"You'll probably will see more of that type of presentation moving forward because we are trying to find more risk/reward..."

Commissioner Tim Finchem sat down Saturday with the assembled scribes at Sherwood (here, here to Doug Ferguson for suggesting we pull up chairs...it was a long 30 minutes). For a summary of the conversation, you can read Ferguson's focus on the PGA Tour cutting costs and not jobs, while Steve DiMeglio shares some of Finchem's most detailed remarks on the economic crisis's impact.  GolfChannel.com posted this short interview with Finchem that also serves as a healthier, more cost effective alternative to your daily Valium consumption.

The Commish talked about the demise of the Hope Classic and I used the opportunity to ask about a rumored shift in over course setup philosophy that we might see in 2009.

Q. You mentioned talking about the Hope, that one of the things that has possibly impacted the tournament was the shift in the way the golf courses played and presented, and now it's going back in the other direction. Do you see that as something that's a shift for that tournament or a shift in general for tour golf courses?

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: To some extent I would say that it's really two different things, because the Hope, we are talking about a straight configuration of history and culture of the tournament, the atmosphere, what you want to try to accomplish in an environment where you play lots of golf courses during the week, and it's very difficult for a competitor to properly prepare, learning their way around one golf course let alone several.

Having said that, we are looking at ways to have a broader range and variety and set of conditions. We have, you have probably noticed in the last year, we have experimented a fair amount at certain tournaments.

For example, at Boston this year, we set up the 18th hole to where it's very conducive for players to reach the green and be in positions for eagle and birdie, just to see what reaction there was from players and the fans and television viewers.

You'll probably will see more of that type of presentation moving forward because we are trying to find more risk/reward and trying to find more things that create interest for the fans but still maintain the integrity of the competition.

Q. Was that a reaction at all to television ratings or player feedback?

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: I don't think it's a reaction to television ratings, but it is the recognition that we should be on the weekend making the competition and the play of these golf courses more interesting to fans generally.

Sometimes you miss things and you realize you should be concentrating more -- not that we have necessarily missed anything, but we are putting out more interesting -- those kind of issues as we look at golf courses.

Uh, that's a yes, they are going to try and generate a little more excitement via setup in 2009. That should reassure Peter Kostis, who has expressed concern about some of the oddball setups of 2008 possibly carrying over into next year.

Finchem was also asked to confirm John Marvel's GolfDigest.com report that the Commish is entered in the AT&T Pro-Am at Pebble Beach.

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: The chairman and CEO of AT&T asked me to play, and I do believe I said, "Yes, sir."

Q. Who is your partner?

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: Davis Love. It has not been announced yet.

Q. What is your handicap?

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: I think my index right now is 6.3.

Q. So if you have to play a few tournaments in the schedule, you're trying to lead by example?

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: I'm going from zero to one.

Q. So who is in your foursome?

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: Hunter Mahan and Randal Stephenson and myself. That's the plan, anyway.

"I enjoy playing where single-digits is a good winning score."

Carlos Monarrez wonders if the post-Buick Tiger will return to Warwick Hills (no!) and points out this comment from a few years ago:

After Woods' last Buick victory, he said he liked the traditional tree-lined layout at Warwick Hills and how it set up for his game. But Woods also admitted he was not a fan of the low-scoring nature of the event.

"As far as enjoying this type of golf tournament, no, it's not my favorite," Woods said then. "If you look at my tournament schedule, I usually don't play events that are like this. I enjoy playing where single-digits is a good winning score. ... Here, you will get run over with spike marks all over your back."

I wonder if such a remark about single-digits drove the PGA Tour to accentuate the higher-rough, old school U.S. Open course setup mentality?

Naw...not possible.

"But it felt like I was always just a foot into the deep stuff and a foot away from having a perfect lie, and it wore on me."

Steve Elling looks at the concept of PGA Tour players fleeing for the European Tour and includes this more detailed version of Robert Allenby's suggestion that course setup is influencing his decision.

Next week, while the Disney event will be mostly filled with journeymen seeking to retain their cards for next season, the HSBC field is expected to include Mickelson, Padraig Harrington, Adam Scott, Kim, Henrik Stenson, Sergio Garcia and Trevor Immelman. To be sure, the European Tour allows players to receive appearance fees, but the imbalance of power is pronounced.

