Posts tagged Geoff Shackelford

Ryder Cup TV Schedule

3

Courtesy of Geoff Shackelford, here is your full week of television when it comes to the Ryder Cup. I’ll post a little mini-rant on the tape-delayed Saturday coverage in a bit, but I figured it would be best to just get all the information out there without any commentary. So here you go. Set your DVRs, it all starts in about an hour.

Tuesday

Golf Channel 12-3 ET (News Conferences)

Wednesday

Golf Channel 12-3 p.m ET (News Conferences)

Thursday

6-8 p.m ET (Pre-game)

Friday

ESPN  LIVE! 2:30 a.m. ET sign on (11:30 Pacific Thursday).

golf.com/PGA.com  
2:45 a.m. to 1 p.m. ET live coverage of holes 2, 6, 12 and 17

Golf Channel Postgame show  1-2 p.m. and 6-8 p.m ET

Saturday

NBC: 8 am-6 pm ET, 5 am-3 pm PT (tape delay)

golf.com/PGA.com  
2:45 a.m. to 1 p.m. ET live coverage of holes 2, 6, 12 and 17

Golf Channel Postgame show  6-8 p.m ET

Sunday

golf.com/PGA.com Sunday
 6:30 a.m. to end of matches, live coverage of holes 2, 6, 12 and 17

NBC   7 am – 1pm ET, 4 am – 10 am PT (live)

Golf Channel Postgame show  1-2 p.m. and 6-8 p.m ET

rb

USGA Blue Light Special: Ball Rollback

3

A couple weeks ago, the USGA green lit a tournament-style outing for Canadian Tour members to play a golf ball that has been designed as an scaled-back alternative to the hotter, farther flying ball that is on the market today.

Geoff Shackelford did some sneaky and great reporting following the mini tournament, using Facebook to find out who played the ball, or if they knew someone who played it, how they liked it and if they thought it would be a good thing for the USGA to adopt. The USGA made the competitors sign non-disclosure agreements so those who played were not able to discuss what they thought with the media. Shackelford got around it, though and spoke to two players (one under 25, the other over 30) who knew people who played. The responses was pretty interesting. Here are a few I found interesting.

  • The unmarked ball, described by both sources as having a shallow, odd dimple pattern with “a lot of flat surfacing,” typically went about 20 yards shorter with the best hit drives.
  • The ball did not spin much and flew unusually straight, as well as on a lower trajectory according to both sources. The younger Canadian Tour player whose friends also are under-25 types, said his buds described their experience as unenjoyable because the ball did not curve at all and played like a limited flight range ball. One of his peers also said the feel around the greens was “just awful.”
  • My other source, on the other hand, reported distinctly different views. An early 30′s player of accomplishment, called the experience “unreal.” He loved the shotmaking emphasis, the longer irons hit into greens, the overall emphasis on skill despite his misgivings about the straighter flight of the prototype. He also reported that his fellow playing partners were enthusiastic despite some concerns about the ball seemingly wiping away a distance advantage of one longer player in the group while not impacting others as much.
  • The players who enjoyed their experience said their irons flew about one club shorter, which, combined with the distance off the tee lost, meant 2-3 clubs more into greens.He also reported loving shots around the green more and found that he could play all types of shots, both with backspin or of the bump-and-run variety.  “Way better, so fun,” was the feedback.

To tie this whole thing into this weekend’s event at the Deutsche Bank, two of golf greatest icons agree somewhat that the ball should be rolled back.

Arnold Palmer, one of the biggest proponents on scaling back a lot of the technology told Reuters yesterday that the technology, and the golf ball specifically, needs to be scaled back in order to make the golf courses playable.

“Because of technology, the players of today hit it too far,” Palmer said. “That should be one of the major things on our agenda, to slow the golf ball down so that we don’t tilt the scale.

“We have so many great golf courses but, as the players start hitting it so far, they are outdating our golf courses. We need to see if we can’t just keep it in the range that we have known it for so many years.”

The King’s point has not been lost on me. It’s mind-boggling to see the pros going out and playing golf courses that are 7,500 yards. It seems ridiculous, but still the PGA guys go out and shoot 10-under. With a little scaling back of the ball, maybe more of the older courses will be able to be played and put back in major rotations without being completely overhauled.

Arnie’s point was lost on the world’s number 1, either. Asked yesterday about scaling back the ball Tiger said he understands if it would happen.

