Shaft Review: Low Torque, Better Feel...The Penley P2

Leave it to the good folks at Penley Golf to solve two major issues with one new technology: The new Penley P2 shafts have been designed using a patented aerospace technology that has resulted in an ultra low torque shaft with great feel. Lower torque results in greater accuracy and distance by helping to square the face at impact.

Now, in the past, low torque shafts have been plagued by harsh feel. But, with the company’s new technology, Penley has been able to eliminate the harsh vibrations traditionally associated with lower torque. Because of this, the P2 is said to feel and perform unlike any shaft previously available.

“The P2 shafts combine low torque with our patented DynamX® Design viscoelastic dampening material,” said David Duffy, General Manager, Penley Golf. “In plain English, this means you will experience improved feel and performance in your driver and fairway woods when using the P2 shafts.”

In plain English, you can take Duffy's words right to the tee box. The P2 truly does manage to deliver the virtues of low torque (greater control and accuracy at higher club head speeds with solid feel) without the snappy harshness that has always been the downfall of low torque shafts. To prove or disprove Penley's claim, I reshafted my 420cc back-up driver (an OEM model commonly used on tour) with the P2 96s (replacing my usual shaft, the A.J. Tech 4470, which has virtually the same torque as the Penley). The Penley was far smoother on mishits (they do happen to the best of us, don't they?). Accuracy seemed comparable with both shafts but the P2 just felt better more often. I also tried the Graphite Designs YS-6+ which is a little higher torque than either the Penley or the A.J. Tech. Now, the YS-6+ felt more like the Penley P2 but just couldn't match its control.

The Penley P2 is a shaft that delivers what it promises. To all of you who have sought greater control yet have been turned off by the harshness of conventional low torque shafts, I can heartily recommend that you try the Penley P2. In my evaluations, it outperformed more expensive shafts from Graphite Designs and A.J. Tech and felt better while doing it. What more could you want?

Penley P2
www.penleygolf.com
bputnam@penleygolf.com
Price $110.00

GreenFix Ball Mark Elimination System

I'm never quite sure that bad putters ever think about ball marks on greens. In fact, that may be why so many people basically refuse to carry divot tools, let alone use them. After all, if you don't believe you're ever going to make a putt, why would you be worried about the condition of the greens?

Now, I'm far from a great putter, but I do like to make them, especially when they matter. It's always been a heartfelt dream of mine that the basic civility of golf would return and that people would take care of the golf courses that bring so much enjoyment to their lives. My guess is that the folks at GreenFix Golf, Inc. are as passionate as I am about preventing the
abuse that the average green endures. The company was founded by Danny Edwards, PGA Tour winner, Champion's Tour member, founder of Royal Grips and all around friend of golf. Edwards, and the other folks at GreenFix Golf, say that a golf course sustains some 2000 ball marks each day. Even marks that are "repaired" with an old fashioned tool will last for 6 weeks or more. Really, it's a wonder that there is any turf left on the average golf course where the greens staff has a lot more on their minds than fixing ball marks that should have been repaired by the very players who inflicted the damage in the first place.

I should point out that while my review is primarily concerned with the GreenFix Wizard, Edward's company is really in the business of providing forward thinking golf course operators with a comprehensive solution to the ever worsening problem of ball marks on greens. Superintendents and course managers who truly care about their courses would be wise to spend some quality time at the GreenFix website. Or, even better, give Danny and the gang a call. They stand ready to answer questions and get you started.

The Wizard is an amazing tool, easily the best I have ever used. It actually makes fixing a ball mark rather fun. Quite simply, the stubby nose of the tool is used to push, rather than dig and pull, the ball mark back into shape. I found that it performed admirably on a variety of surfaces, but not quite as well on really soft or wet greens. When the green compresses too readily, you really do need something to lift the depressed area of turf and soil back to level. A key to using the Wizard is to keep the tool at a 45 degree angle. It fits the hand very well. The neat little depression near the nose gives your thumb just the right amount of leverage. The tool is very tough. It appears to be made from an injection molded resin and should
last for years. You see, since there are no long prongs, there are no long prongs to wear out or snap off in hard soil. The folks at GreenFix really have come up with a better mousetrap (divot repair tool, I mean).

Ever the optimist, I honestly hope that the GreenFix Wizard, and the comprehensive PGA Tour GreenFix Ball Mark Elimination System, serves as a wake up call to players everywhere: The more we care for our greens, the more putts we'll make and the more we'll enjoy the game. Highly recommended.

