Golf Digest Search Results

The End of an Era: USGA/R&A ban anchored putting

Mike Stachura — Tue, 21 May 2013 12:00:00 GMT

By Mike Stachura Golf's ruling bodies announced this morning that the anchored stroke, the method typically employed by players using long and belly putters and the method that has been used by the most recent winners...

Vijay's case against the PGA Tour isn't as ludicrous as you think

Mon, 13 May 2013 18:48:00 GMT

By Brendan Mohler

By now you know that Vijay Singh has filed suit against the PGA Tour. Yes, he's suing the organization that let him off the hook after admittedly using a banned substance, the organization that has made him rich and the same organization that named him Player of the Year in 2004. How could he do such a thing?

Singh greets fans during the practice round at The Players Championship. Photo: Richard Heathcote/Getty Images

Forget about Singh's past: the cheating allegations, the unfriendly manner with which he's been known to treat playing partners, the often rude avoidance of the media. Is it possible that the tour acted carelessly because Singh's reputation wasn't worth saving? Singh and his lawyers apparently think so, and the case they've leveled has some compelling elements. Despite the public ridicule the lawsuit has created, Singh's lawyers actually make a few strong points.

• Aside from his cantankerous reputation, Vijay is commonly recognized as the hardest working player on tour. As the lawsuit points out, Singh currently holds the record for most wins after the age of 40. Yes, his negative reputation has only been reinforced by the lawsuit, but his reputation as the hardest working range rat on tour has weakened.

• Paragraphs 12 and 13 of the lawsuit explain the tour's willingness to rely on the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) for proper testing of banned substances, and to impose action based on the results of that testing, without the slightest effort to verify the accuracy of that information. The tour did not hesitate to suspend Singh and thus left him to deal with the wrath of what the lawyer's claim was baseless action by the tour.

• After the Sports Illustrated story (in which Singh admitted to using deer-antler spray) ran, Vijay provided the Tour with a urine sample (that tested negatively) and a supply of deer-antler spray that the Tour could test. After having the spray tested by UCLA, the tour found no evidence that the spray contained enough IGF-1 to warrant its banning. Furthermore, the tour withheld Singh's earnings during the proposed suspension and alerted Singh that the choice to appeal his suspension would require him to forfeit those earnings, even though he was allowed to continue competing during the appeal process.

• The tour received the results of UCLA's testing on February 14 and, on the same day, sent a letter to Singh notifying him of his violation. Five days later, the Tour notified Singh of his suspension. The timeline of the tour's decision-making process is unclear, but by either deciding on a suspension without proper information about the spray, or by leveling the suspension after finding out about the contents of the spray, the tour seems to have acted preemptively.

• The lawsuit includes a section titled "The Truth about IGF-1" which summarizes UCLA's findings and might be the most interesting aspect of the document. Singh's lawyers point out the biological inactivity of IGF-1 in deer-antler spray in an effort to downplay its effectiveness. They also compare the effect of IGF-1 in the spray to the effect of pouring a shot of bourbon into a pool, then taking a shot of the pool water.

The strengths of the lawsuit do not change the fact that, above all else, Singh admitted to taking a substance that was banned by the PGA Tour. The Tour's Anti-Doping program treats admission of use the same as a positive drug test, meaning Singh has a huge hurdle to clear before this case can gain traction. As in most lawsuits, there are significant barriers that the plaintiff must overcome (the tour's bylaws include language that protects against legal action from members on tour decisions), however, Singh and his lawyers have created a compelling case that's worthy of attention and could have a lasting impact on the Tour's drug-testing policy and procedures.

Follow @BrendanMohlerGW

Vijay Singh suing PGA Tour over proposed doping suspension

Wed, 08 May 2013 16:25:00 GMT

By Ron Sirak

PONTE VEDRA BEACH, Fla. -- Almost exactly a decade ago, Vijay Singh stepped into a public relations hornet's nest when he said he hoped Annika Sorenstam would miss the cut at the 2003 Bank of America Colonial on the PGA Tour.

Singh still doesn't talk to the writer who published that quote. That cone of silence may expand now -- on all sides. Suing the PGA Tour on the eve of its flagship event is not a way to win friends and influence people.

Lawyers for Singh said Wednesday they are suing the PGA Tour to "reclaim his reputation and hold the PGA TOUR responsible for its unwarranted effort to suspend Singh for his use of deer antler spray." The tour, not surprisingly, has no comment at this time.

By suing the tour, Singh is not only biting that hand that has fed him very well -- he has $67.5 million in career earnings, third all-time behind Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson -- he is sort of suing the other players who benefit from the tour and its events.

