08-11-2017, 04:33 PM
On tv they just said how Mickey Wright who grew up on this course has been giving advice to Li.  Hope every 5th word is Stanford
Women's Golf at the U.S. Amateur
08-11-2017, 04:49 PM
Valenzuela is one-under.
The other seven golfers: 23-over.
16-under for the 46 holes coming into today, Li finished +6 for 15 today.
The other seven golfers: 23-over.
16-under for the 46 holes coming into today, Li finished +6 for 15 today.
08-11-2017, 07:59 PM
Apparently there was a strong wind today, that probably contributed.
A question for the golf-knowledgeable: I noticed on the last shot of the Valenzuela match that when Ree was preparing to chip the ball from the fringe of the green, she pushed the club head down on the grass while addressing the ball and the ball moved slightly. I don't think the club touched the ball, it pushed down the grass and that caused the ball to move. If that had been noticed, would that have counted as a shot or have been a one-shot penalty?
A question for the golf-knowledgeable: I noticed on the last shot of the Valenzuela match that when Ree was preparing to chip the ball from the fringe of the green, she pushed the club head down on the grass while addressing the ball and the ball moved slightly. I don't think the club touched the ball, it pushed down the grass and that caused the ball to move. If that had been noticed, would that have counted as a shot or have been a one-shot penalty?
Apparently there was a strong wind today, that probably contributed.
A question for the golf-knowledgeable: I noticed on the last shot of the Valenzuela match that when Ree was preparing to chip the ball from the fringe of the green, she pushed the club head down on the grass while addressing the ball and the ball moved slightly. I don't think the club touched the ball, it pushed down the grass and that caused the ball to move. If that had been noticed, would that have counted as a shot or have been a one-shot penalty?
A question for the golf-knowledgeable: I noticed on the last shot of the Valenzuela match that when Ree was preparing to chip the ball from the fringe of the green, she pushed the club head down on the grass while addressing the ball and the ball moved slightly. I don't think the club touched the ball, it pushed down the grass and that caused the ball to move. If that had been noticed, would that have counted as a shot or have been a one-shot penalty?
08-11-2017, 08:31 PM
(08-11-2017, 07:59 PM)oldalum link Wrote:Apparently there was a strong wind today, that probably contributed.
A question for the golf-knowledgeable: I noticed on the last shot of the Valenzuela match that when Ree was preparing to chip the ball from the fringe of the green, she pushed the club head down on the grass while addressing the ball and the ball moved slightly. I don't think the club touched the ball, it pushed down the grass and that caused the ball to move. If that had been noticed, would that have counted as a shot or have been a one-shot penalty?
Oldalum - did you see the ball clearly change position? The ball might oscillate and then return to its original position in which case there is no penalty. Or this decision to the Rules of Golf could have applied:
A player addresses his ball. He observes a slight motion of the ball but believes that it has only oscillated and has not left its original position. He therefore plays the ball as it lies. Later, the Committee becomes aware from television evidence that the ball had in fact left its position and come to rest in another place, although that change of position was such that it was not reasonably discernible to the naked eye at the time of the incident. What is the ruling?
A.The ball is deemed not to have moved and therefore there is no penalty under Rule 18-2. The Definition of "Moved" - when a ball "leaves its position and comes to rest in any other place" - does not contemplate movements of the ball that are only discernible through the use of high definition television or any other form of sophisticated technology.
Otherwise Rule 18-2 is clear.
Except as permitted by the Rules, when a player's ball is in play, if
(i)Â the player, his partner or either of their caddies:
 lifts or moves the ball,
 touches it purposely (except with a club in the act of addressing the ball), or
 causes the ball to move, orÂ
(ii) the equipment of the player or his partner causes the ball to move, the player incurs a penalty of one stroke.
If the ball is moved, it must be replaced, unless the movement of the ball occurs after the player has begun the stroke or the backward movement of the club for the stroke and the stroke is made.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
(08-11-2017, 07:59 PM)oldalum link Wrote:Apparently there was a strong wind today, that probably contributed.
A question for the golf-knowledgeable: I noticed on the last shot of the Valenzuela match that when Ree was preparing to chip the ball from the fringe of the green, she pushed the club head down on the grass while addressing the ball and the ball moved slightly. I don't think the club touched the ball, it pushed down the grass and that caused the ball to move. If that had been noticed, would that have counted as a shot or have been a one-shot penalty?
