The American Spectator

Print Email

Text Size

Media Matters

(Page 2 of 2)

I'LL BRING THESE OBSERVATIONS back to golf. Because some big things have happened in only ten years, and it has been well worth the look back.

Golfers no longer worry much about spike marks on the greens. In the rules of golf, a player may repair a mark on the green made by a ball, but not the little tufts and tears made by the spikes on golf shoes. At the 1994 PGA, played at a blazing hot Southern Hills Country Club in Tulsa, Oklahoma, spike marks defaced the greens like a scattering of jacks. And those marks deflect putts. So why no more? The advent of plastic spikes, or "soft spikes." Even in the pro ranks, where a few die-hards still wear the old steel nails, most players have gone over to the plastic spikes for superior comfort and, in recent years, traction the equal of steel spikes. A consumer can no longer buy steel spikes except by special order. I don't think I've ever seen a product take over a market so fast.

Golf balls no longer specify a "compression." This rating used to be either 90 or 100 (90 or 100 what, I never figured out). Modern golf balls are no longer wound (you can't unravel one the way you used to be able to). Their compression, if such a thing were printed, would probably be in the 60-70 range. Nowadays, manufacturers tout "soft" balls for their better feel. Used to be you were thought a sissy for playing a soft ball. No more, not with ball makers naming their products "The Noodle" and touting "butter soft feel."

Southern Hills isn't all that long a course, and, in the 1994 final round I preserved, there wasn't much wind. Nonetheless, players were regularly hitting five- and six-irons (or more) to par-four greens, from distances of 185 yards or more. On one hole, I marveled at Greg Norman hitting a nine-iron from about 125 yards. Today, players hit pitching wedges up to 150 yards, with a nine-iron being the basic 150-yard club. Norman's shot would be a strong sand wedge for today's players. And Nick Price, who won that tournament, led the field with a driving average of 303 yards for the week. Today's major tournament winner will probably exceed that average by 20 yards.

FINALLY, SPORTS ANNOUNCERS and their producers suffer from a near-terminal lack of reporting zeal. I don't think they have to go digging after dirt in players' personal lives. But they really should report on the games properly.

Here's a for instance: In tennis, Michael Chang changed his service motion more than any other player over several years. He changed from "platform" serving, with both feet planted, to "step forward" serving, and then back again. He adopted a Boris Becker-ish deep knee bend, then dropped it. He switched from landing, after his service leap, on his left foot to landing on his right foot. How often did I see a video feature describing these changes? Never. "Michael's been working on his serve," is as far as tennis announcers ever went.

In golf, Tiger Woods' switch from instructor Butch Harmon to Hank Haney has been widely noted. But no network has devoted their ample video resources to the changes Tiger has actually made. He's far more a body swinger than an arm swinger nowadays, for one. He has largely eliminated the hand-over-hand "release" at contact point. He rehearses a no-release swing regularly on every tee, never remarked. His swing is flatter than it used to be. He stands a bit farther from the ball, he appears to have weakened his grip somewhat, and I would bet that he uses slightly longer shafts in his irons.

How about it, guys? Dig a little, and become better broadcasters. The players have changed, the game has changed, the sponsors have changed. But we haven't seen anything new in sports broadcasting since Roone Arledge's breakthroughs of the 1970s.

topics:
Education, Trade, Television, Business, Sports