PGA Tour GreenFix Ball Mark Elimination System
DannyEdwards@greenfixgolf.com
866-443-4222
www.greenfixgolf.com

Course Review: Tierra Rejada Golf Club in Moorpark, California

Southern California is a land of hills aplenty. Locals refer to ranges as high as 5,000-6,000 feet as “foothills” while the rest of the world knows something that high just has to be a mountain. Located in Moorpark, California, Tierra Rejada is indeed built in the foothills that lie between Southern California’s coastal and inland mountains. The town of Moorpark is actually quite old, but until recently it was really more of an agricultural hub than a city. With rampant expansion at its doorstep, Moorpark is now home to two of the most exciting new courses in the area, Tierra Rejada and the Moorpark Country Club (a 27 hole Peter Jacobsen design just about 10 minutes from Tierra Rejada. Guess what? It’s built in the foothills!).

You simply must understand that there wasn’t a single new golf course built within the city limits of Los Angeles from 1960 until 2000. While the city grew to overtake Chicago as the country’s second most populous city, the area’s golf nuts were forced to cram themselves onto the same overrun links year after year. The sense of desperation was palpable. The new millennium brought some improvements. The most noteworthy was the capability and practice of building golf courses on land that would have been considered unsuitable just a few years earlier. With few exceptions the new courses that are opening in the Los Angeles area are built in the hills, and I do not mean simply near the hills or with hillside views. The other development has flowed from the suburban sprawl that we Angelenos so disdain. Areas that are outside the city limits of Los Angeles but still in the Greater Metro area continue to grow at an alarming pace. Developments of 15-20,000 homes no longer stun our imagination, we only wonder about where they’ll get the water and how much more congested the freeways will become. Still, the growth of new areas with names like Santa Clarita, Simi Valley & Moorpark has also led to a bevy of new golf courses, so with the bad comes some good, at least if you play golf.

I trust that the images accompanying this review will provide some sense of just how hilly Tierra Rejada’s outward 9 plays. The terrain may cut across a ridge, or up a canyon but there is a constant feeling that the topography is shifting. Like the Pete Dye/Fred Couples designed Lost Canyons (just up the freeway in Simi Valley), Tierra Rejada is almost completely devoid of trees, though a good number of saplings have been planted on the back just to keep things interesting for future generations. This is definitely a course where the player is confronted with consistently challenging views and angles. In some instances the shot required is not as difficult as it appears while in others the demand for solid ball striking is even more rigorous than it would seem. This, of course, gets a player’s mind working and we all know what a problem that can present. Like most of the area’s new courses there is a linksish feel to Tierra Rejada, owing to the lack of trees, but this new breed of hill or canyon-built course has created an entirely new category, and one that I am sure we’ll be seeing even more of in the future. Of all of the foothill courses that I’ve played, Tierra Rejada is the best without a doubt, but I’m getting ahead of myself.

A Tale of Two Nines

Tierra Rejada opened in 1999 and was designed by Robert E. Cupp, architect of many distinguished courses such as Old Waverly and Spanish Hills. Tierra Rejada is a full service course, despite its modest fees. Upon entering the parking lot, a friendly attendant will unload your clubs and load them onto a cart. After checking in, you simply drive your cart down a hill to the fine driving range where neat piles of range balls await. As the appointed time approaches, you simply drive your cart back up the hill and it’s on to the first tee. Tierra Rejada is a course where the two nines very much compliment each other in the way they play. With the exception of the 610 yard opening par 5, the front nine plays predominantly into the wind and uphill. My playing companion, Andy, and I are firm believers in the virtue of being long and wrong rather than short and wrong, so we played Tierra Rejada from the tips. Within a couple of holes, we had some reason to question our judgment: At 3742 yards, mostly uphill and into a considerable breeze, the front nine of this course is a brute. Want an example? Well, let’s consider the 583 yard par 5 4th hole. The carry to the fairway is about 250, but that’s OK because it’s all uphill and into the breeze. We both made it with plenty to spare, but from the fairway you’re left looking at a fairway that works its way around in a massive curve to the right. It’s really more of a broad ellipse than a dogleg. Best of all is that fact that if you do hit your tee shot long and straight you are left with a very long lay-up shot that must be played over a mountain to find the center of the fairway. From the fairway, it’s hard to believe just how far right you have to play to avoid running a solid second shot through the left side of the fairway. If the lay-up is played too timidly, you’ll find yourself unable to see around the corner let alone play a 3rd shot into the green. Ouch.

The par 4 5th is a “short” one at 382 yards and since we caught up with the folks ahead of us we had plenty of time to contemplate the required straightness of our tee balls. Tierra Rejada’s 5th rides a ridge between two valleys which fall away on either side of the narrow fairway. The prevailing wind is left to right and the effect is quite horrifying. The view, however, is sublime. The hole has very much of a Top of The World feel to it and the combination of the vista and the wind is exhilarating.

Even the shorter par threes at Tierra Rejada can get your blood rushing. The 150 yard 7th looks so easy right up until you consider that a shot pulled just 7-10 yards left of the stick or 15 yards past it will be more than OB it will be lost to anything other than a qualified climber with a repelling rope. Of course, we could play to the right (safe side) of the green, but what would be the fun of that? Andy put his ball 4 feet from the stick and I made a sandy from the deep front bunker, so with a smile and a sigh of relief we moved on.

