NY Times Flash: Golf Made Easier When You Can Hear and See

/

Bill Pennington offers another instruction piece in Monday's editions. Because the world needs more golf instruction stories and what better place to read about them than the paper of record?

Ah but Pennington isn't serving up only "it's-all-about-you" fluff. He shares this interesting bit from a USGA test center visit with

Dick Rugge.“It’s all about how much water is channeled away by the grooves,” Rugge said. “Deeper grooves get rid of more water more quickly.”
This month, the U.S.G.A. announced new restrictions on the size and edge sharpness of grooves for clubs manufactured after Jan 1, 2010. The U.S.G.A. said the new rules were aimed at professional golfers who have had an advantage hitting out of the rough with modern U-shaped grooves in their clubs. With more control in higher grass, the pros haven’t had to worry as much about keeping the ball in the fairway, an accuracy challenge the U.S.G.A. hopes to restore on some level.

No worries mate!

But the scientific research behind the groove debate is fascinating, especially as seen in super-slow motion video. At the U.S.G.A., Rugge showed me that when a club cuts through heavy rough, grass squeezed against the face of the club actually releases water. This microscopic bed of water is what reduces spin on the ball. Larger, deeper grooves whisk away the water, like treads on a car tire, and allow for crisper contact with the ball. And in expert hands, more imparted spin.
Back in March, Rugge didn’t tell me what the U.S.G.A. might do about the more efficient U-shaped grooves in golf clubs. But playing that video back and forth, and watching clubs in thick grass putting spin on golf balls, I had an inkling. It’s all about the water.

So, shouldn't the USGA and R&A just advocate putting less water on courses instead of changing the grooves?

"There was a very strong response from people who don't believe in global warming. I was surprised by that, because global warming was actually a very minor part of the piece..."

/

In the July Golfdom, I pen a column/essay on the importance of Golf Digest redefining their conditioning category. Along with the piece was a column that surprisingly hasn't elicited surprisingly nice emails from superintendents.

Online, Golfdom offered editor Larry Aylward pens a column taking issue with Barton's tone toward superintendents.

I also interviewed Barton, who had plenty of great stuff to say about his research and the surprising reaction Golf Digest received.

The entire package of Golf Digest stories can be viewed here.

"Condé Nast To Close Golf For Women Magazine"

/

A shame...

Condé Nast To Close Golf For Women Magazine

Golf For Women magazine will cease publication with its July/August issue, it was announced today by Charles H. Townsend, President & CEO of Condé Nast Publications.

"We came to this decision because we feel the magazine will not support our long term business objectives," Mr. Townsend said. "I would like to thank Susan Reed and Chris McLoughlin and the entire staff for their efforts throughout the years. Golf For Women attracted a loyal readership and we were proud to publish it."

Golf For Women was launched in 1988. Condé Nast purchased the magazine in 2001 from the Meredith Corporation. It publishes six times a year and has a current ratebase of 600,000.

 

"In recent weeks, everyone except for Dr. Seuss, it seems, has been quoted in stories regarding Woods's knee"

/
Jim McCabe on the peanut gallery commenting on Tiger's knee:
Instead of keeping to themselves and their patients, they're reaching out through hospital PR machines to offer free consultations and observations of Woods's condition to any reporter willing to call. And guess what? The reporters have been taking the easy way out and lining up to get quotes from doctors who offer "expert" opinions, analysis, and a prognosis - though, of course, it's always accompanied by the disclaimer that the person being quoted isn't close to the case, has never met the patient, and is merely "speculating," but, hey, it's a good way to get their names in the paper, right?

In recent weeks, everyone except for Dr. Seuss, it seems, has been quoted in stories regarding Woods's knee, as if we were dealing with something rare. But it occurs to me that the knee injury has been a part of the sports landscape since David stunned Goliath, 3 and 1, using a putter and 5-iron - or maybe it was a sling and five stones; it's so hard to keep track.

The Spririt Of The Hamptons: Scantily Clad Women For Charity!

