GolfStinks

A Golf Blog for the Rest of Us!

Why I Can’t Wait to Start “Cheating” at Golf!

| By | 1 Comment

polara golf

I was reluctant. Even if you offered to pay me, I wouldn’t test out Polara Golf’s driver or golf balls. I had my standards and what I felt was outright cheating crossed the line.

Polara Golf doesn’t just sell illegal equipment (nonconforming drivers and balls that take away your hook or slice), but the company (at least in my mind at the time) was also sending the wrong message: That you have to cheat to enjoy golf. After all, the GolfStinks ethos is to enjoy golf in spite of your score. It doesn’t matter if you stink; what matters is you’re outdoors with good friends, playing the game you love.

So how is it that as I type this, I can’t wait to receive my box of Polara Golf balls in the mail? How is it that I am really excited to get out on the course and play a round with them?

Simply put:

“Because golf is more fun from the fairway.” – Dave Felker (CEO, Polara Golf)

I spoke with Mr. Felker for nearly an hour last week. Though my stance toward Polara had softened a bit leading up to our chat, I was still reluctant to actually use the equipment myself. But, I was willing to hear him out.

Mr. Felker, (who by the way has a PhD in engineering and was formerly the vice president of research and development for the company who makes Top Flite golf balls), argued some good points in favor of the average golfer using nonconforming equipment:

1. It’s not cheating if everyone knows.
I questioned Mr. Felker on that fine line between bending the rules and breaking them. For example, taking a Mulligan or awarding a gimme putt might be acceptable for most recreational golfers, but playing with illegal clubs and balls crosses the line for many. His response kicked it up a notch: He countered that the real cheater is the golfer who drops a ball to pretend he found his errant drive, or knowingly puts down 4 instead of 5 on his scorecard. However, playing with non-sanctioned equipment is only cheating if you don’t inform your playing partners ahead of time.

In fact, when Mr. Felker shows up at a tournament, he will tell them he has two handicaps: the first is when he plays with USGA-sanctioned equipment and the second is when he plays with Polara equipment. He then asks tournament organizers to decide which handicap they would like him to use – and they will most often choose the lower one (thus allowing him to use his nonconforming equipment).

2. The USGA rulebook isn’t for recreational golfers.
I mentioned in a post recently that there needed to be a simplified rulebook for casual golfers. Mr. Felker agrees and suggests that one of the rules in that simplified book allows for use of nonconforming equipment. He points to the USRGA rulebook (the United States Recreational Golf Association). The rulebook, co-written by Mr. Felker, is specifically for recreation play.

What Mr. Felker has done by creating the USRGA rulebook is provide justification for average golfers to use nonconforming equipment. Whereas the USGA rules are fine for specific tournament play (including the pro tours) and also from the standpoint of helping to identify the best golfers in the world, the USRGA rules are instead geared for the rest of us.

He told me a story where he was speaking about his products to several golfers at a trade show. Everyone was eager to try the Polara balls until one member of the audience asked if they conformed to the USGA rules. When he answered “no” the crowd’s anticipation turned to disappointment…Until, that is, Mr. Felker said: “But they do conform to the United States Recreational Golf Associations’ guidelines.” At which point the audience’s excitement returned. “People are looking for permission to use this equipment,” he told me.

3. It’s like training wheels for kids.
One thing that didn’t sit well with me was what type of message Polara sends to kids? Are we willing to teach golf newbies that the game is so hard, we have to cheat to enjoy it? But Mr. Felker provided a familiar analogy to address this issue: He likened someone learning golf using a Polara ball to someone learning how to ride a bike with training wheels – it highlights how much fun it could be instead of how difficult it can be.

In this regard, more children exposed to the activity will keep at it. And once they appreciate golf (while learning the proper grip, swing, etc.), you can take the “training wheels” off so that these kids can get a sense of where they stand in terms of competition (and then as they get older, let them decide on their own if they want to go back to nonconforming equipment).

4. Golf is more fun from the fairway.
Perhaps the most influential comment Mr. Felker made to me was that golf is simply more fun from the fairway. When I thought about that, this whole nonconforming equipment thing started to make sense – after all, how much more fun would it be if we average hacks weren’t always hitting out of the rough or out of the trees? How much more energy would we have over the last few holes? How much more time would there be to converse with our buddies (because we wouldn’t all be off in the woods somewhere looking for our drives)? It seems playing from the fairway (or at least much closer to it) can benefit more than just your handicap.

So now I wait with great anticipation for my nonconforming golf balls to arrive at my doorstep. It’s funny that I’ve made a complete one-eighty. As I mentioned, I was already softening a bit to Polara in regards to others using their equipment. But now Mr. Felker has not only convinced me, but has me excited to try it for myself.

Will I switch completely to the Polara ball? I have to admit that notion has crossed my mind. I guess it depends on how effective the ball is at keeping me in the fairway (and ultimately, if I’m having more fun on the course because of it). Only time will tell. Meanwhile, I plan on playing a few rounds with the Polara golf ball and sharing my experience on this blog.