I’ve played Tierra Rejada three times and each time I was impressed by both the condition of the course and the civility of its staff. The first time, they were aerating the greens. But, instead of aerating the entire green, they aerated them in thirds so that the area near the pin was untouched. This was a sensible solution to an inevitable problem, but this was the only course where I have ever seen this done. The second time, they advised us at check-in that the back nine’s fairways had been plugged. Unasked, the starter gave each member of our group a $10 Gift Certificate to their very enjoyable restaurant. This time, nature did the honors. 2003 has been a very wet winter in Southern California and the golf courses have been blessed by the natural irrigation. The conditions on the course were excellent. The greens rolled true at about a 10 and the lies in the fairways were beyond reproach. Unusually, (really) I found myself getting a lot of practice in Tierra Rejada’s bunkers and the sand was very consistent and playable.

Take a Deep Breath: It’s the Back Nine

After taking a few hits on the front nine, we were happy to find that the back nine both measured and played far easier. 469 yards shorter than the front, Tierra Rejada’s back nine is more conventional and player-friendly. There are fewer ball swallowing hillsides and forced carries, but still plenty of fun to be had. We especially enjoyed the dramatic par 4 13th at 432 yards. Running parallel to another hole, the 13th feels more narrow that it really is and forces the player to concentrate on the center of the fairway. Once there, it can be seen that the green is framed by water right and long and by a sneaky little creek that runs down the end of the left side of the fairway. I didn’t see or recall that creek and that’s why one of my balls is still at the bottom of it.

Another thrill ride is the par 3 14th which plays 200 yards into the wind. Fun. Showing that both luck and skill have their place in golf, I flared a 3 iron into the slope to the right of the green and ended the hole by jarring a 15 footer for birdie. Remember, you can’t miss ‘em all. My only complaint about Tierra Rejada is the par 3 17th. There’s no other way to put it: It’s too short at 118 yards and downhill. Sure, it’s a small green and the severe drop makes club selection an issue, but it somehow seems out of place on a course of this length and quality. I had intended to ask someone about this, but thought that they could just as easily ask us to leave as answer us, so I refrained. I suppose that one could mention the 7th at Pebble Beach as an example of such a short hole on a course of this caliber, but I rather feel that to be a stretch: Pebble’s 7th is made or unmade by the wind, but the prevailing breezes of Tierra Rejada simply lack that degree of formidability. Honestly, though, I do hope that someone from Tierra Rejada will educate me regarding Bob Cupp’s vision of the 17th. No matter. With Tierra Rejada Bob Cupp has managed to work within the environs of the foothills and canyons in a uniquely successful way that preserves playability and a really keen sense of adventure in almost every shot.

There’s no need to be coy. Tierra Rejada is the best reasonably priced course that I have ever played. Absent my issue with the 17th and the fact that it’s a cart-only course, I can come up with very few reasons not to play it again and again. As I mentioned before, the staff is equal to the course with everyone just as pleasant and helpful as one could ask. As final note of interest, Tierra Rejada has some great views of the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library, which is just a few minutes away. A trip to the library and a round of golf at Tierra Rejada would be as fine a way to spend a day as I could imagine.

COURSE RATING (OUT OF 10)

CRITERIA/RATING


Design: 9.0

Condition: 9.3

Aesthetics: 8.0 (owing only to its fairly “new” condition...)

Challenge: 8.4

Overall Rating: 8.6

251

Two fifty one is a good drive for you and me. In fact, it’s a exceptional drive. The average player thinks he hits his drives “about 250” but in fact that’s only when he’s sleeping. A 250 yard driving average won a lot of PGA titles and a U.S. Open for Corey Pavin, but it hasn’t done anything for him in years. Even tour players who have never been considered long are now challenging and, in the case of Mike Weir, winning events that were believed to play only into the hands of the longer hitters on the tour.

I mention 251 because that was the winning distance in a long drive contest recently. No, it wasn’t at an AJGA event, it was on the European Tour. It seems that the organizers of the Dunhill Links Championships wanted to commemorate Ben Hogan’s 1953 British Open win at Carnoustie. Contrary to popular belief neither Riviera Country Club or Colonial Country Club are really Hogan’s Alley. The term actually refers to the way that Hogan cut across a gap between a fairway bunker and an out of bounds fence on the 6th hole of famed Scottish Links. Someone found a stash of old British spec balls and a 1953 vintage persimmon driver and had the Euros tee ‘em up. The winner was Arjun Atwal with a drive exactly the same length as the title of this article. It doesn’t seem that anyone has noticed.

Now Atwal’s no Tiger Woods and his ranking of 62 on the European Tour Order of Merit speaks to this fact. Still, the guy’s a professional who has earned over 300,000 Euros on tour this year. But again, it really isn’t Atwal’s game that is of interest here. What I want to know is what his average drive is with his regular club and ball?

