marketer, then this is a terrible idea. There are only four weeks of the year that fans look forward to the best players in the world being made to look like fools - the major championships. In particular, the number one week for that is the US Open. The rest of the year, the fans are looking for interesting setups that reward accuracy, are not too gimmicky, and attract good fields. If the Tour decides to implement furrowing as part of a larger strategy to counteract technology, then they may actually upset some of the top players in the process. This could prove to hurt the potential of the FedEx Cup (not that it has any right now) and fly in the face of its goals.

Oh but the irony is so sweet!

Sand Saves At Memorial

Ken Gordon reports in the Columbus Dispatch:

The first-round sand-save percentage (36.0) was the lowest of the Memorial Tournament. Cumulatively, it ended at 43.8 percent, still lower than the PGA Tour average coming in (49.1) and the 2005 Memorial (47.1), but certainly not a catastrophe.

And this...

"It was more of a game strategy than it was bunker play," Stewart Cink said, "because there’s no way to hit out a good shot out of these terrible lies."

Furrowing A Failure Or Success?

Despite the negative player comments and the heated debate that CBS did their best to pretend wasn't happening by actually showing player interviews (imagine a NASCAR or NFL telecast running so timidly from an interesting controversy), it seems that the bunker furrowing at Muirfield Village brought attention to the question of whether a bunker should be a hazard.

It would also seem that most everyone who didn't vote on a rake spec while serving on the Tour policy board believes bunkers are too good and that this was a great start to restoring the hazard element.

It would also seem that furrowing wasn't the perfect way to go about it,  since it appeared fairway bunkers were treated different than greenside bunkers and there was a debate about which direction to rake in, the depth, the motivation, etc...

And there are also questions about how this little experiment will influence Green Committees across the land.

Finally, the excessive rough that has overtaken the sport would seem to make the concept seem more "unfair" than it really is.

My verdict: it was delightful to see bunkers mean something again. It was even more fun hear select players who have pushed a $elfish agenda on the distance issue--the primary culprit behind all of this setup madness--whine over something that appeared in part because of deregulation.

Your verdict?

Azinger Furrows Brow At Furrows*

From the Dayton Daily News, Bucky Albers reporting:

"It's a joke, really," Azinger said after turning in a 71 Friday that left him at even par after 36 holes. "Peter Lonard is one of the best fairway bunker players I've ever seen. We were the same. He couldn't hit it out, and neither could I.

"It neutralizes everybody who is a good bunker player. The best players in the world are trying to separate themselves from the next guy down. It just makes it harder. Jack (Nicklaus) separated himself his whole career."

Someone mentioned that bunker shots weren't Nicklaus' strong suit. "He was not a great bunker player, but he was never in them," Azinger said.

Azinger said the players have no say-so about playing conditions, and he doesn't think they should have any input because each would prefer conditions that favor his skills.

Update on 2006-06-05 02:16 by Geoff

After his final round, Azinger had this to say:

"I think that they probably avoided the bunkers this week. I didn't hit too many bunkers, and it cost me big time. I didn't hit it very good, so it's supposed to cost me. I don't have a problem with the concept that a bunker should be difficult, but I do have a problem with a bunker being prepared in a way that makes somebody who's phenomenal the same as somebody who's terrible, does that make sense?"

And I'm not sure about this logic...

"If you hate the bunkers being easier, just take them out. Make the whole place grass, if the bunkers are that easy, make the whole place grass. They're not that easy."

How about hard bunkers and less tall grass? 

Hawkins: It's All About Jack

Golf World's John Hawkins misses the point behind the Memorial bunker furrowing, chalking it up to appeasing Jack Nicklaus. He obviously didn't get the message that people find it ridiculous when players would rather their ball up in sand than rough.

The lead reminds you that Darwin, he ain't.

Fortify a PGA Tour venue with four inches of lush rough? Bravo! Gooseneck the fairways, hide the pins, triple-cut the greens? You betcha. Create furrows in the bunker sand? Are you freakin’ nuts?

And the real reason behind this furrowing madness...