Oldalum - did you see the ball clearly change position? The ball might oscillate and then return to its original position in which case there is no penalty. Or this decision to the Rules of Golf could have applied:
A player addresses his ball. He observes a slight motion of the ball but believes that it has only oscillated and has not left its original position. He therefore plays the ball as it lies. Later, the Committee becomes aware from television evidence that the ball had in fact left its position and come to rest in another place, although that change of position was such that it was not reasonably discernible to the naked eye at the time of the incident. What is the ruling?
A.The ball is deemed not to have moved and therefore there is no penalty under Rule 18-2. The Definition of "Moved" - when a ball "leaves its position and comes to rest in any other place" - does not contemplate movements of the ball that are only discernible through the use of high definition television or any other form of sophisticated technology.
Otherwise Rule 18-2 is clear.
Except as permitted by the Rules, when a player's ball is in play, if
(i)Â the player, his partner or either of their caddies:
 lifts or moves the ball,
 touches it purposely (except with a club in the act of addressing the ball), or
 causes the ball to move, orÂ
(ii) the equipment of the player or his partner causes the ball to move, the player incurs a penalty of one stroke.
If the ball is moved, it must be replaced, unless the movement of the ball occurs after the player has begun the stroke or the backward movement of the club for the stroke and the stroke is made.
"We have an unwritten rule around here not to do anything stupid."
-Casey Jacobsen, Feb 3, 2000
08-11-2017, 10:03 PM
Looking at it in slow motion armed with your info, the ball moved slightly toward the club when she pushed the club head down into the grass, but when she lifted the club head off the grass it looks like the ball returned to its original position or very close to it. So no penalty?
Looking at it in slow motion armed with your info, the ball moved slightly toward the club when she pushed the club head down into the grass, but when she lifted the club head off the grass it looks like the ball returned to its original position or very close to it. So no penalty?
08-12-2017, 06:33 AM
(08-11-2017, 10:03 PM)oldalum link Wrote:Looking at it in slow motion armed with your info, the ball moved slightly toward the club when she pushed the club head down into the grass, but when she lifted the club head off the grass it looks like the ball returned to its original position or very close to it. So no penalty?
No penalty.
On a related subject, the USGA intends to limit future noticing of Rules infractions to those which can be done without use of cameras.
High definition cameras have enabled views which are outside the "spirit of the Rules".
(08-11-2017, 10:03 PM)oldalum link Wrote:Looking at it in slow motion armed with your info, the ball moved slightly toward the club when she pushed the club head down into the grass, but when she lifted the club head off the grass it looks like the ball returned to its original position or very close to it. So no penalty?
No penalty.
On a related subject, the USGA intends to limit future noticing of Rules infractions to those which can be done without use of cameras.
High definition cameras have enabled views which are outside the "spirit of the Rules".
08-12-2017, 07:22 AM
thanks for the ruling! I suppose the purpose of the rule is that you don't want golfers improving/altering their lie, but if it doesn't alter the lie there should be no penalty.
So which sport has the most rules: golf or baseball (or something else)?
So which sport has the most rules: golf or baseball (or something else)?
08-12-2017, 07:34 AM
(08-12-2017, 06:33 AM)SF_Cardinal_Fan link Wrote:On a related subject, the USGA intends to limit future noticing of Rules infractions to those which can be done without use of cameras.
High definition cameras have enabled views which are outside the "spirit of the Rules".
Thankfully at least one golf organizations still believes in golf being a game of honor. If only the R&A, PGA, and LPGA could do similarly
(08-12-2017, 06:33 AM)SF_Cardinal_Fan link Wrote:On a related subject, the USGA intends to limit future noticing of Rules infractions to those which can be done without use of cameras.
High definition cameras have enabled views which are outside the "spirit of the Rules".
Thankfully at least one golf organizations still believes in golf being a game of honor. If only the R&A, PGA, and LPGA could do similarly
08-12-2017, 07:55 AM
(This post was last modified: 08-12-2017, 07:57 AM by SF_Cardinal_Fan.)
(08-12-2017, 07:34 AM)winflop link Wrote:[quote author=SF_Cardinal_Fan link=topic=17135.msg197010#msg197010 date=1502544781]
On a related subject, the USGA intends to limit future noticing of Rules infractions to those which can be done without use of cameras.
High definition cameras have enabled views which are outside the "spirit of the Rules".
Thankfully at least one golf organizations still believes in golf being a game of honor. If only the R&A, PGA, and LPGA could do similarly
[/quote]
For most who take the game seriously. golf is a game of honor.