Remember that the old British ball was longer than the American ball of the time, so I have to assume that had he used a 50s balata Atwal’s poke would have only been in the high 240s. Again, what surprises me is that no one seems to care. I guess that the world simply likes being long. Tiger used to like it at least until technology made half of the tour and at least one 13 year old girl pretty much as long as Woods.

Industry types like to talk about the theoretic limits of COR and how their balls all meet the USGA’s initial velocity requirements. What no one seems interested in explaining is where this will all lead and how completely the ruling bodies understand the science of the ever greater distance the ball is flying. Rules are fine, but what do they assure?

More and more distance makes the PGA Tour a little jumpy but the fact that the tour is trying to bring new fans to the game make the long ball and lots of birdies useful, at least for now. In the long run, the tour has to be concerned with the essential nature of the game, the viability of its tournament courses and the meaning and value of par. The practical definition of a par 5 on tour has already been changed, whether they admit it or not.

Sure, the golf industry likes selling its stuff, but long, longer, longest really isn’t that much of a selling point when pretty much every company’s clubs and balls are as long as another’s. At the same time, no one dares stand still, let alone roll back distance gains no matter what the source or the consequences.

The media seems largely satisfied to simply ooh and aah. Television commentators will gawk at the 200 yard 8 irons but no one has what it takes to say that enough is enough. The equipment manufacturers learned a long time ago that it pays to keep a player under contract long after his competitive days are over. Curtis Strange hasn’t hit a ball in anger in years, but as long as he’s in that broadcast booth Titleist will keep the checks coming, the same goes for Callaway and Johnny Miller. It’s not that I find the media complicit in the distance wars but rather a warning that we shouldn’t look to them to take a stand.

You won’t hear much from the players for many of the same reasons be they professional or amateur. The USGA did its part to assure this with their recent rule changes that allows amateurs to accept free equipment. With younger players, they even lack a point of reference. Where a Davis Love III or Justin Leonard can reach into their closet and pull out the persimmon driver they used but a very few years ago on tour, the rising stars have never known anything but beta titanium, multilayer balls and properly spined graphite shafts sure to optimize their launch angle.

It would be as if the next generation of big league hitters all showed up to the ballpark with Easton aluminum bats and wondered what the older players were doing with those hickory sticks. Really, that example says alot about the difference between golf and other sports. Even though it may be true that today’s athletes are bigger and stronger than ever, no one in the majors today throws any harder than Sandy Koufax or Nolan Ryan did 30 or 40 years ago. How then do we explain, or accept, the amazing distance gains in our own tradition-rich sport? Perhaps it’s more about the fiddle than the fiddler after all.

Nope, it can only be the USGA (and its rule making lapdog the R&A) to figure out what to do and then develop the fortitude to actually do it. One thing is for sure: No one’s going to like it. There will be no greater challenge to the USGA than to reign in distance gains, if they ever engage the process at all. The first step is for them to figure out what their testing protocols fail to measure. This will involve an admission that the equipment companies know more than they do and that will be a tough admission for the USGA as well.

I wish I’d been at Carnoustie when Atwal beat the other European pros with his 251 yard drive. It would have been great to hand him his real ball and driver and have him hit another drive and then measure the difference. The problem is that no one wants to know the truth, but there may come a day when it’s too late to save the game from itself.

Wanted: A True Challenger for Tiger

Come we now to the end of the 6th full year of Tiger Woods and while he didn't win at the Top 30’s final money grab at the Tour Championship, this much is sure: There is as yet no one to challenge his primacy. When he stormed on the scene in 1996, we heard prognostications that told of a veritable floodgate of talent that would come to the game in his wake. From no less than Curtis Strange we heard the vaguely racist prediction that Tiger would bring bunches of "guys 6'7" and 6'8" tall that would hit it nine miles." Instead of cheering Tiger and his challenger and heir apparent, we are left to hope for Ty Tryon to make another cut and for Charles Howell III to win for a second time.

We have heard how much Tiger needs a foil, and know in our hearts that we need one as well. With each major his legend grows, but what of his motivation? Can the near promise of a couple majors a year keep his interest when he knows that there is really no competition? Perhaps it is time to admit that He, the true challenger to Tiger, just isn't coming anytime soon.

Tiger would then become golf's answer to Larry Holmes: A champion in search of a worthy opponent. A man living his life and playing his game while the literati wonder how he would have faired against players of similar mettle to the greats of the past. Note that I didn't say the skills of the greats of the past. Like it or not, Palmer's win at Cherry Hills was great because of the number of majors the men that he beat owned (or would own, in the case of Nicklaus) as much as his own play. He was seen to have faced true greatness and triumphed. Tiger has yet to do the same, though through no fault of his own.

