Why Not Ban Green Reading Books Altogether?
/
That's the question some players asked after seeing the language laying out what will be permissible to carry around during tournament play.
From Rex Hoggard's report at the WGC Bridgestone:
“If it was me I would just ban them completely – and I use them – but I think green reading is a skill that can be developed just like your swing,” Rory McIlroy said. “It’s sort of halfway there. They are trying to come up with a solution that isn’t the whole way, but if it were me I’d say get rid of them. It’s a step in the right direction but I don’t think it’s the full step.”
The words "necessary evil" written by Hoggard to sum up player views suggest they've felt required to buy something because everyone else is using it to get a leg up.
In Ryan Herrington's account of the ban, he talks to the USGA's Thomas Pagel about the enforcement of new rules that limit but do not ban the books altogether.
Pagel said that the USGA and R&A intends to work with the makers of the green-reading materials and encourage them to submit materials to confirm they are conforming to the new interpretation. Such books could potentially receive some type of imprint so that tournament officials would know from a distance that they are conforming.
Pagel felt comfortable that the line being drawn on the matter was an appropriate one.
“What we’re saying here is for the best interest in the game moving forward, the skill of reading a putting green should be retained,” Pagel said.
In Brentley Romine's account, Jim Stracka of Strackaline says the new rule creates enforcement issues and points out that the USGA and R&A sample published with the announcement is incorrect.
Stracka also points out that the USGA example of a conforming green guide, which depicts a mapping of the 18th green at St. Andrews’ Old Course, is actually non-conforming when taking into account the stipulation of disallowing indicators where there is a slope of less than 4 percent (2.29 degrees). On the example, Stracka insists there are arrows in “illegal” areas of the green.
“Their example is not correct,” Stracka said, “so how do they expect people to distinguish what’s legal and not legal?”
The irony? The action taken was almost guaranteed to avoid a lawsuit from book makers and yet will end up creating more confusion.
We discussed today on Golf Central's Alternate Shot. While not at the top of the list of evil's in the game, I appreciate and support the defense of skill, local knowledge, experience, pace of play and self-reliance:
