Editorial

16 Oct 2012 Corina Pelloni

Is it time for the Ryder Cup to change its format again?

Prior to 1979, the Ryder Cup was not a competitive event and the public had little interest in it, save for some die-hard golf fans in Great Britain and Ireland.  All of that changed that year, when Jack Nicklaus’ suggestion to Lord Darby for GB & I to include all of continental Europe was put into action.

The first three editions of the USA vs. Europe did not pay immediate dividends, as the US squad triumphed.  In 1985, Europe won on home soil for the first time, and in 1987 the unthinkable happened – the US lost at home. Far from being catastrophic, at the time it was seen as a healthy development for the matches, because it created interest in 1989 that the matches had never before seen.

Fast-forward to the year 2012, and the Europeans’ record since 1985 is 9-4-1, including an astounding 6-1 since 2001.  The Europeans have turned the tables, and how!

The problem is that the Cup matches are threatening to return to the pre-1979 days when they simply weren’t competitive.  You may ask, how can this be? The United States still produces the best golfers in the world in terms of depth.  While this is true when considering individual countries, it is not true if you combine all of Europe.  Yes, I know the Official World Ranking says otherwise, but that system is very flawed in my opinion (and is another issue for another time).

This will probably sound like sour grapes to some, but consider this:  It took eight…yes, eight…countries to beat the US this year.  Now, one might argue, “Well, of course!  It’s Europe vs. the USA!”  But consider this:  In what other sport does Europe gang up against the USA by forming a continental team?  None that I can think of.

The best basketball players in the world are from the USA, and no other country can beat us when we put our minds to it.  You don’t see Europe forming a team with Germany’s Dirk Nowitzki, France’s Tony Parker, England’s Luol Deng, etc., to compete against us.  World Cup Soccer?  It’s country vs. country.  Yet, in golf, it’s somehow okay for Europe to gang up on us.

I’m not necessarily arguing for a return of the USA vs. GB & I, but if you think about it, the golfing world is far away from where it was in 1979. Back then, GB & I simply had no depth.  Today, that can’t be argued.  A potential squad could be Rory McIlroy, Darren Clarke, and Graeme McDowell (Northern Ireland); Padraig Harrington (Ireland); Luke Donald, Justin Rose, Paul Casey, Simon Dyson, Ian Poulter, and Lee Westwood (England); Paul Lawrie and Martin Laird (Scotland).

Those 12 are extremely formidable and would give the USA a huge tussle, and which team would be favored would be very much up in the air.

The downside, of course, is interest in continental Europe would be destroyed.  That downside is too much to overcome in returning to USA vs. GB & I.  A potential solution might be to limit Europe to two continental players.

The other solution would be for the USA to simply play better and produce better players.  Since changing the composition of the European squad will probably not happen, playing better remains the only solution for the USA at this time.

But let’s be honest – we’ve tried everything and it’s not working.  Europe is simply producing better players as time goes on, and I’m going to boldly say unless Europe’s team composition is somehow weakened, Team USA will be consistent losers for years to come.  Such dominance is bound to diminish interest in the USA – once unthinkable – and perhaps in Europe as well.

Something needs to be done eventually, but the question is, will it?  Time will tell.

1 Oct 2012 Corina Pelloni

Maybe a little reverse psychology should be used to grow the game

Every year a golf organization comes up with some type of initiative whose intent is to grow the game of golf. This year it is Golf 2.0. Last year was Play it Forward. We have also had Play Golf America, Link up to Golf, Get Golf Ready, and a myriad of other catch-phrase programs. Yet, the number of people playing golf has declined over the past five years. Maybe this type of approach is wrong. There is an old saying regarding golf that goes “less is more.”  Maybe that approach should be applied to marketing the game. Instead of trying to make it easier for people to take up golf, perhaps a forbidden-fruit philosophy or grass-is-greener on the other side mentality is the way to go.

I just read a terrific article by good friend Bill Fields in Golfweek Magazine about how he rediscovered his love for playing golf this year. In it, he wrote some very pertinent words to the point: “Golf requires effort. Effort requires commitment.” In none of the initiatives trying to drive people into the game is there any mention of effort and commitment. In many European countries, people have to demonstrate a certain skill level before they are allowed to play an actual round of golf. Those that I have met appreciate and respect the game much more and stay with it.

Now, it is unlikely such a system would be popular here in America, where anyone with a green dollar believes they are entitled to play, even if they don’t know a putter from a ball retriever. I am not saying we should make it difficult for people to take up golf, but maybe just put more emphasis on finding those willing to make the commitment necessary to really become enamored with the game. Those are the people that will stay with it and keep playing for years to come.

