“I understand what you are saying.”

Adam Schupak says that the USGA's Dick Rugge visited Liberty National to take in the lovely architecture to let Phil Mickelson vent about the latest turn in the grooves saga.

For 45 minutes, Rugge and Mickelson stood in the middle of the putting green, nearly toe-to-toe, and engaged in a wide-ranging – at times, animated – but cordial discussion.

Rugge termed it a “pleasant conversation” but would not reveal specifics.

But much of it could be overheard easily. Mickelson, speaking with conviction, expressed his disappointment with the USGA’s recent ban of his prototype irons, his concern that the 64-degree wedge could be banned in the future and his view that this wasn’t good for golf on a global scale.

And...

Rugge repeatedly answered Mickelson by saying, “I understand what you are saying.”

I suppose that was better than, "thanks you sir, may I have another."

“The objective of this change is to limit the effectiveness of grooves on shots from the rough to the effect of a traditional V-groove design.”

Bowl and Grass flesh out the notion that Bomb and Gouge golf might not be impacted by the groove rule change because most irons already had conforming grooves and their well-paid brat handlers haven't had U-groove on their mind
Read More

"Some of these guys have no idea what they're going to be in for"

Bill Elliott profiles Greg Norman on the eve of his return to Turnberry and talks about the state of his game. There was also this at the end of the piece:

"The return of V-grooves is the greatest move technologically in golf for years. That's gonna teach today's players a huge lesson on the art of understanding a lie, controlling a ball and flight trajectory. Some of these guys have no idea what they're going to be in for," he grinned.

"Over time we're going to be experimenting with a lot of different ways to set things up because our hope is that this change is going to make the game more interesting to watch"

After giving a remarkably cogent explanation of the groove rule history--really, not jargon!--Commissioner Tim Finchem was asked this interesting question:

Q. Tim, the only manufacturing company that has objected publicly to the reinstitution of the V-grooves has been a golf ball company so far. Do you have any research indicating that the adoption of the V-grooves will somehow impact the performance of golf balls and therefore affect golf ball companies?

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: With respect to companies, I've spent a lot of time talking to manufacturers as you might suspect over the last six weeks. They have different opinions among them on different aspects of the rule and equipment and where it should go and all those things.

You know, all I know is that with this change you're not going to be able to spin the ball as much out of the rough. There's some assumptions that players will as a result, maybe, in some instances, look for a ball that spins more generally. That's not necessarily the case in my view, but it's possible.

With respect to the manufacturer that objected, they were a party that recommended the delay. We looked at the request based on whether or not -- because one of the arguments made was there's not enough time to make the transition, and we primarily were looking at it from that perspective.

We also looked at it from the perspective of the timeline and the fairness issue of delaying after individuals and entities and companies had spent time, energy and resources reacting to the timeline. That was a major concern.

But in terms of how it develops, you know, that's something the players will sort out as they pick up the equipment. They go practice with it and then they make the adjustments that they feel like they need to.

Q. So just real quick, nobody presented you with any research indicating that there would be an impact on a specific golf ball product?

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: No, no.

Hmmm...

This was particularly encouraging, but also in an peculiar roundabout way, an admission that course setup took on Draconian measures in response to technology changes:

Q. One more on grooves. Yesterday you said one of the challenges is the qualifiers and that you may look at possibly different rules for that. USGA and R & A are also looking at that. Are you likely to act in lockstep with them or will you act independently regarding rules on qualifiers? And on a different note, do you see with the new groove being implemented next year that course setups may evolve, possibly pin placements get a little more accessible?

COMMISSIONER FINCHEM: Let me answer the second question first because it's more fun. Yes, we do. We have changed our rough heights this year at a number of golf courses and did some fairly meticulous analysis of what happened when we brought those rough heights down a little bit compared to earlier years, and the reason we did that was to set the stage for now measuring what happens on those same golf courses when we shift grooves.