“It’s just, I can understand them wanting to obviously pull the game back a little bit, because the guys are just becoming more athletic. Here I am 6 foot and I’m considered short. Most of the guys now are 6-3, 6-2, 6-4. Just like every other sport, it’s evolved, become more athletic.”

As Ryan Ballengee points out, “understanding” isn’t exactly the same as Arnie’s full support for rolling back the ball.

“Understand” obviously isn’t “fully endorse,” but Woods typically has come down on the side of regulation where appropriate. He vouched for drug testing though later received controversial, albeit totally legal, therapy. Woods had (has?) been on the top tier of the PGA distance charts, but has since scaled back to a degree.

The USGA said earlier this week that the study has been going on for a couple of years now and that even with this significant amount of testing, there is not intent to change up the ball any point soon. It seems like this testing is being done for some cushioning if the rule were to go into effect. I think the USGA is doing all their research and fact-gathering so that if the rule were to change, they would have a significant amount of information to feed the players and the public when the ball stops flying 300 yards.

JACK NICKLAUS

The Golden Bear is Really Only Worthy of Silver in His Eyes

0

I came across an article on Geoff Shackelford’s website yesterday written by Jaime Diaz for Golf Digest about how Jack Nicklaus. In the article, there are some interesting facts about Jack’s life; both personally and professionally.

The feature was based over a 90 minute interview taking place at Jack’s office in North Palm Beach. With Tiger Woods, Nicklaus’s greatest threat of breaking his majors record, temporarily derailed by scandal, a new appreciation and admiration has come upon Jack again. Steady as you like, Nicklaus has cast himself out of speculation and judgement, saying that it’s none of his business. (Something Tom Watson doesn’t seem to care about.)

With that in mind, Jack was very interested in what the story was going to be about, seemingly because whatever interview Nicklaus does these days is peppered with questions about Woods and what he thinks about Woods. And why not? As Diaz put it,

“…Nicklaus has long demonstrated an uncanny understanding of Woods as a golfer, which surely comes from having breathed the same air, Jack knows that for the foreseeable future, anything he says about his historical challenger will be read through the prism of rivalry.

What really came as a shocker to Diaz was Jack’s interspection of his own career.

Nicklaus displays a new candor. He used to say, “My record is my record. I did all I could do.” Today, he casts a more analytical and sometimes critical eye on the nuances of his career, starting with a self-effacing haymaker: “If I were to look back on my work, I think I accomplished probably about 70 to 75 percent of what I could have. Maybe 60 percent. Somewhere in that area; two-thirds of what I could have accomplished. If I had been a really dedicated person, and really worked hard, I think I could have accomplished more.”

When he says he only accomplished two-thirds of what he thinks he could have done, that’s a little scary. I’m sure he looks at the 19 second place finishes in majors and sees five or ten more wins if he would have worked at it. He also talks about how later in his career, it was more difficult to keep that fire to win.

Perhaps it was he was chasing an undisclosed number. For Tiger, his whole life was about getting to 19, a definite goal that Nicklaus believes, once he reaches, he won’t go much past it.

For my generation, the 20-25 year-olds, we never saw Jack play really. Sure, there was the Masters in ’86, but I was still a year away from being born and no way I would have had that appreciation for Nicklaus at that young of an age. My point being, we see Tiger now with struggles off the tee, but he’s a great scrambler and short game player, no doubt in any one’s mind. For Nicklaus it was his short game. He admits in the article he never really worked hard at his short game because he hit so many greens and if he didn’t his mindset was to “slop” the ball up to eight or 10 feet and make the putt.

Lee Trevino also thinks the equipment and balls had something to do with it. Nicklaus was a long hitter then as well as an extremely good iron player. He would hit 14 or 15 greens a round, but they didn’t have the wedges for around the green like they did today. Trevino thinks that hampered his generation and especially Nicklaus.

“If Jack had had a wedge, no doubt in my mind, he would have won 30 majors,” says Lee Trevino, who won six — several at Jack’s expense. “I certainly would have had about three less majors; I’d maybe have gotten him only once. I mean, he was so good at everything else. I tell people all the time, ‘If Jack in his prime could have played the clubs and balls these guys are playing today, he would have hit the sumbitch 400 yards.’ I’m dead serious. I believe Tiger is going to catch him, but if Jack had had a short game, even Tiger wouldn’t have been able to touch him.”

Yeah, 30 majors will never be touched.

Go to Top