Regarding pro Tour golf and, or, high level amateur golf events, one popular misconception is that the on course Officials are there to spot Rules infractions. Unlike other sports, golf's on course Official's are there (if asked to do so by a player) , simply to provide a Ruling.
That said, a significant number of Tour players, and top level amateurs, do routinely cheat. Wrongly marking a ball which rests on a green, claiming illogical and unreasonable relief from obstructions, and taking liberal point of entry drops from hazards are the most common examples of cheating.
To end this message on a positive note, I will say that two of golf's most honorable high profile participants graduated from Stanford. They are Tom Watson and his friend, the late Frank "Sandy" Tatum.
(This post was last modified: 08-12-2017, 07:57 AM by SF_Cardinal_Fan.)
(08-12-2017, 07:34 AM)winflop link Wrote:[quote author=SF_Cardinal_Fan link=topic=17135.msg197010#msg197010 date=1502544781]
On a related subject, the USGA intends to limit future noticing of Rules infractions to those which can be done without use of cameras.
High definition cameras have enabled views which are outside the "spirit of the Rules".
Thankfully at least one golf organizations still believes in golf being a game of honor. If only the R&A, PGA, and LPGA could do similarly
[/quote]
For most who take the game seriously. golf is a game of honor.
Regarding pro Tour golf and, or, high level amateur golf events, one popular misconception is that the on course Officials are there to spot Rules infractions. Unlike other sports, golf's on course Official's are there (if asked to do so by a player) , simply to provide a Ruling.
That said, a significant number of Tour players, and top level amateurs, do routinely cheat. Wrongly marking a ball which rests on a green, claiming illogical and unreasonable relief from obstructions, and taking liberal point of entry drops from hazards are the most common examples of cheating.
To end this message on a positive note, I will say that two of golf's most honorable high profile participants graduated from Stanford. They are Tom Watson and his friend, the late Frank "Sandy" Tatum.
08-12-2017, 08:02 AM
(08-12-2017, 07:55 AM)SF_Cardinal_Fan link Wrote:[quote author=winflop link=topic=17135.msg197013#msg197013 date=1502548457]
[quote author=SF_Cardinal_Fan link=topic=17135.msg197010#msg197010 date=1502544781]
On a related subject, the USGA intends to limit future noticing of Rules infractions to those which can be done without use of cameras.
High definition cameras have enabled views which are outside the "spirit of the Rules".
Thankfully at least one golf organizations still believes in golf being a game of honor. If only the R&A, PGA, and LPGA could do similarly
[/quote]
For most who take the game seriously. golf is a game of honor.
Regarding pro Tour golf and, or, high level amateur golf events, one popular misconception is that the on course Officials are there to spot Rules infractions. Unlike other sports, golf's on course Official's are there (if asked to do so by a player) , simply to provide a Ruling.
That said, a significant number of Tour players, and top level amateurs, do routinely cheat. Wrongly marking a ball which rests on a green, claiming illogical and unreasonable relief from obstructions, and taking liberal point of entry drops from hazards are the most common examples of cheating.
To end this message on a positive note, I will say that two of golf's most honorable high profile participants graduated from Stanford. They are Tom Watson and his friend, the late Frank "Sandy" Tatum.
[/quote]
Sandy was truly a great man, according to my grandfather who graduated from Stanford with Sandy and knew him all his adult life.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
(08-12-2017, 07:55 AM)SF_Cardinal_Fan link Wrote:[quote author=winflop link=topic=17135.msg197013#msg197013 date=1502548457]
[quote author=SF_Cardinal_Fan link=topic=17135.msg197010#msg197010 date=1502544781]
On a related subject, the USGA intends to limit future noticing of Rules infractions to those which can be done without use of cameras.
High definition cameras have enabled views which are outside the "spirit of the Rules".
Thankfully at least one golf organizations still believes in golf being a game of honor. If only the R&A, PGA, and LPGA could do similarly
[/quote]
For most who take the game seriously. golf is a game of honor.
Regarding pro Tour golf and, or, high level amateur golf events, one popular misconception is that the on course Officials are there to spot Rules infractions. Unlike other sports, golf's on course Official's are there (if asked to do so by a player) , simply to provide a Ruling.
That said, a significant number of Tour players, and top level amateurs, do routinely cheat. Wrongly marking a ball which rests on a green, claiming illogical and unreasonable relief from obstructions, and taking liberal point of entry drops from hazards are the most common examples of cheating.