What seems certain is that the men who comprise Tiger's supporting cast & who we thought might challenge him have not and will not: Duval, Mickelson, Leonard et al may enjoy lovely trips to their banks but there will be no greatness to their careers. I will be endlessly happy if I am wrong about this, by the way. In fact, perhaps the most interesting effect will be to see these Old Young Lions surpassed by the New Young Lions so aptly represented by the likes of Howell and others just now arriving at the party.

With this in mind, I present my 2002 State of the Tiger Challengers Report Card:

1) Sergio Garcia: By far the most accomplished of the Tiger chasers, Sergio has done by the age of 22 what Colin Montgomerie hasn't been able to do by the age of 39, that being win on the PGA Tour. While he failed to seriously challenge Tiger at the US Open at Bethpage, I am among a minority who felt that he performed admirably, probably better than Tiger would have at the same age and playing overseas. The world is holding Sergio to a very high standard (Seve) and it is yet to be determined if he can handle the pressure over the years. Still he has overcome an unconventional swing, the curse of the re-grips and yet he endures.

Finally, the Euro Love Fest at the Ryder Cup may have been good for Sergio's sense of belonging, but could have hampered his development as a true Tiger Beater. He has recently announced that he will spend more of 2003 on the European Tour than jousting with Tiger here in the US. This is the same mistake that led to the stunted career of both Monty and his fallen protégé, Lee Westwood. Sergio should become Woods’ shadow, matching his schedule to Tiger’s event for event, and learn to beat him.

2) Charles Howell III: This guy is very hard to ignore. He seems mature yet hungry, confident yet willing to learn. It's hard to find many weaknesses in his game. His first tour win cam as much from his deft short game as his prodigious length. Had he been able to catch and overtake Singh at the Tour Championship, it may have been just the sort of confidence builder that would have put him over the top. To nitpick, Howell has a somewhat forced and mechanical looking swing. This makes me wonder whether he may have to endure the sort of total swing overhaul that Tiger did. While such a project might delay his progress, there's no betting against this one.

3) Matt Kuchar: After winning at the Honda earlier this year, this former amateur champion had a quiet year but still finished in the top 50 in earnings. In his favor is a putting stroke to die for and the nerves to make them when it counts. Also, he is a man who truly chose his career after finishing his education at Georgia Tech and getting a real job, if only briefly. This would appear to have granted him a certain confidence and bearing that some of the younger and less thoughtful may have a hard time beating.

4) Aaron Baddeley: Along with Howell, this guy's a Leadbetter disciple. You can talk all you want about Butch Harmon, but it was Leadbetter who guided Faldo, Price & Norman through their glory years and now Si Re Pak. Leadbetter can pick 'em and Baddeley would appear to be a bigger, stronger, more complete and possibly tougher version of Howell. He's got some of the Norman-Aussie swagger and the game to match. By the way, has anyone noticed that Baddeley was born in New Hampshire? To my mind that would make him eligible for the US Ryder Cup team and we could certainly use him when the time comes.
5) Luke Donald: Something of a dark horse, Donald survived the tour and got a 54 hole win to cap off the year. 2003 will be the real test for him: Can he win again? Can he contend week in and week out? His swing is solid and mature, as is his manner. The question remains whether he can go toe to toe with Mr. Woods. Many have tried.

6) Justin Rose: The future poster boy for the fact that winning in Europe means little in the US. I have nothing against this kid, but in my book he did it with mirrors and against Euros to boot. If Rose were to spend a whole year on the US tour he have a hard time staying in the top 125 and making cuts. The European Tour is his only hope. Another Monty in the making.

7) The Rapidly Aging Also-Rans: Jim Furyk. The next Brad Faxon. A very rich man ($2.2 million in 2002) but rarely a winner. He is living proof that in this new millennium, placing high on the money list doesn't make a great player. He seems able to look Tiger in the eye for brief periods, but can't maintain his intensity. Justin Leonard. Has anyone else noticed that Justin's workout efforts haven't changed the look or shape of his body at all? He's the next Cory Pavin and a man slipping further into the rearview mirror every minute. Stuart Appleby. A player with lots of strength and game, but just how much does he want to win? Ernie Els. If he could ever do anything to convince himself or anyone else that he thinks that he is as good as Tiger he may actually become as good as Tiger. For all of his three majors, he’s still a player looking to duck the champ if at all possible.

Phil Mickelson. Quite the opposite of Els, to me. I believe that Phil thinks he's better than Tiger and is surprised when he doesn't beat him more often. It is disappointing to see Phil looking so out of shape, making the same silly mistakes when the chips are down, and never simply admitting that he has a lot of work to do if he's going to catch Tiger. David Duval. Watching Duval play, looking at his loose swing, ragged short game and profoundly strong grip, it's really easy to imagine that he may never recapture the days of his British Open and his 59 at the Hope. This is a player who only found new inspiration after losing the Ryder Cup. He is wasting years as if he has a bunch of them left, but that is the worst way to think in the era of the Tiger.