And there are many among those players who were not happy when the World Anti-Doping Agency rescinded its ban on deer antler spray, leading to the tour dropping its 90-day suspension of Singh, which was under appeal at the time.

Singh freely admitted to using deer antler spray in a magazine interview while it was on the PGA Tour's banned substance list. That was changed when WADA concluded there was not enough human growth hormone in the spray to make it a performance-enhancing drug.

"I am proud of my achievements, my work ethic, and the way I live my life," Singh says in a news release by Peter R. Ginsberg Law, LLC, in New York City. "The PGA TOUR not only treated me unfairly, but displayed a lack of professionalism that should concern every professional golfer and fan of the game."

The timing of the suit is sure to annoy many players almost as much as it irks officials in PGA Tour headquarters here. That's about as in-your-face as it gets and is somewhat reminiscent of when three LPGA executives quit on the eve of the 2006 LPGA Championship, saying they had lost confidence in then commissioner Caroline Bivens.

At the time the suit was filed, Singh was still listed as having a 2 p.m. tee time in Thursday's first round of The Players. It's a pretty safe guess that the media room is rooting for a 64 by Vijay in the first round - and a trip to the interview room.

One of the risks in filing the suit is that the move likely means that anything in his file at the PGA Tour headquarters - and Singh has been controversial enough that a file certainly exists - is now fair game for public release, as it was in the case of John Daly when he sued a newspaper for libel.

The PGA Tour has a policy of not making public any fines or suspensions levied against players. The extent of the disciplinary actions against Daly were not known until he sued.

If there has ever been any actions against Singh, or even complaints, those would now become public knowledge. In fact, his 90-day suspension for deer antler spray was only made public when it was detailed in the suit Singh filed.

It's also probably safe to assume the PGA Tour will have crack investigators thoroughly probe every aspect of Singh's medical history.

The other risk for Singh is the elephant in the room throughout his career - a suspension for allegedly cheating, an allegation he denies, in the 1980s, would resurface larger than ever.

The accusation was that Singh changed a scorecard in the 1985 Indonesian Open in order to make a cut. The South East Asia Golf Federation suspended him indefinitely and he was not a member of any tour until resurfacing on the European Tour in 1989.

The only way this suit makes sense -- and the greatest risk to the PGA Tour is going to court rather than reaching a negotiated settlement -- is if Singh knows something. Have there been other drug penalties -- either performance enhancing or recreational -- the tour has issued to prominent players that Singh knows about but the public does not? If that is the case, then is the motive purely vindictiveness?

According to the the lawsuit filed Wednesday in New York:

"Singh seeks damages for the PGA TOUR's reckless administration and implementation of its Anti-Doping Program. After exposing Singh, one of the PGA TOUR's most respected and hardest working golfers, to public humiliation and ridicule for months, and forcing Singh to perform the type of scientific analyses and review that the PGA TOUR was responsible for performing, the PGA TOUR finally admitted that the grounds on which it sought to impose discipline were specious and unsupportable."

As for what Vijay want, the suit asks for:

"WHEREFORE, Singh respectfully requests that this Court enter judgment in Singh's favor, granting the following relief: 1. damages in an amount to be determined at trial; 2. punitive damages and attorney's fees; 3. and such other relief as the Court finds just and proper."

Singh withdrew last week at the Wells Fargo Championship pretty much as soon as the PGA Tour announced it was dropping its case against him in light of the WADA reversal on deer antler spray.

He last played at the RBC Heritage, where he missed the cut, and according to the lawsuit the tour had held more than $99,000 of his winnings in escrow pending his appeal of the suspension.

Related: Who will win the Players?

When Singh made his inflammatory comments about Sorenstam, he went out and won the EDS Byron Nelson Championship that week and then withdrew from Colonial, thus escaping further media scrutiny. It's not clear he has an easy road out this time, other than fully extending his cone of silence.

It could very well be that the next words we hear from Singh on this matter will be in court, where the questions are certain to be far more reaching than he ever gets in the interview room - and where the answers will have far greater consequences.

A matter that seemed as if it would quietly be forgotten now has the potential to not only drag on in a very public manner but also could drift into areas Singh has for decades avoided.

Follow @ronsirak

Vijay Singh will not be suspended by PGA Tour

Tue, 30 Apr 2013 18:02:00 GMT

Official statement by the PGA Tour:

The PGA TOUR Anti-Doping Program, which has been in effect since July 2008, closely follows the International Anti-Doping Standard set forth by the World Anti-Doping Agency ("WADA") particularly as it relates to the interpretation and application of the List of Prohibited Substances and Methods.