So this will be a -- you're not going to see us revolutionize our setup the first month next year, but over time we're going to be experimenting with a lot of different ways to set things up because our hope is that this change is going to make the game more interesting to watch from a variety of perspectives, and that would be helpful to us. So we're going to be -- we have more people, more energy, we have this wonderful ShotLink program that tells us everything, so we're going to really, I think, enjoy the process of doing some things differently and playing around with it.

How Finchem Got The Grooves Back

The grooves coverage features several intriguing tidbits.

Mike Stachura writing for GolfDigest.com, writing about industry reaction:

Others in the industry see no cause for alarm, however.

"We're very happy they took the decision to move forward," said Benoit Vincent, chief technical officer at TaylorMade. "The USGA had a pretty set schedule, and we have been working to develop solutions within the new rule, so there was no rational reason for us to want to postpone implementation for a year."

E. Michael Johnson talks to players and gets their take on how this will play out, including this from Ping man Ted Purdy, who is about to take delivery on conforming wedges that Ping didn't want to make:

"The game is hard as it is, to make it harder doesn't make a lot of sense to me," he said. "I think people want to see excitement. We'll evolve and we'll be fine and there will be great scores and great shots being hit. But I don't think this was the will of the majority of the players."

Golf.com's Rob Sauerhaft reminds us all that this will have little impact on the everyday game for some time.

How will the rule affect amateur and "casual" golfers? First, equipment companies can continue to sell current models with U-grooves through the end of 2010. Beyond that, the new regulation on conforming grooves will take effect for high-level amateurs in 2014 and for "casual" players in 2024.

That didn't stop Jeff Rude from complaining that this rule change is cruel to the average golfer. They're taking away their Oxycontin! (In 2024.)

If the PGA Tour wants to have its players use smaller-groove irons and wedges, fine. But leave the recreational golfer alone.

Isn’t the game hard and long enough? We’re going to make it harder for the masses in a few years (elite amateurs in 2014, the rest in 2024)? Doesn’t golf already have a difficult time keeping recreational players in the game? Isn’t the game hurting in most corners?

The theory is that reduction of the size of the current U-grooves and the sharpness of their edges would make playing from rough more difficult and, in turn, put a greater premium on driving accuracy and shotmaking.

That’s fine for the Tour, but not for you and me. We play for enjoyment (and today’s equipment makes the game more enjoyable than ever for the garden-variety amateur).

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ...

"We've had plenty of time to make our adjustments."

Not the cleanest transcript ever, but you get the idea. Tiger Woods at Congressional, asked about the groove change going ahead in 2010:

TIGER WOODS: I think it's great. We've had plenty of time to make our adjustments. We've known for over a couple years now what this decision was going to be, when it was going to come down, and we've had plenty of time to make our adjustments.

All the companies have been testing and getting ready for this, and the guys will make the changes. Most of the guys play with big groups brought their irons. Only new groups they usually have use their sand wedges. But guys will make their changes, their adjustments.

It'll be interesting seeing guys catching flyers and not being able to spin the ball back out of the rough. Their decision is how they play par-5s whether they will they try and drive drivable par 4s now. Short-siding yourself is obviously going to pay a little more of a price, and you know, how many more 64-degree wedges you're going to see with the balls being as firm as they are. Are guys going to start going to a spinner ball.

"Exactly why the board decided to let Finchem make the call remains, for the moment, unclear."

Steve Elling on the PGA Tour's Policy Board Tim Finchem's groove call:

It will be interesting hearing the four players who have seats on the board explain what happened at the meeting, but at minimum, it removed them from a potentially uncomfortable situation – the players have endorsement deals with manufacturers, which might have created a conflict of interest.

Titleist: "Disappointed"

Boy they work fast up there in Fairhaven. Hot off the presses:

Acushnet Statement re: U.S. PGA Tour Groove Decision

The Acushnet Company is disappointed that the U.S. PGA Tour has decided to adopt the Condition of Competition for the new groove rule effective January 1, 2010.