1 Oct 2012 Corina Pelloni

Fedex cup good but, but it can be made great

Several years ago, the PGA Tour instituted the FedEx Cup to give an exclamation point to the end of the season.  The Cup was based on the NASCAR system, which determines the champion of that racing circuit.  The Cup has done some of what it’s supposed to do, namely keep fan interest alive and provide some drama at a time when interest in professional golf starts to wane.

Still, in 2012, the FedEx Cup has somewhat of an identity crisis:  What, exactly, is it supposed to determine?  The major championships all have their long-established niches, and the Player of the Year may well be someone other than the FedEx Cup champion.  Contrast that to other sports, where there is a clear-cut champion at the end of each season.  The NASCAR Chase winner is THE champion; there is no debate.  Same goes for the World Series, Super Bowl, Stanley Cup, and NBA Finals winners.  But winning the FedEx Cup means…?

Given golf’s somewhat random nature, where virtually anyone can win in any given week, it doesn’t make much sense that someone can come from 26th position, as Bill Haas did a year ago, and claim the overall championship. Sure, major championships are decided by who plays well in that given week, but the FedEx Cup is billed as a “season-long” event.  Here is a proposed fix to make the “season-long” part more relevant, but with elements of a playoff that keeps some unpredictability.

Right now, points in the three “playoff” events (Barclay’s, Deutsche Bank, and BMW) are quintupled (5 times normal points).  The points are re-set for the Tour Championship.  While this makes the playoffs relevant, it over-rewards those who do well in the playoffs.  Yes, we know other sports do the same thing, but remember, the FedEx Cup is supposed to be season-long.  We propose a more modest doubling of the points for the first three events, and then tripling them for the Tour Championship with no pre-tournament re-set.

Remember the playoff between Haas and Hunter Mahan last year for all the marbles?  How would you like to have that every year?  Here’s where it can get interesting.  After the Tour Championship, take the top four in points and have them engage in a series of three sudden-death playoffs:  #4 vs. #3, the winner to face #2, and the winner of that match to face #1.  The winner of the Tour Championship, if not in the top four, would automatically become the #4 seed, bumping whoever was there.

The integrity of the regular season would be maintained to a higher degree, and yet the excitement of the post-season would be in play, too, to a degree never before seen.  This formula would give golf fans really something to talk about during football season.

1 Oct 2012 Corina Pelloni

Diversify your life’s portfolio to increase your happiness and productivity

Brandt Snedecker won the 2012 Tour Championship as well as the FedEx Cup for a whopping $11.4 million. When we see his victory from a distance, we might come to believe it was his ability to hit fairways and fantastic putting that made the difference (Brandt was #1 for both in this tournament). I say it is Brandt’s attitude which makes him a champion.

I had the wonderful opportunity to work with Brandt when he played at Vanderbilt University.  My impressions of him were that he was quite insightful and bright, well beyond his years.

When interviewed at the Tour Championship this past week, Brandt stated that he has learned a powerful lesson as he got older:  Having balance in his life gave him a better golf game. Brandt mentioned that he has hit more than 1 million golf balls, and he does not have to practice so much anymore. He also said he works out in the gym much less. However, he does spend more time with his family (he has a young daughter, with another child on the way). This balanced perspective has not only helped with his mental well-being, but also, this new perspective has supercharged his game.

When we diversify and have more balance in our lives, we reduce our stress levels. Here is an analogy:  You have a variety of ego egg baskets. But, if you place all your ego eggs into only one basket, there is more pressure to perform well at that one activity to get those self-esteem points. For Brandt, he diversified his baskets. With greater balance in his life, the pressure is diminished for Brandt to always perform well, and as a result, he plays better in competition.

The ironic point of balance is that it increases your production by taking time away. When you have greater balance, you will have less stress and more energy to produce at higher levels for longer periods of time.

Unfortunately, many people in the business world do not see the irony of balance. They believe it is a badge of honor to work 80 hours a week and never take a timeout or go on vacation. Lee Iacocca, of Chrysler fame, has said, “I have seen many executives who have said with pride to me, “Boy, I worked so hard last year that I did not even take a vacation.” To Iacocca, that is foolish thinking. Taking a vacation and having balance is essential to your overall well- being in business.

Besides hurting your mental health, being uni-dimensional in your life can contribute to burnout. Sports psychologists have discovered that athletes who are uni-dimensional (only played one sport) suffered from greater burnout than those athletes who are multi-dimensional (played a variety of sports).

When all your ego eggs are in one basket, they can crack more easily. The same principle applies to your life.