So, all that we can do is look to 2003 with hope for the game and best wishes for the players. Tiger's greatness is without question. We are only left to wonder if there ever will be The One who can challenge him, and make it all the stuff of legend.

The Conformist in Me

One of golf’s fascinations for me is that it brings out our inherent love of rules and our abject hatred of them, sometimes all at once. The local gentry take mulligans a plenty, but razz their fellows when they move a ball away from a divot.

I guess all of this is a mere expression of human nature, just like the universal desire to hit the ball ever farther. The quest for the long, longer, longest drive has led us to an equipment industry that is preparing to do battle with the keeper of the rules, our own USGA and the R&A.

The question at hand is whether a driver ought to may able to possess a face that has an elastic, or intentionally trampoline-like effect. The USGA has let all of the current gear on the market off the hook by labeling it conforming. But, recently Callaway Golf has introduced their ERC driver which they admit will fail the USGA’s test. The USGA, of course, promptly got hold of an ERC and found that it was indeed non-conforming.

Callaway’s out is that they have confined sales of the ERC to their overseas markets where the rules are set by the R&A, which is yet to address the issue of the trampoline-effect. Still, ERCs are finding their way home in good number. You can find several on auction at EBAY for upwards of a kilobuck.

Callaway’s actions are quite cunning. They have used their remarkable R&D facilities to develop a club that is very likely longer than the USGA wants drivers to be. But, instead of breaking down the USGA’s front door, Callaway has decided to test the waters by bringing the ERC into the market through the kitchen.

Now that Callaway has done the R&D heavy lifting, other club makers have built their own spring-faced drivers using a process that is sometimes called “cut & clone.” This means simply cutting open a head and copying as much of its materials and internal dimensions, as is cost effective for the cloners, in an effort to extract its performance. When the USGA tested a number of these products they found that they too failed to conform.

In a recent promotional publication, the giant Austin Texas-based component club head manufacturer Golfsmith announced new club heads that employ thinner faces for slower club head speeds, and slightly thicker faces for higher swing speeds. Why? Golfsmith claims that the thinner the club face, the more the face deflects and the less the ball compresses. The effect is a less-lossy transfer of energy and more distance. Golfsmith does not say whether these new heads have been judged conforming by the USGA or not.

What I always like to look for is motive. What’s Callaway’s motive? Naturally, it’s to make their stock market symbol move up in value. What’s the USGA’s motive? Well, that’s harder to say. Are they, as their ads say, simply the guardian of the game? It is obvious to me that they are at once more and less than that.

A major thrust of the USGA’s test is to reassert their primacy in the making of the rules of golf and to a lesser degree in actually defining the game. The USGA’s position here is quite unusual. In baseball, the rules are made by the individual leagues (which are made up of rich club owners) and the now defanged commissioner (a rich, team owner himself).

This frees baseball to invent and maintain the sacrilege of the DH, among other things, and to assure that their financial interests are served. But, even in the home run crazy world that is major league baseball today, can you imagine one of the major bat companies coming out with a new bat that’s made from genetically engineered hickory trees that grow cork in their cores? Balls hit by these wonder-sticks would come off the bat as fast and fly as far as one hit by an aluminum bat, or further. Then, Mark McGwire’s home run balls would still be going up when they left the park.
Why won’t this happen any time soon? Quite simply because baseball and baseball players have a natural sense of just how much a bat like that would alter the game, most obviously by obsoleting all of the MLB ballparks. This sense has so far eluded golfers.

We see PGA players routinely reaching par 5 holes in two shots, the second usually with an iron, and we say why not? We see high school kids hitting the ball well over 300 yards with conforming titanium clubs and balls and we say why not? Distance and its pursuit has long been our passion in golf.

How long can we keep it up? We have already obsoleted courses that have hosted U.S. Opens that Ben Hogan won. The barons of Augusta National have taken to growing rough to defend the work of Jones and Mackenzie. Of course, length also comes from bigger and fitter players. But since we’ve never seen Tiger Woods hit a real balata-covered ball over 300 yards with a persimmon driver, we will never be quite sure what counts more, the swinger or that which is swung.

The scofflaw-actions of Callaway and the rest do nothing but bring out the conformist in me. At 39, I’m just starting to lose a bit of the distance I had in my wild youth. But I won’t resort to an illegal club to get it back. That would be too much like using a corked bat.