As for the notion that tournament officials ignored standard procedure as determined by the tour’s own policy board, one can only chuckle. The players themselves are all too aware of how little influence they have in Camp Ponte Vedra’s version of democracy, particularly when it involves Nicklaus. Jack wanted grooves in the sand so the boys would have harder time short-siding an approach, splashing out to two feet and moving on. The tour wasn’t about to object to the wishes of the man they just named 2007 Presidents Cup captain, a man who almost always gets what he wants and is usually right.

“Why does everybody want a free ride?” Jack pondered during the Friday telecast. “You don’t hear much [complaining] from the good players. The tour said it wants to keep doing this—we’ll find out whether [it has] any guts or not. It will be interesting to see what [happens] next week.”

Next week? You can bet the tour will follow the path of least resistance at Westchester and beyond. The bunkers will return to their pristine state, the moaning will cease, and it will be business as usual. Nicklaus has always cast the Memorial as something of a Masters knockoff, complete with its own little set of rules (caddies wear white jumpsuits, no reporters on the practice range), many of which have been abandoned over the years. It’s Jack’s way of reminding us who he is, a right to which he is perfectly entitled, and Camp Ponte Vedra isn’t about to play the role of heavy one week each year.

Somehow, I think there is a whole lot more to this than coddling Jack Nicklaus's ego.

More Muirfield Moaning

As much as I'd like to side with the players, their cause is hurt by a consistent inability to articulate why bunker furrowing is a bad idea and by their reluctance to address the distance issue that has led to situations like this. 

Ken Gordon had these comments in the Dispatch:

"They’re not very good, that’s about all you can say," Jeff Maggert said. "We don’t play any other tournament like this. I think you’ll see players looking to pop this event off (their schedule) if they keep doing it."

And..

The idea was to make the course more old-school. But Mark Brooks thought the change actually hurt shortgame artists more than the bombers.

"If a guy’s got a good short game, he can play more aggressively if he’s got reasonable opportunities to recover," Brooks said.

"It’s about (losing) the art of the recovery shot. (Ben) Crenshaw, (Seve) Ballesteros, those guys didn’t drive the ball great but won tons of tournaments from hitting it all over the place because they were great at recovery shots."

One of the biggest issues was the element of surprise. Players said they did not know about the change until they showed up this week.

"It’s something that I think kind of shocked us this week," Steve Flesch said. "Some of the players are like, Wait, wait.’ We’re used to hopping in there with a perfect lie and knocking it on the green."

Joe Ogilvie is one of four players on the PGA Tour policy board.

"It’s a communication issue," the Lancaster native said. "I don’t think there would be nearly be the controversy here if the PGA Tour and the Memorial Tournament had communicated to the players. We’ve got terrible communication on the tour, period."

Later, that was the major concession made by PGA onsite tournament director Slugger White.

"We’ve taken some criticism and we’ll just look forward," White said. "It’s change, and everyone is a little bit stubborn when it comes to change. We all are.

"Looking back, probably we should have prepped these guys (players) a little earlier, and I’ll take the blame for that."

Not everyone was hot and bothered. Sergio Garcia said it made players think a little more, changing clubs to avoid hitting bunkers, "so it’s good."

And Dave Hackenberg in the Toledo Blade:

Pro golfers don't react well to change, and the reaction to the bunkers was overwhelmingly negative.

Davis Love III was so angry - despite a 3-under 69 - that he blew past media members after making a double bogey out of the fairway bunker at No. 18 and declined comment.

Shaun Micheel spoke for Love, who is one of four players on the PGA Tour Policy Board.

"I had breakfast with Davis this morning, and he told me that the policy board had approved a standardized rake used for all tournaments," Micheel said.

The columns, they just keep on a coming! Actual, a breakfast of complaining and Tour policy board political chat between Micheel and Love is just too easy, even for me.

"Are we not supposed to make anything?" [Micheel] said. "Hey, fill 'em with water and paint hazard lines around them. There's a lot of frustration. [The players] had no warning. We showed up Monday, and they were furrowed and raked sideways. Today, every trap is raked parallel to the fairway. So they changed the conditions.

"They used to have the most beautiful sand here. What's wrong with guys shooting good scores?"

I'm with him on the last point. That would be a good question for the Commissioner.