For the past several months we have communicated with the USGA, the R&A and various worldwide professional tours, our support for aligning adoption of the Condition of Competition with January 1, 2011, the date that manufacturers are required to begin shipping products with the new groove configuration. We believe that alignment of those dates is in the best interest of the professional tours, consumers, retailers and manufacturers. Below are some of the factors that we believe support our position.

Although Acushnet incorporated a new conforming groove configuration into its irons in 2007, we elected to wait to convert our wedges until after the USGA/R&A took final action on the groove proposal. Once the new groove dimensions were finalized, in the rule as adopted in August 2008, we developed a new groove for wedges and began tour player testing in March 2009. We have since tested a significant number of tour players comparing the current and the new groove configurations.

Our test results are consistent with testing conducted by the USGA/R&A that revealed a spin rate reduction of between 30% and 50% for full shots out of the rough. However, our testing also revealed significant changes in ball launch angle, ball trajectory, angle of descent and roll out on the green. The testing also revealed significant differences in performance depending on player club head speed and short game technique. Player reaction to what they saw was dramatic. They were caught off guard by the magnitude of the performance difference and expressed concern about the extent of the transition process.

Momentary pause here to run for my Kleenex box. Continue...

We believe, and players have confirmed, that the conversion process will not be a simple exchange of existing wedges with new grooves. The conversion process may involve different wedge designs and lofts, different shot technique, different golf balls and different set configuration (including drivers). These types of changes are iterative and take time. They also require significant support from players and equipment manufacturers. There are approximately 1,500 exempt tour players worldwide. We don’t believe that this extensive transition process will begin in earnest until late in 2009, when manufacturer tour support is almost non existent. That is particularly true for tours outside of the United States.

The groove rule change is the first time in the history of contemporary competitive golf that equipment performance has been rolled back. Making a change of this precedential significance requires that the conversion process be conducted in a thorough, deliberate manner taking the interests of all constituencies into account. Regardless of how much research and thought went into the development of the rule change, as with any significant change, there are unforeseen issues and complexity, particularly at the point of implementation and adoption. There is no way to predict many of these issues and they only surface during the actual conversion process, as described above. While no one is to blame for these circumstances, the major logistical issues of implementation still need to be taken into account.

Hey, maybe this will force more guys to show up at Kapalua!

One of the most significant consequences of this equipment roll back is that not aligning adoption of the Condition of Competition with the manufacturer sell by date creates a bifurcation between the equipment that the Tours are using and the equipment consumers have available in the market place. That disconnect is also unprecedented. Our research indicates that the majority of retailers and consumers only have an interest in product with the new groove configuration if product with current grooves is not available. On the current schedule that is January 1, 2011. We believe that alignment of these dates to January 1, 2011 is critical as it allows for a thoughtful, orderly and comprehensive implementation of the proposed new grooves for all parties. Non-alignment is not in the best interests of the game of golf and all of its constituencies.

Now that the USPGA Tour has voted to continue with a January 1, 2010 adoption (and we expect all professional tours to follow their lead), we will, as promised all along, make the effort to service all worldwide professional players as best we can. Our irons currently conform to the new rule and we will begin distribution of new wedge product to the professional tours shortly. However, the decision to adopt the Condition of Competition effective January 1, 2010 does not diminish or alter the challenges described above.

And The PGA Tour's Groove Rule Verdict Is...

...they are going ahead with the 2010 "condition of competition." Victory for USGA, Finchem, rough mowers. Finchem conference call highlights:

"full and thorough discussion on delaying, reaffirmation of general support for rule, some issues with the enacting date"

"the board finished discussion by continuing the history policy of using condition of competition, our intention to move ahead January 1, 2010"

"full court press" to make sure every player is paying attention to what he has to do, working with his manufacturer, to be prepared

"some challenges"

"Delaying at this point in time was not in our overall best interest"

"continues to be wide support for rule itself"

Ferguson asks: why in best overall interest? Finchem: "late in the process"

"Board did not take action" according to Finchem. Means no vote was taken, left up to the Commissioner.