Allenby said he's looking for variety, too, and took a thinly veiled shot at the PGA Tour's prevailing bomb-and-gouge mentality.

"I joined because I wanted to expand my golf, I wanted to play a different style of golf," said the Australian, who has lived in Florida for nearly a decade. "I thought I was getting a little bit stale. The golf courses (in the States) are set up the same way every week. I kept getting injuries over here, pretty much because the rough was so high, and I got sick of it.

"I got sick of playing out of six-inch rough every week. I'm not bitching or moaning about it. I know I am a great ball-striker, and I drive the ball very straight. But it felt like I was always just a foot into the deep stuff and a foot away from having a perfect lie, and it wore on me."

Fair enough. But like they say on the police shows, if you want to find the real reason behind the mystery du jour, follow the money.

"It also is likely that there will be less of a need for long, punitive rough."

There is a USGA.org Q&A with president Jim Vernon about the state of the USGA and his first year in office. I liked his answer on the groove rule change, which could be the first time I've seen someone from the USGA suggest that it could lead to less rough.

How do you expect the rules changes concerning grooves to impact how courses are set up for tour-level and championship competitions?

Vernon: For those setting up courses for players of this level, I think you’ll see a whole array of opportunities. If you look at the PGA Tour, the major championships, or the European Tour for that matter, you’ve seen a trend over the past 15 years showing hole locations have gotten closer and closer to the edge of the green each year, and that won’t need to be as much the case anymore. The rules changes may well reopen greens to some different hole locations that will still reward accuracy, but you won’t have to put it three or four paces from the edge of most of your greens. It also is likely that there will be less of a need for long, punitive rough. 

"[The rough] is five inches long. Why brush it back at us?"

Paul Mahoney reports on Lee Westwood's scathing post round criticism of the Oakland Hills course setup. On site sources say the rough had been trimmed but it also seems the raking we spotted last week was taken to a new extreme. At least according to Westwood.

"The course is 7,500 yards long, the greens are firm, and the pins are tucked away," Westwood said of Oakland Hills (official yardage: 7,395). "They are sucking the fun out of the major championships when you set it up like that. The fairways are narrow, and unfortunately if you miss the semi [rough] by a foot you are worse off than if you miss by 20 yards. I asked my partners [Geoff Ogilvy and Zach Johnson] if I was out of order, and they said 'No, if you are slightly off-line, you are crucified.' It is too thick around the greens as well. It takes the skill away from chipping."

Comparing Thursday's conditions to the practice rounds, Westwood wondered if the PGA had dispatched an army of workers overnight to "brush back" the rough, changing its direction so that the blades point toward the tees, instead of toward the greens.

"I can't think of a reason why they would do it other than to irritate the players," said Westwood, whose round included five bogeys, one double-bogey, and no birdies. "[The rough] is five inches long. Why brush it back at us? It makes no sense. People want to see birdies, and they have not seen me make any. I can't see anything wrong with being 9- or 10-under-par for the week."

Part of me wonders if the setup is really that extreme, or perhaps the players have become so enamored with Mike Davis's layered rough cuts that the old style setup looks that much more ridiculous? Maybe...

Westwood said that the PGA should have followed the USGA's lead at Torrey Pines, which was not the punishing setup often seen in the U.S. Open. "You have to reward the accurate players like they did at the U.S. Open," he said. "[That] was set up perfectly. It rewards accuracy and penalizes you if you are off-line. I didn't see that today."

Update on 2008-08-08 03:53 by Geoff

In John Hopkins' report, he implies the rough ploy was a mowing in only the direction toward the tee, as Augusta National does with its fairways so that its members who also happen to be on the Executive Committee don't have to do anything about distance!.

While mowing fairways back towards the tees to bring balls to a halt sooner has been fashionable since it first appeared at Augusta a few years ago, the practice of doing the same to the rough is surely unnecessary.

"I couldn't reach four fairways. You have to use common sense and they didn't. They put themselves in the league of the USGA at Shinnecock."

Steve Elling on the early massacre at Birkdale:

Despite assurances that the weather would be taken into account during the setup, the tees on several key holes playing into the wind weren't adjusted, causing as many complaints as bogeys. Specifically, players said that the par-4 Nos. 6, 11 and 16 were not reachable in regulation, even with 3-wood approach shots.