Stay tuned…

The Great Golf Ball Shortage Of ’78…

| By | Leave a Comment

We could be playing golf here soon...
We could be playing golf here soon…

Sorry, never existed. Completely made up. It is a rather humorous phrase though…the great golf ball shortage of ’78. Speaking of shortages, recently the Northeast has had a bulls eye on it for snow. We’ve been pelted a few times and this is getting a little ridiculous. Actually, all these storms and adverse weather conditions have put many of our municipalities in a road salt conundrum. Basically, salt inventory is dangerously low and one or two more good storms and Main St will be a slip-n-slide. Fun.

You’re probably wondering where I’m going with this. So, this salt shortage got me thinking about how golf has never had a shortage. Right? If you play like me though it is very possible to have a temporary golf ball shortage. You see, golf itself has never had a shortage as far as equipment or accessories go. In fact, I’d be willing to bet there is a surplus every year. Hence the end of year, last year’s models and close-out sales.

However, golf is responsible to a point for a serious shortage – water. I’m pretty sure we’re all aware of how much water a course can suck up. Especially for courses in the southwest. The USGA reported 18 hole courses in the Southwest had an average yearly water bill of $107,800 in comparison to the $4000 – $7000 the rest of the country averaged. Holy crap!!

Interestingly, last year Golf Digest released a special report discussing this and what can be done to improve the situation. You will see in the article that it discusses Hunting Hawk Golf Course and how they only use rainwater collected on its property to irrigate. Pretty cool! Now we have to take this model and apply it worldwide.

Ok, water issue…check! Now where can I find salt…?

Hit’em long…yell FORE!!!

Golf Rules: Who Really Cares?

| By | 2 Comments 

caddyshack putt

I read an interesting press release yesterday from Polara golf. You might recognize Polara as the manufacturer of drivers and golf balls that are banned on the tour. You know, those golf balls that can “correct” a slice and what-not. It’s funny because usually I never read stuff like this from any company but it had some interesting info.

In their response to the USGA/R&A’s ruling on “anchoring” clubs, Polara included some research results that I found quite amusing. A couple polls were taken and the results were just what I expected…the majority doesn’t give a crap. Let’s take a look:

In April 2013, Polara Golf commissioned a Google Consumer
Survey of 18,000 internet respondents; 1,000 of which were
golfers with a USGA handicap that were asked what
they thought of the anchoring ban. Here are the results:

35.4% – I don’t care.

25% – I agree with the proposed ban.

23% – I didn’t know there was a proposed ban.

17% – I disagree with the proposed ban.

You would think the USGA should take action and make an effort to improve these numbers. In reality, it probably wouldn’t even make a difference. Just as I had mentioned earlier, most could care less. Actually, another poll (below) shows more than 75% of golfers are out there for fun and have never even laid eyes on a rule book.

In December 2012 a Google Consumer Survey of 6,800 internet
respondents found:

* 78% of golfers play for fun and 22% play according to the USGA
rules
* 61% of respondents said they sometimes take mulligans, gimme
putts and other popular infractions such as using a “foot wedge.”
* 63% of golfers said they would consider using golf equipment
that was banned from professional play.
* 72% of golfers said they have never read the USGA Rules

There’s a trend happening here when it comes to rules. Somehow we know them but we never really read them. Take a look at how many U.S. citizens have read the constitution and laws governing our country. I’d bet the majority hasn’t. It’s just one of those things we pick up along the way from the generation before us…just like golf.

Hit’em long…yell FORE!!!

The USGA Rule Book: Definitions

| By | 2 Comments

Do you know golf law?
Do you know golf law?

Let me go out on a limb and state that most weekend golfers probably try to follow the USGA rules. Sure, we might not walk back to the tee to re-hit a ball that’s gone OB (or play a provisional). And we sometimes take mulligans and gimmies, but for the most part, we try to play the game right.

But do we really know the rules? I’m sure many of you have thumbed-through the USGA rule book, but have you read it cover to cover? Probably not. So in this continuing series, I’m going to write about stuff you find in the rule book – perhaps about things you’ve never even realized.

Today we’re highlighting Section 2: Definitions. Perhaps part of what makes understanding the USGA rule book so difficult is the terms used for things. Do we really know the difference between a “water hazard” and a “lateral water hazard”? To that end, the USGA Rules have an entire section devoted to the definition of golf terms.

There are literally dozens of rules defined in the rule book. Do you know what “Rub of the Green” means? That’s when a ball in motion accidentally is deflected or stopped by an “outside agency.” Of course, you then have to read the definition of “outside agency” – which is basically a person or thing other than the players themselves, their caddies and/or their equipment (with the exception of wind or water). So an outside agency, for example, might be a chipmunk that runs across the green and deflects your ball. Now then, what is the benefit of “Rub of the Green”? Well, you play the ball as it lies (after the chipmunk moves it) and don’t have to take a stroke. Gee, thanks.