In a Jan. 28, 2013 article that appeared on SI.com, Vijay Singh was quoted as admitting to his use of a deer antler spray supplement. Subsequently, Mr. Singh confirmed his use of deer antler spray in a statement he issued. Deer antler spray contains IGF-1, a growth factor listed on both the WADA and PGA TOUR Prohibited Lists, which the TOUR warned players about in August 2011. After the SI.com article came out, WADA also issued a warning about deer antler spray on Feb. 5, 2013.

There is no test for IGF-1 currently available in routine blood testing. However, the PGA TOUR Anti-Doping Policy provides that an admission to the use of a prohibited substance is a violation of the policy even if there is no positive drug test. After confirming the presence of IGF-1 in the deer antler spray product provided to the TOUR by Mr. Singh through tests at the WADA-approved UCLA laboratory, the TOUR proceeded with the matter as a violation of the PGA TOUR Anti-Doping Policy, and a sanction was issued. Mr. Singh subsequently appealed the sanction under the PGA TOUR Anti-Doping Program guidelines. During the appeal process, PGA TOUR counsel contacted WADA to confirm a number of technical points.

At that time, WADA clarified that it no longer considers the use of deer antler spray to be prohibited unless a positive test results. Indeed, on April 30, WADA subsequently provided written confirmation to the TOUR that:

"In relation to your pending IGF-1 matter, it is the position of WADA, in applying the Prohibited List, that the use of "deer antler spray" (which is known to contain small amounts of IGF-I) is not considered prohibited.

On the other hand it should be known that Deer Antler Spray contains small amounts of IGF-1 that may affect anti-doping tests.

Players should be warned that in the case of a positive test for IGF-1 or hGH, it would be considered an Adverse Analytical Finding."

Based on this new information, and given WADA's lead role in interpreting the Prohibited List, the TOUR deemed it only fair to no longer treat Mr. Singh's use of deer antler spray as a violation of the TOUR's anti-doping program.

Since his initial quote was made public, Mr. Singh has cooperated with the TOUR investigation and has been completely forthcoming and honest. While there was no reason to believe that Mr. Singh knowingly took a prohibited substance, the PGA TOUR Anti-Doping Program clearly states that players are responsible for use of a prohibited substance regardless of intent. In this regard, Mr. Singh should have contacted the PGA TOUR Anti-Doping Program Administrator or other resources readily available to players in order to verify that the product Mr. Singh was about to utilize did not contain any prohibited substances, especially in light of the warning issued in August 2011 in relation to deer antler spray.

Going forward, the PGA TOUR is committed to increasing its educational initiatives to remind players of the PGA TOUR Anti-Doping Program and the risk of utilizing any product without a full understanding of the ingredients contained in that product. Such educational initiatives will include reinforcing with its members the many resources available to them on a 24/7 basis to respond to any questions they may have concerning any product.

The PGA TOUR recognizes that the science of anti-doping is an ever evolving subject, and the TOUR will continue to work with its consultants and WADA to stay abreast of all current developments in this area. This will include staying abreast of developing policies and procedures, specifically with regard to testing for growth hormone and IGF-1. When fully implemented tests for those substances become available in routine blood testing, the TOUR will continue to monitor the situation and make changes to the policy as necessary or appropriate.

Finchem, Nike's Davis among 50 most powerful in sports

Wed, 06 Mar 2013 14:43:00 GMT

(Getty Images photo)

By John Strege

PGA Tour Commissioner Tim Finchem and Nike Golf President Cindy Davis were the only two golf representatives on Sports Illustrated's list of the "50 Most Powerful People in Sports."

Finchem was ranked 25th and Davis 46th on a list headed, not surprisingly, by NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell. Those on the list with peripheral ties to golf include NBC Sports Chairman Mark Lazarus (the Golf Channel is part of the NBC Sports Group), CBS Sports Chairman Sean McManus and IMG Worldwide CEO Michael Dolan. Lazarus is ranked seventh, McManus 13th and Dolan 14th.

Given golf's niche status in the world of sports, it perhaps is not surprising the list included only two from golf. BusinessWeek once had Tiger Woods listed No. 1, ahead of Goodell and NBA Commissioner David Stern, in its list of the "100 Most Powerful People in Sports."

There were no active athletes on Sports Illustrated's list (Michael Jordan, now the owner of the NBA's Charlotte Bobcats, came in 50th).

Follow @JohnStrege

Tiger not budging on anchor ban stance

Wed, 27 Feb 2013 20:56:00 GMT

By Dave Shedloski

PALM BEACH GARDENS, Fla. -- Commissioner Tim Finchem may have expressed his opposition on behalf of the PGA Tour to the anchoring ban proposed by the USGA and the R&A, but he doesn't speak for Tiger Woods, who is sticking to his guns that golf's governing bodies should adopt the rule change.