/
hampton_hills_final.jpgMatty G spares us an "ambush" video in his write-up on a Make-A-Wish fundraiser, but instead shares with us in spellbinding detail an event that should never be documented: a Monday charity outing.
We didn't play by all the rules, at times we weren't complete gentlemen, and we didn't always hit great shots, but this group had a blast. It never ceases to amaze me how the game of golf can be the common denominator. Regardless of the fact that we didn't know each other and came from different backgrounds, professions and generations, for a little more than six hours, with an assortment of alcohol, hot dogs and a $100-per-man side-bet between two foursomes, we had the game of golf.
Really Darwinesque, don't you think?
It seemed like on every tee box we were greeted by a new form of alcohol, served by a young, scantily clad representative of the liquor company. The Hawaiian Tropic Zone Girls attended this function, also scantily clad, and we had an occasional visit on the course by a rogue cart full of marinated members of the gallery. Was THIS what they meant by "the spirit of the Hamptons?" Other than that, we had razor-sharp focus on the side-bet.

I'll condense the day of competitive golf down to the fact that my team won. I use "competitive" loosely here, and it's always a relative term. Each group and each player had good shots, clutch putts, lucky breaks and cold-tops that made you want to bury your head in the bottom of your bag. We had an above-average amount of smack-talk, change-shaking, chest-bumping and fist-pumping, but a portion of that has to be attributed to the "swing-oil" and an unusual number of pit stops.
And for those of you counting at home, that's 3 "scantily clad" mentions in 1200 words.

"Specifically, each member of the PGA TOUR Communications team is responsible for measurable results"

/

This is from the May Golf Writers Association of America newsletter. It's a "note from the communications staff" in Ponte Vedra.

PGATOURMBASPEAK bingo boards at the ready?

“The PGA TOUR has introduced a new initiative to engender, among all members of the Communications team, more ownership in the results of individual media outlets. Specifically, each member of the PGA TOUR Communications team is responsible for measurable results -- number of stories published or aired in print, television, radio and internet -- for two to three particular Top 50 or PGA TOUR tournament markets. Similar assignments have been made for national media, such as USA Today, Wall Street Journal, ESPN, ESPN.com, Yahoo!Sports.com etc.”

It's as if they take words and say, let's put them in a blender and make them as difficult to read as possible.

I just want to know Ty, who is assigned to me?  

Seriously, who has the job of counting ownership results? And if the results are just a bunch of negative stories about slow play or John Daly's latest hiccup, does that hurt your ownership stake? 

Turnstile Lays Off 14; Post-Noose Cover Ad Revenue Decline To Blame?

/

With great regret I learned tonight that 14 of our friends in the publishing business lost their jobs. According to my sources, declining ad revenue was cited as a reason for the cuts at Turnstile Publishing, which houses Golfweek along with other titles.

No one milked Golfweek's noose cover debacle more than I did, however, it's depressing to think that major advertisers are still staying away from the publication in the aftermath (come on, let's move on Carlsbad!). Jobs have now been lost as a result of a mistake that has been apologized for and the editorial quality of an important publication may be taking an unnecessary hit.

Among the casualties were three on the editorial side at Golfweek, including one of my favorite writers, Scott Hamilton, who broke several major business stories and was just developing a strong voice in the limited space provided for Golfweek's media column. I know Scott will land somewhere and someone's publication will be much better thanks to his contributions.

 

"Well, Alex, I guess that's why I played on the tour, and you were a teaching pro."

/
maar01_newtonqa.jpgGolf Digest's U.S. Open preview includes John Huggan's interview with the engaging Jack Newton. So many great stories, but my favorite involved Huggan asking Newton how he lost his BBC announcing gig:
I was commentating with Alex Hay at the 1984 Open. John Bland, Baker-Finch and Fred Couples came to the last hole at St. Andrews. The wind was into their faces off the right. The pin was left and over the Valley of Sin. Bland got up and hit his drive way left, onto the first hole. Alex said he'd pulled it, hooked it and come over the top of it. Then Baker-Finch did the same thing, maybe 20 yards farther. Alex said the same. He'd either hooked it or pulled it. So Fred gets up there and smashes it 40 yards past Ian on the same line. So Alex said the same again.

The upshot was that Bland and Ian both made 3. And Fred holed his pitch for a 2. When Couples hit his drive, I had said, on air, that all three players had gone where they did so that they would have the best angle for their second shots. They took the Valley out of play and were hitting back into the wind. Alex disagreed, again on air, which is a bit of a no-no. Anyway, Fred is interviewed. Clive Clark told him there had been some disagreement over the way he had played the last hole. So Fred says he was trying to hit a low hook up the left so that he would have the best angle and be hitting into the wind.

When we came back to the commentary box, I was expecting Alex to say something about it. But he ignored me. So I thought, Mate, you're not getting away with this. So I said, "Well, Alex, I guess that's why I played on the tour, and you were a teaching pro."

I never worked for the BBC again.