What constitutes a “stroke” is also a good one to highlight. A “stroke” in golf is when a player has the intent of hitting the ball – even if said player misses the ball! However, a check swing (where the player is able to stop a swing before it reaches the ball) is NOT considered a stroke. By the way, if you are addressing (hello ball!) the ball on the tee and mistakenly tap the ball with your club causing it to fall, that is also NOT considered a stroke and you may re-tee without penalty.

Do you know what “through the green” means? That’s basically referring to the fairway of the hole being played (or the area between the tee and green). Though hazards (both water and sand) are not considered “through the green.”

“Abnormal Ground Conditions” is a rather abnormal one: It includes things like “casual water” and “ground under repair” (which, of course, have their own definitions). But it also includes holes made by burrowing animals. “Burrowing animal” is defined (yep, that’s defined too) as a “hole for habitation” for critters such as moles, gophers and salamanders. But the rule doesn’t apply to worms or insects. Which is a bit discriminatory if you ask me – after all, I’ve seen some pretty large burrowing wasps out on the course!

Finally, let’s circle back to the difference between a “water hazard” and a “lateral water hazard.” See below:

  • A “water hazard” is any sea, lake, pond, river, ditch, surface drainage ditch or other open water course (whether or not containing water) and anything of a similar nature on the course.”
  • A “lateral water hazard” is a water hazard or that part of a water hazard so situated that it is not possible, or is deemed by the Committee to be impracticable, to drop a ball behind the water hazard in accordance with Rule 26-1b.

Get it now? LOL. Basically, there may be portions near a water hazard where you might actually find your ball but cannot play from (environmentally safe areas, etc.). So in these instances, you can play the ball up to two club lengths away from the lateral water hazard (and still lift and clean or substitute a ball).

So know your golf terminology! Though I’d rather familiarize myself with more non-traditional golf terms like THESE.

Is Golf Meant for the Rich?

| By | 3 Comments

golfstinks, golfsitnksTo many non-golfers, the title of this post has a very clear and direct answer: Yes.

But for those of us who play love this game, the answer isn’t that easy. After all, many of us don’t consider ourselves rich.

Most of us have to work for a living at a modest job – we’re not jet-setters, leisurely golfing around the globe at some exotic locale like Abu Dhabi or Thailand.  Nor do we tee-it-up daily at some hoity-toity private club where late-model luxury sedans fill the parking lot.

No sir, we drive our Honda Accord or Ford Fusion to the local public course and fork-over $60 to squeeze in 18-holes every Saturday. I say “squeeze” because inevitably we have to return home to mow the lawn before it gets too dark. Clearly we aren’t rich, so the headline of this post is a bit perplexing to us.

What we forget though, is that we’re the middle class…and we can afford golf. We can afford $125 for a pair of golf shoes every year or two; we can spend $600 or $700 on a new set of clubs every 5 to 7 years; we have a closet full of polo shirts that we already wear to work; and we have an extra 60 to 100 bucks a week to plunk down on greens fees. We may not always be happy with the costs associated with golf, but we pay them because (a) we love this game and (b) we can afford to pay them.

However, there are many, many people who cannot afford to play golf. Golf is not soccer or baseball – where you can organize a quick game at the local park. Nor is it basketball – where you can just show up at the courts down the street and play a quick pick-up game for free.

The mere fact that you have to pay to play golf sets it apart. In fact, you even have to pay to practice golf. Let’s ponder this for a second: First you pay to learn golf; then you pay to practice golf; and then you pay to actually play golf. Add to that the costs associated with clubs, balls and apparel and you begin to get the picture.

The USGA and other authoritative organizations within the industry want to grow the game. They want to bring golf to inner-city kids and others who wouldn’t normally have an opportunity to play. I say kudos to them. But this is not an easy task. The very foundational structure of golf requires the need for money. And not just initial money to learn the game – but liquid cash on hand throughout a lifetime of playing the game. We can get them started, but will they be able to continue?

Something within golf needs to change in order bring more diversity to the game. Perhaps golf course developers need to consider creating (or investing in) more 9-hole or Executive-style links – this would provide an inexpensive alternative to the typical 18-hole facility. These smaller tracts would be more cost effective to run and serve as a training ground for newer golfers and/or those who simply can’t afford 18-hole greens fees.

Funneling money to smaller-sized courses is just one possible solution – I’m sure there are many others – like removing this notion that every part of the golf course must be lush and green (AKA the Augusta effect). But ultimately, the point is something needs to change or the dream of growing the game will forever be…a dream.

So, is golf meant for the rich? Well, let’s put it this way: It’s certainly not meant for the poor.

Questions / Advertise

info@golfstinks.com

Disclaimers

See here

Privacy Policy

See here