"My position hasn't changed," Woods said Wednesday at PGA National Resort as he prepares for the start of this week's Honda Classic. "I still think that it should be swung, it shouldn't be anchored, and that hasn't changed at all. . . . Hopefully, we don't have to bifurcate or adapt a local rule like we do sometimes out here on tour with the stones and bunkers and things of that nature. Hopefully we won't have to do that with our putter."

The No. 2 player in the world, Woods said he understood where Finchem was coming from. But that doesn't change his mind. "Yeah, I get it. I mean, the guys that play our tour, all three of them play our tour fullâ¿¿time (who) have won major championships with an anchored putter. I understand his position, but I still feel that all 14 clubs should be swung."

Woods, who won his 75th tour title last month at the Farmer's Insurance Open at Torrey Pines, is making his second start at PGA National's Champion Course after moving to nearby Jupiter. With a career-best final round effort, an 8-under 62, Woods surged up the leader board, but ended up T-2 behind Rory McIlroy. That effort served as a springboard to breaking a three-year victory drought three weeks later at the Arnold Palmer Invitational.

"I made a run, and I thought it might get me into a situation where I might have a chance at a playoff," Woods said. "But Rory made a couple birdies down the stretch and basically iced it."

Both Woods and McIlroy, the No. 1 player in the world, are coming off first-round losses in the WGC-Accenture Match Play Championship. That circumstance afforded the friendly rivals a chance to play 36 holes together Sunday at Medalist Golf Club.

"We thought we would play our own matchâ¿¿play final except it was over 36," joked McIlroy, who recently moved to Jupiter.

Woods won the first 18 holes, McIlroy the second.

"We figured, let's get a game sometime. We were kind of hoping that it wouldn't be that Sunday, but we were both free and went out and played," Woods said. "(We) played a quick 36, and he headed off to do whatever he needed to do, and I went back home and did some more training."

McIlroy, 23, and Woods appear to have struck up a friendship in recent months, and McIlroy in December joined Woods in the endorsement game by switching to Nike golf equipment. They trade text messages, and McIlroy has picked the brain of the 14-time major champion on occasion, but Woods said he doesn't consider himself a mentor to the youngster from Northern Ireland.

"I don't think it's quite the same level as I was with Mark [O'Meara] and Cookie [John Cook]. Back in those days, those guys really took me under their wing," Woods said. "Went out to dinner all the time and basically traveled together on tour, went fishing all the time . . . they were like my big brothers at the time. They basically still are. It's a different type of relationship.

"He's a friend of mine, who just happens to be the No. 1 player in the world. That's about it."

Follow @DaveShedloski

(Photo by Getty Images)

Zinger's Corner Podcast: A victory, a defeat and anchors away

Wed, 27 Feb 2013 14:03:00 GMT

Listen to the podcast

By Ryan Herrington

Matt Kuchar's nice-guy persona remains even as his on-course competitiveness seemingly intensifies. His win at the WGC-Accenture Match Play, as Azinger and Jaime Diaz note in this week's Zinger's Corner, is more impressive given the swing change he made--and quickly absorbed. Ariya Jutanugarn's 72nd-hole stumble at the Honda LPGA Thailand is also discussed, as is the matter of anchoring in the wake of Tim Finchem stating the PGA Tour believes the proposed ban is a mistake. A healthy argument ensues regarding the wisdom of the tour opposing the USGA/R&A, with Paul and Jaime in opposite camps.

Download and subscribe to the Zinger's Corner series in iTunes

Keegan Bradley contines to face belly putter backlash

Tue, 26 Feb 2013 20:21:00 GMT

By Dave Shedloski

PALM BEACH GARDENS, Fla. -- Since golf's governing bodies proposed to ban a stroke in which a club is anchored to a player's body, Keegan Bradley has felt like he's been under a microscope, and it's adversely affecting his game.

Photo by Getty Images

The first player to win a major championship by anchoring a belly-length putter, Bradley said Tuesday at the Honda Classic at PGA National that accusations by fans and some writers that he is cheating have become more common since the USGA and R&A announced an amendment to the rules on Nov. 28.

Bradley first heard a fan call him a cheater in December at the World Challenge, the invitational hosted by Tiger Woods. The catcalls have only increased, he said.

"It's been actually pretty difficult," said Bradley, who began the season with a T-4 at the Hyundai Tournament of Champions, but hasn't been in contention in a final round since. "Especially lately. I'm being called a cheater more than ever by fans, by some writers. . . . I can't imagine how people can say that to me or to anybody out here. It's been really difficult, and I'm sick of it to be honest. I'm ready for it to be over."