It used to be that the U.S. Golf Association was reputed as the most sadistic organization in golf, though their reputation has softened in the past couple of years. Not to worry, because the Royal & Ancient rushed to the fore to fill the Draconian, dunderheaded void.

American veteran Jerry Kelly called it the biggest gaffe he'd seen at a major, including the controversial 2005 U.S. Open at Shinnecock Hills, where play had to be suspended after a green became sun-scorched and unplayable.

"Worst course setup I've ever seen," said Kelly after finishing with an 83. "I couldn't reach four fairways. You have to use common sense and they didn't. They put themselves in the league of the USGA at Shinnecock."

Hey, is there an echo in the room?

"If it had been run by the European Tour, the tees would have been pushed forward a little bit," said overseas veteran Graeme Storm, who shot 76. "It's hard enough to hit the fairway, much less reach them."

Wednesday Open Clippings: 17th Green Edition

It's only Tuesday and Mt. St. 17th-Green-At-Birkdale is about to erupt. Just imagine the possibilities when the tournament starts and the wind blows!

Before we get to the articles and after a lengthy search (because Lord knows we need more photos of guys hitting out a bunker), I finally found a shot of the 17th green in Golfweek's roster of images from Tuesday (the volume lowering tool is in the lower right).
No. 17 at Birkdale, courtesy of Golfweek (click to enlarge)

....we have several fine stories full of all sorts of rich, compelling and incriminating detail.  Here's John Huggan quoting Geoff Ogilvy:

"If Birkdale were a one-hole course this green would be out of character with the rest of the course. It's out of character with the land; it's out of character with the hole.

"You can see from 250 yards away that something has gone wrong. Sadly, it could be a decisive factor in who wins the championship. You could get some really crazy putts going on there. Funky bounces, too. A guy could hit a great shot in and see his ball take a really weird kick left or right. It's fine to have a tough green, but it has to look right. It just doesn't fit the spot that it is in, or the hole that it is on, or the rest of the course."

But other than that...Huggan also shares this from Robert Allenby:

"The problem is that whenever they try to change these great courses, they always stuff it up by doing something like that. You can argue they do these things because of how far the ball goes these days, but this has nothing to do with that. It's a mess that has obviously been made by someone who doesn't know how to design golf courses. He's built a green that isn't even close to the other 17. It's just stupid. If they revisit it after the championship I hope they use someone else."

So Huggan went to the vision behind the green and well, Martin Hawtree probably didn't help matters with either the players or his architectural Godfather Peter Dawson:

"In previous Birkdale Opens the 17th had been the easiest or one of the easiest holes," said Hawtree, who will lay out Donald Trump's proposed new course near Aberdeen should the present public inquiry into the project give the go-ahead. "So it needed stiffening.

I will spare you a Viagra joke here. Continue...

We moved the green back to the point where the front of the new green is where the back of the old one was. Then we added another tier. In my original concept of the hole there was nothing at the back of the green. The two big dunes there create an amphitheatre effect so I felt that the green should run on into a hollow at the rear. I wasn't allowed to do that though; the R&A wanted spectator mounds. So now the green forms too much of a bowl shape.

"I'm taken aback by the depth of the reaction. It was a weak hole and demanded something be done. I have heard that the club want to redo the green complex after the Open. I'd be more than happy to move the mounds at the back and create my original idea."

Just guessing by the comments, the lack of a rear hollow seems to be the least of the problems here.

Mike Aitken in the Scotsman talks to the other culprit behind this mess, R&A Executive Secretary and in-house architect Peter Dawson:

"Well, this has caused a little bit of controversy," he said. "And, as a result of that, I'd like to say a few things about it. It's a par 5, so it's not as if we're expecting the green to be hit at with long irons. It's a green the pros are accustomed to facing on many of the courses they play.

"If you look at Augusta, there are probably 18 more sporty greens than this one."

Lee Westwood echoes some of his fellow competitors' concerns about the 17th green, which is described in the official course guide as a "tiny, two-tier target with extreme undulations".

"I think everybody has accepted that something has gone wrong with it," said Westwood. "It's just out of character with the rest of the course, (let's] basically leave it at that.

"It's not to the standard of the rest of the greens. The rest of them are brilliant."