Are you feeling drained and tired as a golf teacher? Are you on the way to burnout? Are you suffering from being uni-dimensional?

As a golf teaching professional, it is easy to overwork. When the lessons are there in this tough economy, you need to take them – right?  I would say be careful. While money in the pocket is always great, your longevity in this business is also essential. You must protect your overall well-being.  As Lee Iacocca mentioned, working 80 hours is not the best way to run a business.

Like Brandt, add to your balance sheet by diversifying your life’s portfolio. Add meaningful and fulfilling activities to your day. Make sure you play enough golf and spend time with your family. Diversify and you will greatly accrue in pleasure as well as productivity.

1 Oct 2012 Corina Pelloni

Equipment and balls have not changed the game significantly… oh, really?

The USGA continues to say that equipment and ball improvements have had little effect on how the game is played. Are you kidding me? If that were the case, then why is it they are adding 500 yards to the Merion Golf Club for next year’s US Open? The original layout of the East Course measured just less than 6,500 yards. For the Open next year, it will be stretched to a whisker under 7,000 yards. I’m sure they would have made it longer if there was room. Merion is situated on a mere 128 acres. As it is, one tee is being moved almost off the golf course for added length.

The fact of the matter is modern equipment and balls have significantly altered how the game is played. If not, then why the need to redesign or lengthen all the courses that national championships are played on? The PGA Championship played at 7,676 yards. This year’s Open included par-four holes of more than 500 yards. The average golf course length in the 1960s was 6,400 yards. It is rare these days to see tournaments played at under 7,000 yards. The advances in technology are the reason. Let’s just be honest about it. I’m not passing judgment, good or bad, but to try to convince people that nothing has changed is ridiculous.

31 Aug 2012 Corina Pelloni

Why I Teach Golf

When I was 21, just after I began my studies in education, I had a brief conversation with a close friend that altered my life. A couple of years earlier, with a small degree of enthusiasm, I decided to pursue a career as a schoolteacher. It ran in my family and it was a profession that did hold some appeal: summers off, decent benefits, significant opportunity, reliable income, etc. But in my heart I knew it wasn’t really what I wanted.

The game of golf had been a passion of mine since I was a young teenager. My appetite for the game showed up in a number of ways: reading whatever I could about the best players, daydreaming about golf, playing as much as possible (mostly in a field outside my front door – in the middle was a large oak tree which served as the perfect target), and learning the ins and outs of technique – most of which was self-taught (I couldn’t afford to take lessons).

I started playing some competitive junior golf and turned things up another notch with my desire to get better and better. It became the driving force in how I spent my free time. I went to college and played some more competitive golf, won a tournament, and continued to improve. It was at that point that I decided to turn my back on the game somewhat and pursue my career as a teacher. But then I bumped into a friend and we had the conversation which resulted in my “path of life” doing a 180.

His words were simple, and I suppose, not all that surprising: “You love the game, Andrew. It’s what you should do. It’s your passion. You should go for it. See where the game can take you.” As soon as he said these things I knew he was right. It was all I wanted to do and it made sense. Why not go for it? You only have one life, right? Why not roll the dice and follow your dreams.

To make a long story short, I went for it. I relinquished my spot in the Faculty of Education at the University of Manitoba and I enrolled in a Golf Management Program in Alberta that was geared to train aspiring golf professionals. I obtained a job scrubbing clubs at a course the following summer. I was on the road. Not for one second have I been sorry I made that decision.

Bottom line, I teach golf because I absolutely love the game. I love to play. I love to be around the game. I love learning about it. It’s a huge part of me. There probably isn’t an hour that goes by when I don’t think, in some way or another, about the game. I’m hopelessly addicted. I’m sure many of you can relate.

But, unfortunately, for a golf teacher, just loving the game isn’t enough. You need to be able to connect with people in order to make this profession rewarding. You need to understand people, to be able to get outside your own scope of thinking and delve into the minds of others – with sincerity. Thankfully, through my upbringing and life experiences – some good, some bad – I’ve developed a love for getting to know people. It’s another major reason why I teach the game. I enjoy getting to know the quirks, the insecurities, the weaknesses, the strengths, the character, and the faces of others. Getting to know others and observing how they cope, learn, adapt, laugh, and get angry, allows you to learn a little more about yourself.