The issue isn't likely to end soon. Though the 90-day comment period pertaining to Rule 14-1b ends Thursday, the USGA announced Sunday that a decision on whether or not to adopt the rule would be delayed until spring. If golf's two governing bodies go forward, the new rule wouldn't go into effect until Jan. 1, 2016.

That commissioner Tim Finchem said that the PGA Tour does not support the ban has thrown the issue into further uncertainty. The tour joins the PGA of America in opposition to the proposed rule change.

"It's just a bit of a mess," World No. 1 Rory McIlroy said.

Bradley, who has slipped to 60th on the tour in the telltale statistic, strokes gained putting, said he wasn't surprised by Finchem's comments.

"Commissioner Finchem and the PGA Tour have always had their players' backs, no matter how big or small the group is," Bradley said. "You know, I'm very proud and makes me feel good that my tour, the tour I play on, has my back. I think now that this comment period that the USGA has been talking about, they have heard from two of the biggest organizations, golf organizations in the world, the PGA Tour and The PGA of America saying that they don't agree with the USGA.

"If they are really taking this comment period seriously, I think they really need to look at what's been said by both those organizations."

Meanwhile, the invective hurled towards him has seriously hurt Bradley.

"Some of the guys that have come out strongly against it, I don't understand," Bradley said. "Because it doesn't affect them, it affects me. . . . For the most part people are super respectful, but it's very easy to pick out those few, and the word cheater . . . it's amazing that people can say that. It's probably the worst thing you could ever say to an athlete."

Follow @DaveShedloski

Finchem And 'The Greater Good'

Jaime Diaz — Tue, 26 Feb 2013 05:00:00 GMT

Why it was disappointing watching the PGA Tour commissioner voice his opposition to the USGA's and R&A's proposed ban of anchoring.

How Finchem upstaged Kuchar and why

Sun, 24 Feb 2013 23:19:00 GMT

By John Strege

The overriding question that evolved from the extensive coverage of the PGA Tour's response to the USGA regarding a ban on anchoring the putter was this: Why couldn't this have waited until Monday?

Photo by Getty Images

What an odd final day for one of the showcase events in professional golf, one that carries the prestigious designation of World Golf Championship. The WGC-Accenture Match Play Championship began on Wednesday with 64 of the best players in the world and ended on Sunday with PGA Tour Commissioner Tim Finchem making the most news.

In the midst of the Match Play final between Matt Kuchar and Hunter Mahan (Kuchar prevailed, 2 and 1), Finchem held a news conference outlining the PGA Tour's position on the USGA's proposal. Then he was summoned to the NBC booth for an extensive discussion that relegated the golf to a secondary role.

"We did give the USGA our position last week and our board and player advisory council concluded that we should be opposed to it, which we articulated," Finchem said. "We're very supportive of the USGA. We hold it in high regard. We were asked our opinion and we feel strongly that going down that road would be a mistake.

"If there's one thing that would prevail across a lot of our players and a lot of our board members is that it's been around for a generation and the game of golf has done quite well. Unless you have a compelling reason to change we shouldn't. And the USGA has indicated there's no performance advantage to using anchoring . . . What the data shows is there isn't an anchoring putter on the PGA Tour that's in the top quartile in the putting stats."

OK, but why now, when this viewpoint was relayed to the USGA several days earlier? Finchem might have been using the WGC television stage to bolster the tour's position by lobbying golfers at large.

The USGA countered via Twitter, then with a statement that read in part: "We continue to listen to varying points of view, and have had many productive conversations across the golf community, which is a reminder of just how much people care about the game - regardless of their position on this issue.

"As we consider the various perspectives on this issue, it has always been our position that Rule 14-1b aims to clarify and preserve the traditional and essential nature of the golf stroke, which has helped to make golf a unique and enjoyable game of skill and challenge."

So we have an apparent stalemate, with the next move up to the USGA. It said it would have a final ruling in the spring, and should it choose to stand by its intention to ban anchoring, it would not go into effect until Jan. 1, 2016, nearly three years hence.

So, again, why the urgency for Finchem to outline the tour's position? Would his urgency have been the same had it been Rory vs. Tiger rather than Kuchar vs. Mahan in the final?

Related: The anchor ban explained

So it was less than compelling, a match between two players who weren't ranked in the top 20, one of them, Kuchar, taking a 4-up lead through eight holes to quell the drama for much of the afternoon. Was that sufficient for Finchem to interject himself into the proceedings by calling a news conference?

For an old political hand from the Carter administration, one apparently set on working the crowd, the answer was yes.

Follow @JohnStrege