Do The Kids Have A Point?

/

Harris English and John Peterson suggested that the leading college golfers can compete with the top professionals on any given week because, as English said...

"we're ruthless. All college events are very competitive, and you learn how to go out there and win."

Recent evidence certainly points to some outstanding play from American collegiate players but also from younger players across the globe, especially on the women's side.

So it seems the lads may be correct about the youth's impressive play, but is it really the quality of competition within the American college golf system that is producing this rise? As much as I'd like to believe that, the shift should more likely be attributed to the improvement of equipment combined with a new generation of swings shaped to fit optimized clubs.

Shotmaking has been dulled if not virtually eliminated, experience muted and driving skill lessened as hot putting becomes more vital than ever. Perhaps this shift in the game is why the recent Open Championship was so refreshing, as quirky old Royal St. George's was the rare exception of a modern course returning those retro elements of skill.

The recent rise of under 23-year-olds around the world seems to coincide with advances in fitting, in progressive equipment rules that have everyone playing with the latest stuff and rapid advancements that reward high swing speeds. That's not a knock on the hard work or talent of the kids, but it does raise the question that gets back to the May, 2002 USGA and R&A Joint Statement of Principles:

The purpose of the Rules is to protect golf's best traditions, to prevent an over-reliance on technological advances rather than skill, and to ensure that skill is the dominant element of success throughout the game.

The statement goes on to talk about any advances post 2002:

The R&A and the USGA believe, however, that any further significant increases in hitting distances at the highest level are undesirable. Whether these increases in distance emanate from advancing equipment technology, greater athleticism of players, improved player coaching, golf course conditioning or a combination of these or other factors, they will have the impact of seriously reducing the challenge of the game. The consequential lengthening or toughening of courses would be costly or impossible and would have a negative effect on increasingly important environmental and ecological issues. Pace of play would be slowed and playing costs would increase.

All of those things have happened and then some. Everyone knows that.

But with the rise of so many young players able to compete with the top golfers on the planet if they have a hot putter, are we seeing the best evidence yet of an over-reliance on technological advances rather than skill?