Are grandstands behind the 18th green creating an unfair advantage?

Each week, we ask our panel of writers, PGA members and golf industry experts to weigh in with their views on the hot topics of the day.

On Sunday at the LPGA’s Chevron Championship, the grandstand behind the 18^th green became a factor in the tournament’s outcome. That’s happened before on the PGA Tour as well, usually when the finishing hole is a par-5 and players have the option of going for the green in two and using the grandstand as a backstop. It endangers fans and creates an unusual and maybe unfair advantage. Should the Tour implement a local rule to put the grandstand out of bounds or at least designate it a penalty area instead of awarding a free drop?

Jim Deeks, Fairways Magazine (@jimdeeks): That’s a harsh and unnecessary solution you’re suggesting, in my view. I don’t think that hitting the grandstand and getting a free drop detracted from the tournament at all.  Unless you landed on the front two feet of the green, your ball would inevitably hit hard and bounce over, so the shots that went long were not necessarily “bad” shots.  And since everybody who played it that way got a free drop, no one got an advantage.  It was an exciting finish.

Michael Schurman, Master Professional / Hall of Fame Member, PGA of Canada: I have not liked this rule for a long time. Usually, the stadium is far enough away from the playing surface that it requires a shot a long way off-line or long to hit into it. It should be a free drop away from the wall, but OB if a player is beyond the edge.

TJ Rule, Golf Away Tours (@GolfAwayTJ): I guess they need the grandstand to maximise the fan experience and the corporate dollars, but it really is a shame.  I don’t think you can make a rule that it’s a penalty if it’s struck as it’s so close to the play.  Maybe they should build a stone wall like on the 17th at the Old Course and if it goes up against that, too bad, play it as it lies, lol.

Hal Quinn, Freelance Writer, Vancouver: Back in the day, Arnie’s Army used to take shots for the King keeping him in play, and Eldrick’s mouth-breathing behemoths once moved a loose impediment the size of a Volkswagen. But the back stop is another story. Monday after the tourney those rockets over the 18th are lost balls. Still, how could the Tour weigh the $$$ from those prime grandstand seats and devising a penalty for intentionally hitting into them? The LIV hassle might be solved before this one.

Peter Mumford, Fairways Magazine: Balls hit into the grandstand are plainly bad shots and would otherwise land well beyond the green maybe imperilling the patrons on the clubhouse patio or incurring a penalty. Treat the grandstand as a one-shot penalty and head for the drop area. For balls that roll through the green and are stopped by the drapery or boards around the grandstand, quit wasting time calling in a marshal to determine the best place to drop. Must go to the drop area – no penalty. If you don’t like those options, hit a more precise shot.

The PGA Tour just concluded its annual sabbatical, a week where most of the top players take a breather while the grinders battle it out in teams of two at the Zurich Classic. The unique format is offset by the almost total lack of star power, yet it has produced some exciting finishes. What’s your take on the Zurich Classic? 

Deeks: A fun and refreshing format.  I enjoy watching it every year, more than most week-in, week-out events.

Schurman: The format is boring as it repeats itself. I’d prefer round one – alternate shot; round two – best ball; round three – two-man scramble; round four – two-man combined score.

Rule: It’s a unique format and I give them credit for trying something that isn’t the normal boring non-elevated event format, but it doesn’t get my juices flowing, no matter if Rory and others are playing or not.  It’s nice that they have had close Sundays recently, and the team event does add to that drama, but it doesn’t get me to rush to the TV on a Sunday afternoon.

Quinn: T-t-t-timing is everything. This is a great and ambitious effort at mixing up the Tour, but for it to work better it has to have a better date to attract players whose names fans recognize or at least can pronounce. It was fun last year with the Irish rovers winning, but it needs that type of star power to make it ‘must see’ and a date when baseball isn’t getting warmed up and the interminable NHL season is finally playing meaningful games.

Mumford: I like the format – no changes required. And it’s a pleasant break from the weekly tedium. These days on the PGA Tour, it’s difficult to find an optimal date that isn’t sandwiched between majors and Signature events, but a team event should get better participation from the game’s top players. They are in the entertainment business after all, and this event is a chance to be uniquely entertaining.

Last week, several PGA Tour players acknowledged discussions at the highest level about changing the format for the Tour Championship. It would appear that the current method of giving the Tour leader a head start is not popular. Neither is any form of match play. How would you structure the Tour Championship?

Deeks: That’s a loaded question, especially in view of the fact that I’m always confused about what exactly is the “ultimate” event or criterion that determines the player of the year (as opposed to Player of the Year as voted on by players).  I’m sorry that the players don’t appreciate match play (other than in the Ryder Cup), and certainly television doesn’t like it because the “best” players aren’t guaranteed to be in the final, and the pace of the broadcast is glacial.  I agree with not giving the Tour leader a head start.  But if I was in charge, I’d be making the event match play.

Schurman: The current format is ridiculous! Event one starts with the top 75 players. Event two: the top 50. Event three: the top 30. Just like every other sport. No ‘leadoffs’, no advantage, no edge to anyone. Make the play-offs and play-off.

Rule: I love the idea of match play but it’s terrible for tv.  It’s painful to watch one single match live, you just can’t fill that much dead airtime, no matter who you have on the mic.  So, with that out as an option, I do think you need to give the year long leader some advantage, he’s deserved that.  Perhaps he’s the only one and it’s a two-shot lead on the rest of the field.  Basically, like handing him the home ice advantage in the Stanley Cup finals.  But any road team can catch him during the week!

Quinn: Seeding works in NFL football, NBA basketball, and NHL hockey only because the playoffs are an artificial construction to milk gate receipts. One versus eight after 82 games? That’s nuts. But so is giving strokes to season-long leaders in golf. The game just don’t work that way. A golfer qualifies for the Playoffs. Cuts after each event. End of story. Play on.

Mumford: Why does the Tour need playoffs? Each week is a separate tournament and at the end of the schedule, one player will have won the most money or points. For some reason, the Tour doesn’t think golf fans can walk and chew gum at the same time, so they believe a Tour Championship that crowns the season long champion and may have a different winner of that week’s event is confusing. It’s not. Run out the string, pay the bonuses. No gimmicks or Steve Sands’ whiteboard required.