Quest for the Zone: The Story of Von’s Golf and Gauge Design

I admit it. I’ve always wanted to build a really superb putter. There is something magical about a great flat stick, and though there are plenty of fine designs available I always figured that I could do better. I am not alone. There are more people making putters than there are making all other club types combined. One web site has links to over 100 putter manufacturers. I’ll bet that even the most unrepentant putter junkie can’t name more than 30 of them. What drives these folks? In a world where most people buy putters made by fewer than 10 manufacturers, why do new companies think they can compete? I think that the answer is as American as apple pie: They think they can do the job better. With this ethos in mind, I set out to find two small putter manufacturers who were not well known, but showed promise. My search yielded two simultaneously very different, yet oddly similar manufacturers: Gauge Design (www.gaugedesigns.com) of Solana Beach, California and Von’s Golf (www.vonsgolf.com) of Seattle, Washington.

Jim Von Lossow has spent a life in golf, a high school and college standout, a tour player and finally a teaching pro for the last 18 years. Still, it was his own dissatisfaction that led him to try and build a better mousetrap. Von Lossow says, “Missing putts drove me to design my own putter. I was frustrated at the marketplace in general which did not offer any weighted putter heads, especially for players wanting a shorter overall length club. Many of us use a putter as short as 33" and with the standard weight heads there was no way you could achieve good feel. They were just way too light, so controlling the stroke was impossible. With that in mind I set out on the path I am on today: Making a putter head with classic lines and superior feel, one which has extremely solid feedback and keeps its position throughout the stroke. Our heavy heads were an invention of necessity and have been refined at every turn.”

David Whitlam of Gauge Design has been in the golf industry for more than 19 years. He has worked in retail and marketing, and for companies large (Odyssey) and small (Plop). With his experience and a degree in accounting, Whitlam finally decided to build his own company from the ground up. “In the U.S. we are slowly building up a following. The people who know of us know we manufacture a 100% CNC milled putter from a solid block of material...not like the competition who simply weld on their hosels. Our customers know that they are getting one of the finest machined putters in the industry. Our putters are not cheap nor are they are the most expensive. For some of my tour models and one of a kinds I am getting upwards of $1000. Our regular production models are $285 and $275.”

Let’s face it: The driver and the putter have got to look the part. Maybe it's because we use them the most, or because they are the hardest clubs to master. No matter, if a golfer looks down at his putter and doesn't like what he sees, he's bound to miss more putts than he makes. That said, looks aren't everything. Solid construction and proper design are just as significant. It's important to recall that when Karsten Solheim first started taking his new putter design, what we all now know as the venerable Anser, around to golf courses trying to find converts to his radical heel and toe weighted design the response was universal: The putter was thought to be very ugly.

The now classic shape has become so recognizable, so totally accepted, that only the most stalwart 8802-wielding codger would call the Anser ugly today. Still, its look can be improved. The folks at Titleist and Bettinardi have really upped the cosmetic ante with their embellishments to the humble, cast Anser that old Karsten gave us so many years ago. To my eye, they have chosen to make collectible golf jewelry. I have nothing against their putters (I used a coke-stripped Cameron Santa Fe for years) but it's no secret that their success is built upon looks and image, not performance.

The Von’s putter that I evaluated is called the SS 398. Not surprisingly, its shape is based on the venerable Anser. Its head is quite heavy at 375 grams. The Gauge model that I received is called the GAA2. Its look is rather a cross between a pintail like the Cameron Coronado, a cavity back like the Ping Ally and a little bit of a Kevin Burns 9304. The look is very clean, and the putter features a Gauge Design feature called Aluinser which is basically an aluminum plate that is pressed into the putter’s sole directly behind and beneath the hitting area.

My local course is Robinson Ranch. It was designed and is owned by Ted Robinson and his son, Ted Jr. There are two courses (Mountain and Valley) on the 400 acre piece of semi-arid hills and oak lined canyons. The Valley course is very tough and quite long, with lots of difficult view lines and angles off the tees. The Mountain course is shorter and a bit less demanding, though by no means easy. While the courses are impressive, what really keeps me coming back is their practice putting green. It is amazing bordering on the magical. I have seen guys who have played at some of the very best private clubs marvel at the purity of its roll and its frightening pace (11+ on the Stimp, at least). The good news is that it's pretty mild in terms of its slope and there are some straight putts on it. It is the perfect place to check one's stroke, or one's putter.

Von's putters are unique, custom crafted instruments tailored to each player's particular and specific needs. To Von Lossow, heavier putters mean more control, less wobble and thus greater accuracy. Accuracy leads to more putts finding the hole and then greater confidence. Sounds good to me. The heft of the Vons just feels right, and feels right immediately. On long putts, it's easy to swing the putter smoothly and sense the speed required for the distance and break. On shorter putts, the mass of the head serves to calm the stroke and increase the player's awareness of the head's momentum. Best of all was the buttery feel of this putter and the delightful sound of impact. Both are indescribable, yet they are the best that I’ve experienced. The net result? Good strokes and a good number of putts that found the bottom. What more could you want?