Of course, with this profession we are also given the opportunity to make a difference in the lives of others. It may not grant them the fortitude and the wisdom to overcome the most challenging issues facing them. However, engaging them in a pastime can have a dramatic effect, not just on their golf games, but in how they live their lives. It frees their minds for a while. Because everyone – doctors, housewives, electricians – needs to rest, take a break, from the “real” issues of life. It’s healthy. It’s how we were made. It’s what we need. To be able to offer that to them through teaching them something about the greatest game on earth is an honor. It’s a privilege – and I’m thrilled to be able to do it every day.

31 Aug 2012 Corina Pelloni

From Humble Roots We Have Blossomed In Our Profession

As golf teaching professionals we have it pretty good. Our students put us on a pedestal just because we can hit a little ball straight. We’re thought of as highly as their doctor, financial adviser or lawyer (well maybe not lawyer). Let’s just say we hold a pretty lofty position in the public eye. Ah, but it wasn’t always the case. In the 500 years that golf has been played, it has only been about 70 years that professionals have been allowed to enter the clubhouse of a private course. In the early days of golf, pros were considered to be less than second class citizens. To trace the roots of our profession, we must return to the year 1740, a period of relative prosperity in Scotland. Many a merchant made fortunes trading wool and cotton and began to enjoy the privilege and respect of their new found wealth. Bonding together and having the time and money to spend on leisure activity, they began playing golf on weekdays, something humble townsfolk could never afford to do.

Golf itself was an expensive proposition primarily because of the cost of the feather balls used at the time. Thus, only the wealthiest played regularly. Naturally, such a class of citizen would not do such menial tasks as take care of the golf course or carry clubs. They hired townspeople to serve them. For many of the locals it became a useful way to supplement their incomes. Eventually, the more enterprising, took to caddying regularly, tending to the course, making balls and building or repairing clubs. It was only a matter of time before the servants began playing golf themselves. I mean if you hung around a golf course all day, could you resist the temptation to try playing? Unfortunately, earning a living off something as frivolous as golf did little to elevate the status of the men who did. On the scale of social distinction such people were lower than common laborers. As golf grew more popular among the elite, golfing clubs began to form and more new courses began to appear across Scotland. The growth required more equipment, balls and people to service this expanding economy. Enter the golf professional.

The father of our grand trade is widely acknowledged to be Allan Robertson of St. Andrews. Robertson was best known as a producer of feather golf balls but he was also the finest golfer to break 80 on the Old Course. One of the ways professionals made money in those days was in head to head challenge matches. Legend has it that Robertson never lost such a match. It was during Robertson’s later years that the popularity of golf exploded due to the introduction of the inexpensive gutta percha ball in 1848. More people than ever began playing but only a handful, the professionals played it well. Their superior ability however, did nothing to improve their social status. Golf professionals knew their place and abided by the expectations of the general society.

It would remain so for another seventy years. To their discredit a lot of early pros did not help their image. They were often hard drinkers and generally unkept. In fact for the British Open in 1860, practice round spectators were so appalled at the appearance of some of the pros that the tournament committee bought each a suit of clothing to wear on tournament day. Fortunately, the golf played by the eight contestants in the inaugural Open was outstanding, bringing large crowds and high praise from the local newspaper.

As the game grew, more sophisticated professionals appeared on the scene. Old Tom and Young Tom Morris, Willie Park and the great triumvirate of Harry Vardon, James Braid and J.H. Taylor dominated golf from 1860 to 1915. Taylor was the first of these golfers to take the lead in trying to elevate the social status of his fellow professionals. He was instrumental in forming the first Professional Golfers Association in 1901 calling for improvement in wages and working conditions. Things started to get better but amateurs or sporting gentlemen as they were referred to still controlled golf and the fate of their hired hands.

The American touring golf pro was probably most responsible for raising the golf professional’s status to the lofty position we currently enjoy. I would have to say it was primarily one man, my personal hero – Walter Hagen. At the 1920 British Open, Hagen was rebuked by a steward for entering the clubhouse to change shoes. Apologizing for not having known the rules, he then told the steward that for the remainder of the stay, he would be changing in his limousine, which would be parked in front of the clubhouse each day. It was a bold move but typical of Hagen. The British people fell in love with him, yet in subsequent trips he was still banned from the clubhouses. Then at the ‘24 Open he finished second and for the first time was invited into the clubhouse for the presentation of the trophy to Arthur Havers. He politely thanked the committee and declined. He then turned to the crowd and told them that in the entire time of his stay he was not allowed in the clubhouse, so instead he was inviting everyone to the pub where he was welcome all week for a drink and to thank them personally. The gallery followed him to the pub leaving only the tournament committee and Havers. Certainly there were a lot of factors that changed the fortunes of golf pros besides Hagen, but he was probably the first to expect a certain level of respect. For that I think we should all be grateful.