I vacillate fairly often on how I feel about Jon Rahm, as do many others, I believe (“Rahm’s cash-grab defection stings PGA Tour,” December 7 GGP+). He is cordial, well spoken, and most times a reasonably good interview. However, he at other times is prickly and above the situation at hand, and then there is the sometimes woe-is-me whining, possibly contracted from fellow Spaniard Sergio García. In short, Rahm covers a lot of ground and is one heck of a player.
More times than not, I forgive his blunders, give him a pass, and pull for him in the next event, although it’s getting a little harder each time to dose out the forgiveness medicine.
There are no meds to give today, as he led off his interview with a statement about how much he loves and misses team golf, and this move to LIV will give him a better opportunity to grow the game of golf, which he dearly loves.
And, he looked very uncomfortable saying the words. Let me be clear: I do not blame Jon Rahm for taking generational money for participating in golf events, but in his particular case it is a 180-degree deviation from his words in the past year and makes him out to be a person of less character than we thought, or hoped.
If I seem a bit cynical, I probably am, but the timing was very well planned from the LIV perspective, though cannons backfire on occasion. We will just have to see how much he will be missed. Most people can’t even spell Surjio’s name any more.
Mike Nixon
Franklin, Tennessee
(Nixon, who retired as the director of operations at the Tennessee Golf Trail, played the PGA Tour in the 1970s and early ’80s.)
LIV-id. Yup, that's how I feel about Jon Rahm and the others who have jumped ship (“Rahm’s cash-grab defection stings PGA Tour,” December 7 GGP+).
It’s not the fact that they play fun golf in a team over three days and don’t have to practice anymore as they’re guaranteed millions however badly they play. It’s the sheer hypocrisy. LIV has turned them all into liars, saying it’s not the money, etc., etc. By all means, go and don’t try to play on the DP World Tour or the PGA Tour. I have no interest in viewing these exhibition matches and honestly don’t know anyone else who has.
Goodbye and good riddance.
Francis Christie
Arnold, Nottinghamshire, England
It would seem to me that the desire to roll back the golf ball is largely based upon the length of tour players off the tee (“Rollback,” December 4, GGP). To that end, I am chewing on a comment from Adam Scott who said in reference to the rollback debate: “The biggest fundamental change in the game since I’ve been a pro, is traditionally the driver has been the hardest club to hit in the bag, and now it’s the most forgiving. And that’s the biggest evolutionary change in the golf bag to me out of the equipment.”
His point being, I believe, that the problem has less to do with the ball and has more to do with a club whose sweet spot has grown from the size of a dime to a half dollar. Perhaps taking the tour player’s driver back to the size of yesteryear’s persimmon would reduce length and put a premium on accuracy.
To those who flinch at the thought of a tour driver specification or a “tour” ball as the first steps down the unholy road of bifurcation, I would say that train left the station long ago. Having and playing with a USGA index is bifurcation. My 4 is equal to your 3, according to my index. That is bifurcation. You are hitting from the tips, and I am playing from a forward tee more appropriate to my ability: bifurcation.
I would love to know the history of how the USGA and R&A became the self-appointed custodians of a game that belongs to all of us.
Rick Whiting
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
I’ve noticed for years that golf ball development has focused on enhancing the game of the longest hitters. How far Rory McIlroy hits it should be of academic interest to amateurs, but we all want extra straight distance. Problem is that the extra yards are only available to those with the fastest clubhead speeds, whether pros or club amateurs, with a disproportionate gain for every small increase. Design and manufacture have improved to the extent that balls fly straighter, so the longer hitters are penalized less frequently. The game used to be an equal contest between power and precision, but not anymore.
The statistics released with the announcement that the ball performance might be reined back seem to confirm this (“Rollback,” December 4, GGP). A reduction of 15 yards for the longest guys on the PGA Tour is around 5 percent, yet the loss of distance for the “average” golfer is just 4 yards; that’s around 2 percent. That can only be because the ball is designed to benefit a small minority of players to the detriment of the vast majority. Anything that redresses that imbalance is welcome, in my opinion.
Terry Wall
Winchester, England
If you have been under the impression that the “governing bodies of golf,” a.k.a. the USGA and the R&A, represent the 99 percent of golfers in the world, the latest decision concerning the golf ball should finally disabuse you of that opinion (“Rollback,” December 4, GGP).
“The game was not happy with the ‘model local rule,’ ” R&A CEO Martin Slumbers said. “There was a view that it would create a bifurcated game at the elite level. It was a very strong pushback against that. The PGA Tour was very public about it. So was the PGA of America. A number of players spoke out. And our job is to listen.”
I can't wait to hit more fairway woods, maybe more than once, on par 4s and maybe on some par 3s. I already am playing it forward, and there are a couple of 200-plus-yard par-3s I hit driver on.
Let’s have a new organization: the World Amateur Golf Association. The WAGA could set the rules and governing principles for the 99 percent. The USGA and the R&A can get in bed with the pro tours and elite amateurs and rule away. But, the tours don’t want them, either. Maybe it’s time for the governing bodies to decide whom they want to govern, and maybe it’s time for the pros to go their own way like every other professional sports league.
And those “storied venues?” I really miss Forbes Field in Pittsburgh, but they probably did need a new one.
Golf's governing bodies won’t listen, and I doubt they even care. They haven’t thought about the rest of us for a very long time, but they are very happy for us to keep sending them money because that’s what this is all about: money not golf. Fifty million golfers deserve more respect from the bodies that claim to represent them.
Blaine Walker
St. Paul, Minnesota
Global Golf Post welcomes reader comment. Write to executive editor Steve Harmon at saharmon83@gmail.com and provide your full name, city, state and country of residence. If your comment is selected for publication, GGP will contact you to verify the authenticity of the email and confirm your identity. We would not publish your email address. We reserve the right to edit for clarity and brevity.