Pace of Play, Carts & the USGA

Since the USGA has dropped the ball (some would say ignored the ball) on equipment issues, I think they should turn their attention to issue of pace of play. Oh sure, they've issued their policy on pace for the 19 USGA championships but what about the rest of the rounds played in the US?

Their commercials extol the virtues of the game while their web site extols the virtues of the USGA but when will the USGA do anything to get that foursome up ahead to get a move on? I think some basic research would be a good start. For example, how long does the average round of 18 holes take to play? I am thinking of a real round by real players without anyone else on the course. It would also be useful to do some research on what takes (wastes) time during a round. Is it Pete plumb-bobbing his 2-footer or is it Sean searching over there in the weeds for the now lost Pinnacle that he found in the rough back on the 7th?

Slow play is to today's golfer what pornography was to Potter Stewart on the Supreme Court: We know it when we see it. But, I think that it's time to truly understand slow play, where it comes from and what can be done about it. The USGA maintains that it is a promoter of walking yet the latest trend is toward courses where carts are mandatory. Recently, a county course in New York became the latest cart only course. Their story is that it's all about getting more folks on the course: "We're not doing it for the money," Deputy Nassau County Executive Peter Gerbasi said after the policy went into effect. "We're trying to make the course more available to more people." For that to happen at a public course should have a chilling effect, but I am not sure that it will because institutions like the USGA will likely remain silent.

Before such draconian measures are considered, wouldn't it make sense to make sure that everything reasonable has been done to make sure that the pace of play is as good as possible? How many courses have really asked the hard questions about why a round on their course takes the time that it does?

The USGA could be a huge help in such a campaign. For starters, they could formally notify courses of their belief in the essential association that walking has with golf. Such a declaration could serve as a preamble for a series of studies on pace of play and how improving it makes the game better for everyone. If the USGA's mission is truly to grow the game then it must take a far more active role in making sure that the games can be played as it was intended.

Pace of play, like so many aspects of golf etiquette, does not come as naturally as we might hope. Improvements will only come through the dedication of the folks who run the courses and institutions like the USGA. If either fails to lead by instruction and example, we may all pay with our freedom to play the game at an enjoyable pace.

What Woody Austin Meant to Say at Southern Hills

Watching Woody Austin during his post round news conference made me wish that I had been there to articulate his major point. What he said was that he'd outplayed Tiger Woods on Friday but had been outscored. Now, that's a pretty easy problem to grasp whether you're talking about a tour pro or the hacker playing out of your fairway: Hitting the ball and scoring are sometimes two very different things.

But, I think that Woody Austin had a more important thought that he just didn't quite articulate. He said that after the second round the press reported how great Tiger Woods had played and that he was basically toying with the field. I think that what Austin was really trying to point out was just how difficult it is not only to play against the best player of our era but also to have the voices of the press so consistently piling on the heavy superlatives whether deserved or not.

No one who has ever seen a golf ball can deny the supremacy of Tiger Woods. But, how does one quantify the influence of a golf press that is so bent on making sure each good shot is perceived as a great one? When Woods missed a pretty easy par putt on the back nine Sunday, one of the announcers said, "That just doesn't happen." as if the network style guide stated that Woods was always to be portrayed as infallible, even if he wasn't. But, when Woody Austin faced a par putt of similar length, the announcers groaned, kindly helping the TV audience anticipate that Austin likely wasn't likely up to the challenge.

Tour players are men of immense talent but fragile egos. It is easy to lose site of just how much their games ride on the razor's edge of their own sense of place within the tour's food chain. Woody Austin did four things of note this week: He breathed on a leading Tiger Woods in a way that the Mickelsons, Furyks, Els and Sings of the tour have not done, ever. Austin also finished in second alone, making a gutsy par on the 72nd hole for what was also his first top 10 finish in a major. Woody also catapulted himself on the President's Cup team, a thrill which I am sure has yet to sink in for Austin. Most importantly, Woody Austin, maybe, possibly, held a mirror up to the golf press that might, in some small way, help them see just how much they in their supposedly unbiased reportage works to elevate the perception of Tiger Woods from player to a golfing deity. Tiger Woods is the best, but there are others on the course as well. Congratulations, Woody Austin, and thanks for reminding us.

St. Andrews & the R&A: Too Royal and Too Ancient

For those of you who were beginning to think that all I do is bash the USGA, let me take a few shots at the R&A. Oh sure, St. Andrew's is the home of golf and all that. I get it. Still, the R&A has two basic problems: It is largely the USGA's lap dog when it comes to rules and equipment issues. But, the R&A's greater failing is that it is still very much an old boy's club.

It is true that the R&A has seen fit to take down their No Dogs or Women sign for the week of the British Open. They've also opened the entire clubhouse to the women, including the locker room. Is this a substantive step in the right direction or a move that's simply good for the public face of the R&A?

I admit to having a tough time taking cues from the Brits when it comes to this kind of thing. This is the same country that thinks the best way to soothe racist soccer hooligans is by giving them free tickets and hoping they don't attack other fans or burn the stadium to the ground.

Let there be no doubt that Great Britain's is still a golf establishment that is separate and not especially equal. I'm sure that I'm not alone in finding it cheesey that the Women's British Open needs a title sponsor: Can you imagine there being a Royal Bank of Scotland Open Championship? Not likely, but it's no problem for the women to be stuck with the Ricoh Women's British Open.

On Sunday evening, after the winner of the Ricoh is crowned, the doors on the St. Andrews clubhouse will slam shut on the women again. The R&A should move to consolidate its mission with the Ladies' Golf Union because separate is never equal.