Bloomberg's Michael Buteau also looked at the 17th green and shares this from Steve Stricker:

"You wish they'd just leave them alone because they're good for a reason,'' said Steve Stricker, the No. 8-ranked player. ``They've withstood the test of time, equipment and everything else.''

Buteau also shares the same excuse reply from Dawson and I thought by printing it again it would make sense, but it still does not.

Dawson said organizers weren't expecting many golfers to attempt to land their second shots on the putting surface.

``It's not as if we're expecting the green to be hit at with long irons,'' he said. ``We're aware that it's a green that could get away from us if we're not careful. We'll have to see how it goes.''

So if the green could be "hit at" with long irons, that would make it better or even worse? I really need Peter's book of design guidelines to help here, because I think he's really onto something.
Competitors such as Stricker said they wish they could roll back the clock.

James Corrigan files an excellent look at the controversy, also ends the piece with his breakdown of the "12 to follow" at Birkdale. But first, his take on the 17th green, using overheard player comments:

One labelled it "a sloping mess of mounds" while another concluded that it looks as if it's "contracted a severe case of mumps". Even those not totally anti the mogul run have agreed that it is not in keeping with the other greens that have help confirmed Birkdale's reputation as the finest and fairest course in England. In Westwood's opinion they should unload the shovels and start again. That is exactly what the members are planning. But perhaps not before next Monday.

Jack Nicklaus played here in April and was aghast. "You've got one of the greatest golf courses in the world, and they changed 16 holes because of a stupid golf ball," said the 18-time major champion. "That is just ridiculous."

Okay, how did I miss one of the best quotes ever? Where did he say this? Please readers, guide me!

Nicklaus was speaking for an ever-growing number who believe that the authorities should have placed limits on how far the modern golf ball travels. They failed to act, however, and now the only defence they appear to have to protect the dignity of old courses is either course lengthening or course toughening. Or in the case of the 17th, both. On occasions, the powers that be have gone overboard like at Shinnecock Hills at the US Open in 2004 when the greens were quick to the point of unplayable. The R&A is blessedly not the United States Golf Association and is not about to let their stubborn mistakes re-occur here. But they have created an eyesore. Slam, bam in the middle of golfing beauty.

I'm not sure about the USGA reference, since they didn't create the 7th green at Shinnecock. It's one thing go blunder a set-up, because with a little bad luck, bad planning and a steep green, anything can happen. But to make a mess of things before you even set the course up takes a special talent that takes things to an entirely different level.

This is yet another reminder as to why governing bodies should not design golf courses, particularly when it's in response to their own (continued) inability to regulate equipment.

"Our rules officials have finally realized that — duh! — course setup has a lot to do with pace of play."

As always I enjoyed the pre-Open Championship insights from SI's anonymous tour pro (thought it would be nice if he'd actually seen Birkdale!), including this on the relationship between PGA Tour course setup and slow play.

No doubt I'm wasting my time talking about slow play. One veteran told me that we had the same discussions 25 years ago. The Tour is trying to identify the slower players and work with them to get faster, but in the end we're probably only talking about picking up 15 minutes a round. Is that a big deal? Probably not.

Yes it is!

One thing I like is that the Tour is going to use ShotLink to tell us how long we take for each shot. Certain players who are slow and don't know the average time spent on a particular shot need to be made aware. Our rules officials have finally realized that — duh! — course setup has a lot to do with pace of play. It's not only the players who are slow. When you play a 510-yard par-4 with a semi-island green, you're going to take a while. It seems obvious, but apparently our officials didn't think of it. At some tournaments, like the Memorial, the setups are getting out of control. Guys don't want to play a U.S. Open-style course two weeks before the Open. What Jack Nicklaus had this year at the Memorial was way worse than Torrey Pines. Jack and Arnold Palmer, who's growing serious rough at Bay Hill, may want to have major-championship conditions, but they're in danger of winding up with bad fields. Six-inch rough, furrowed bunkers, greens running at 14 — some guys are going to think twice before coming back.

Good.

Reader Greg noted there was one problem with another the mystery pro's comments.