The Vons SS 398 is a clean and pure looking putter. There is something about it that says, "Hey, laddie...I'm here to help you put the ball in the hole...make a good stroke!" The face is smooth and free of the Cameron and Bettinardi favored, if somewhat ostentatious, "Milling Marks." The Vons is finished in a tool-like satin that creates no glare even in the brightest sunlight. Really, it reminds me of a fine German tool that you’d find in a velvet-lined, hardwood tool box. There is no plating to wear out or get damaged by fertilizer (can't the boys at Titleist make a truly durable finish?). All in all, the Vons is a serious looking putter for the serious player. The Vons can be had in either steel or bronze, and with a choice of three different hosel lengths.

The Gauge Design GAA2 is an exceptionally attractive and elegant putter. The lines are straight without being sharp or abrupt and the finish is impeccable. On close examination I was unable to find a single burr or tool mark on the entire putter. That’s really quite amazing, and a first in my experience. The sole of the putter is cambered six ways in an attempt to guide the player to setting the blade behind the ball with the loft and the lie as they are intended. Though I did not measure it, the lie of the Gauge would appear to be a couple degrees more upright than either the Vons or my reference Ping Anser. I like the theory of the Aluinser (at least I will assume that this is the theory, as it makes intuitive sense to me.). The idea in putting is to roll the ball toward and into the hole. When a putter (as most do) positions mass beneath the ball and to the rear of the flange, the momentum of that mass tends to cause the ball to skid a little following impact. Since the Aluinser plate is lighter than the steel of the rest of the head, there’s less mass beneath the ball so there’s less initial skid effect.

I found the Gauge GAA2 very easy to align squarely behind the ball. The sole cambers took a bit of getting used to though in the end I’m sure that they did help. The GAA2 didn’t quite have the buttery smoothness of the Vons, instead its feel was crisp, with lots of pop. Solidly hit putts rolled very tightly and held their line exceptionally well. While the clean look and precise feel made straight putts easy, I had a somewhat more difficult time getting the break and speed of putts right with the Gauge. Still, this should be seen far more as a reflection of my skill (or lack thereof) rather than a failing of the putter. The fine Gauge Design web site shows a wealth of other models. The GAA2 is but one of many, and I have no doubt that I might have found another of their models more in line with my own style. Still, taken on its own, the Gauge Design GAA2 is still very much a winner.

Von Lossow and Whitlam both have their own views about the putter market, which comes as no surprise. I asked both of them whether they has any particular influences, or, dare I say heroes in the business. Von Lossow says, “Karsten Solheim without a doubt has affected golf and putters in a profound way. His innovations and skills have produced a never before seen array of putter heads, shapes and materials. He is my hero when it comes to putter design, development and playability. All the rest of us have taken his lead and bumped it up the next level. His foresight and engineering skills brought a better club to the masses and it has allowed so many more of us to enjoy the game even more.”

Whitlam’s take is a bit different, but he too credits Solheim and another well known, one might say even mythic, figure in putting circles. “Why try to reinvent perfection? People refer to Cameron’s stuff as Camerons. I call them all Ansers because that is what they are. Cameron was not a great influence in terms of design or originality, but I respect the guy because he was one of the first to go large with pricey putters. After all golf happens to be one of the greatest marketing games in sports: What Cameron was able to do was make a great putter pretty. Not better, just prettier. Ping has not quite figured that out. But, that’s not their market now is it? It all started with Karsten, but Cameron is the reason that I am able to sell a few putters in the U.S. for $300 to $1000, not Karsten.”

Still, Whitlam is not too cynical. He obviously is proud of Gauge Design’s success so far. “This has been the greatest experience I could have ever wished for: I am at the helm of my own ship and steering it in the direction that I want. I am in an industry that is a blast, though it doesn’t pay the best. I have seen people come and go. The unique thing is that everyone is always trying to better their game.”

Does the world really need another putter company. let alone two? Von Lossow thinks so. “Oh heck yes, we can always use another good putter in the marketplace. Golfers will hear of the latest new sensation and quickly flock to it. Golf is such a fickle game, one day in the penthouse, the next in the outhouse. We need new products to keep our spirits up and to give us all hope that we too, one day, will play like the pros we see on TV. We all want that magical day on the greens when the hole swallows up the ball with such ease and we get an inkling of being in the zone.” That must be it, the quest for the zone.

There’s just no logical reason to get into the business of making putters. But, despite all of our best efforts there’s no logical reason for our love of golf, save for its essential and timeless beauty. Putters are like that too. We see and judge them as ugly or beautiful, as useless or essential. Very often the slightest curvature or line will catch our eye, just as when we see a car that we like and then we’re hooked. Feel is even harder to quantify. Is it a function of mass? Is it a function of materials? Or, could our perception of feel be affected by the sound a putter makes when it strikes the ball? For me, I know that this is essential. I need to hear the pureness of impact as well as feel it. The perfection of being in the zone is its scarceness, its inescapable brevity. Von Lossow and Whitlam are just trying to make your stay in The Zone that much longer and that much sweeter. I guess that’s reason enough.