The Tour thinks that putting San Antonio in Atlanta's spot was a terrific swap because Valero is a great sponsor and that we might have a Texas swing: the Nelson, Colonial and San Antonio in successive weeks. The problem is that LaCantera, the Texas Open venue, is awful. None of the top players would tee it up there in the fall, and they won't play there in May, either. Anytime you can see a roller coaster and a Ferris wheel from a tee box — you can actually hear the people on the rides screaming in the background — that's a red flag. Has any great course ever been built next to an amusement park? Until the new TPC San Antonio is finished [in 2010], I don't see top players remembering the Alamo.

Technically, Pine Valley's next door neighbor is an amusement park too. But we understand his point.

“It’s a one-dimensional hole"

Thanks to reader Chris for this AP note on Fred Funk and Congressional's 6th hole.

When a par 5 become a par 4, the result can be, in the words of Fred Funk, “downright stupid.”
 
No. 6 at Congressional Country Club is this week’s prime example. It is listed as 518 yards for the AT&T National—the third longest par 4 on the PGA TOUR so far this year—and the large water hazard around the right front of the green makes it even more daunting.
 
“I don’t like their mentality with that hole,” said Funk, who double-bogeyed the hole to mar his even-par round of 70. “I think it’s downright stupid, actually.”
 
The hole produced one adventure after another during Thursday’s first round. Defending champion K.J. Choi and Jim Furyk both landed in the front bunker yet saved par. Bo Van Pelt’s 40-foot putt provided one of only two birdies among the morning rounds. Corey Pavin, one of the shortest drivers on the tour, had no chance at all: He laid up despite hitting a tee shot that landed in the middle of the fairway.
 
“That green’s designed for a par 5,” said Rich Beem, who parred the hole after missing a 15-foot putt for birdie. “That’s the problem with par 5s turning into par 4s.”
 
“It’s difficult,” added Furyk. “You’ve got to get the ball in the fairway, or you’re going to be struggling.”
 
Choi said he was so concerned about the hole that on Wednesday he practiced the very bunker shot he ended up hitting on Thursday.
 
“It’s a one-dimensional hole,” Funk said. “If you hit the fairway and you’re a long hitter, you can get your shot to fit in there. The shorter hitters are going to have a long, long, long shot in there with a green that’s really designed for a wedge.”

What an interesting contrast in course setup approach we're seeing between the PGA Tour and USGA. (I'm guessing based on what we saw at Torrey Pines that the 2011 U.S. Open tees would be moved up a bit to prevent the situation described above, or perhaps even see the hole played as a par 5.)

"The fact that you've not heard anything should not be construed as meaning there's a problem."

Several interesting items in the USGA press conference at Interlachen where David Fay, Roberta Bolduc and Mike Davis faced the inkslingers who miraculously asked some great questions (offsetting the point missers lobbing stuff about a U.S. Senior Women's Open). After Davis talked at length about Interlachen's design attributes and Brian Silva's restoration work there, he shared this about the bunkers at Torrey Pines:

The bunkers like we have been doing the last few years, we did stir up the bottoms to try to make the bunkers a little bit softer so that the player can't get as much spin. And I was telling somebody the other day, one of the best things I heard at Torrey Pines, it just -- I almost wanted to do a cartwheel is when a player actually said, we were trying to avoid bunkers at Torrey Pines. Because we haven't heard that in who knows how long.

Davis, on driveable par-4s this week at Interlachen and in future USGA course setups:

 You have to have enough risk but you've got to have the reward with it. They have to match. And in fact David and I talked about it before Sunday of Torrey Pines, that I thought it was going to work well for the reasons I kept going through in my mind, but you don't really know. And if only ten players out of the 80 went for it I would call it a failure but I think there was 57 or 56 or whatever that went for it. And it's, you know, there was a blend of scoring.

But when we did it at Oakmont it worked. Because those holes were architecturally set up for it. We did it the one hole at Winged Foot. But, no, we will not force it. So it won't necessarily be a trademark. But I think when you get that opportunity, it's really neat because you do make the players think. And we want -- we don't want this to be gimmicky, but at the same time we want it to be the hardest championship of the year, whether it's the U.S. Girls Junior, the Women's Open, the U.S. Open or the Senior Men's Amateur, but at the same time there's nothing wrong with introducing more risk, reward and making the players think, giving them opportunities, and taking a hole and really saying if you play it great you can make birdie, eagle, but if you don't play it so great, if you try something and don't pull it off you're going to pay the price.

And look at this troublemaker with the killer follow up about those R&A lollygaggers.

Q. David, could we get an update on the groove situation? Wasn't that due for some sort of roll out in January, I think, in theory? Has there been any developments on that front or are we going to have to all change irons?

DAVID FAY: The latest update is there's no update. We are still on track, we hope. There are a number of components that we have to get everything resolved. A number of -- and we're moving ahead on that. But to give you a timetable at this time, it would be premature.

Q. R & A still a part of the equation in getting them signed up for the same time?

DAVID FAY: Well the R & A, it's a change in equipment, a change in any rule will not happen unless both sides support it. Fully. The fact that you've not heard anything should not be construed as meaning there's a problem. It's just that we -- anything dealing with equipment, particularly these days, is complex. You deal with the specifications, manufacturing tolerances, I think that one thing I would say that we have never, at least in my experience at the USGA, researched and done the lab testing and the player testing to the degree that we have with this subject of grooves.

Just not enough for the R&A!

"They kept us on our toes. They kept us thinking. That's what a major championship should do."

An unbylined Scotsman report on European prospects brightening in future U.S. Opens:

One of the reasons why Europe's most illustrious golfers have struggled to emulate the success of Tony Jacklin at Hazeltine in 1970 can be attributed to the one dimensional course set-ups which

In a curious switch of identities, the Masters evolved into the US Open earlier this spring and delivered a tournament where the emphasis on defensive golf made for mostly dull viewing. The US Open in California, on the other hand, presented opportunities for the most positive players to attack over the closing stretch and encouraged the kind of thrilling finale which used to be the copyright of Augusta National.placed a premium on driving accuracy at the expense of short game wizardry.

And...

According to [Robert] Karlsson, who was eighth at Augusta in April, the presentation was resourceful. "I don't think they could have done anything any better," enthused the Swede. "It was in good condition and the way it was set up from tee to green with the mix of tees and pin positions was fantastic."

Mark Zeigler in the San Diego Union Tribune offered this on the varied tee setup, highlighted by the par-4 14th.

"That's the beautiful thing about it," Spain's Sergio Garcia would say later. "They kept us on our toes. They kept us thinking. That's what a major championship should do. It shouldn't be just get there and whack it, which is what Augusta and (The Masters) has turned out to be in recent years."

"It's real compelling golf," said Heath Slocum, who had a birdie en route to a 65. "I think you're giving (fans) the opportunity to see some drama. You hit a good shot, you're rewarded. But if go a little long or plug it in one of those bunkers, you're going to have a hard time making par."

To a man, the players praised it.

Eagle or ice plant?

Australia's Geoff Ogilvy arrived at the 14th tee at 2-over par, three shots off the lead. He stood next to his golf bag, arms crossed, gazing at a red flag dancing in the breeze 267 yards away.

He pulled out a short iron, laid up and two-putted for par.

"If I went back (to No. 14) again," Ogilvy said, "I might have a go at it."

You may recall I reported on Ogilvy's first practice round playing the 14th as well as all other setup matters for the GolfDigest.com Torrey Story blog.

Finally, SI's Michael Bamberger says "the whole move--to bring the Open to Torrey, a true muni, owned and operated by the city of San Diego--was inspired."

He goes on to list the reasons and the hole No. 14 setup is near the top.

"Par always has been irrelevant, and it still is."

Catching up on a few articles I have been wanting to check out and I enjoyed this Doug Ferguson breakdown of the absurdity of the par protection mindset, which seems to be less of a defining USGA trait these days...but still a defining trait of the U.S. Open.

It could have been worse at Torrey Pines.

Rees Jones Jr., who buffed up the course to attract the U.S. Open, was among those who wanted the par-5 18th hole to play as a par 4. With a pond in front of the green, there would have been more gore than glory on the final hole. Davis deserves credit for persuading the blue coats to make it a par 5, which could be the most exciting closing hole at a U.S. Open.

Imagine an eagle on the last hole to win.

"As far as protecting par, I firmly believe the USGA wants to make the golf course as difficult and as testing a golf course as they can without going overboard," Furyk said. "For the best players in the world, that's going to be shooting somewhere around even par. But if it's 5 under or 5 over, I don't think it really matters."

Par always has been irrelevant, and it still is.