To end this message on a positive note, I will say that two of golf's most honorable high profile participants graduated from Stanford. They are Tom Watson and his friend, the late Frank "Sandy" Tatum.
[/quote]
Sandy was truly a great man, according to my grandfather who graduated from Stanford with Sandy and knew him all his adult life.
Audaces fortuna iuvat
08-12-2017, 08:14 AM
(08-12-2017, 08:02 AM)Mick link Wrote:[quote author=SF_Cardinal_Fan link=topic=17135.msg197015#msg197015 date=1502549754]
[quote author=winflop link=topic=17135.msg197013#msg197013 date=1502548457]
[quote author=SF_Cardinal_Fan link=topic=17135.msg197010#msg197010 date=1502544781]
On a related subject, the USGA intends to limit future noticing of Rules infractions to those which can be done without use of cameras.
High definition cameras have enabled views which are outside the "spirit of the Rules".
Thankfully at least one golf organizations still believes in golf being a game of honor. If only the R&A, PGA, and LPGA could do similarly
[/quote]
For most who take the game seriously. golf is a game of honor.
Regarding pro Tour golf and, or, high level amateur golf events, one popular misconception is that the on course Officials are there to spot Rules infractions. Unlike other sports, golf's on course Official's are there (if asked to do so by a player) , simply to provide a Ruling.
That said, a significant number of Tour players, and top level amateurs, do routinely cheat. Wrongly marking a ball which rests on a green, claiming illogical and unreasonable relief from obstructions, and taking liberal point of entry drops from hazards are the most common examples of cheating.
To end this message on a positive note, I will say that two of golf's most honorable high profile participants graduated from Stanford. They are Tom Watson and his friend, the late Frank "Sandy" Tatum.
[/quote]
Sandy was truly a great man, according to my grandfather who graduated from Stanford with Sandy and knew him all his adult life.
[/quote]
For anyone who is interested to learn about Sandy Tatum, here is a link to his obituary:
http://www.sfgate.com/sports/golf/articl...240981.php
As an SF resident, I am especially grateful for what Mr. Tatum and another Stanford graduate (Charles Schwab) did to restore Harding Park Golf Course. Considering the political climate of SF, the competitive environment of the PGA Tour , and more, Tatum and Schwab's use of their connections and resources to make Harding Park world class is a truly stunning accomplishment.
(08-12-2017, 08:02 AM)Mick link Wrote:[quote author=SF_Cardinal_Fan link=topic=17135.msg197015#msg197015 date=1502549754]
[quote author=winflop link=topic=17135.msg197013#msg197013 date=1502548457]
[quote author=SF_Cardinal_Fan link=topic=17135.msg197010#msg197010 date=1502544781]
On a related subject, the USGA intends to limit future noticing of Rules infractions to those which can be done without use of cameras.
High definition cameras have enabled views which are outside the "spirit of the Rules".
Thankfully at least one golf organizations still believes in golf being a game of honor. If only the R&A, PGA, and LPGA could do similarly
[/quote]
For most who take the game seriously. golf is a game of honor.
Regarding pro Tour golf and, or, high level amateur golf events, one popular misconception is that the on course Officials are there to spot Rules infractions. Unlike other sports, golf's on course Official's are there (if asked to do so by a player) , simply to provide a Ruling.
That said, a significant number of Tour players, and top level amateurs, do routinely cheat. Wrongly marking a ball which rests on a green, claiming illogical and unreasonable relief from obstructions, and taking liberal point of entry drops from hazards are the most common examples of cheating.
To end this message on a positive note, I will say that two of golf's most honorable high profile participants graduated from Stanford. They are Tom Watson and his friend, the late Frank "Sandy" Tatum.
[/quote]
Sandy was truly a great man, according to my grandfather who graduated from Stanford with Sandy and knew him all his adult life.
[/quote]
For anyone who is interested to learn about Sandy Tatum, here is a link to his obituary:
http://www.sfgate.com/sports/golf/articl...240981.php
As an SF resident, I am especially grateful for what Mr. Tatum and another Stanford graduate (Charles Schwab) did to restore Harding Park Golf Course. Considering the political climate of SF, the competitive environment of the PGA Tour , and more, Tatum and Schwab's use of their connections and resources to make Harding Park world class is a truly stunning accomplishment.
08-12-2017, 08:26 AM
This year's Goodwin will be held at Harding Park, another nice tribute to Sandy Tatum.Â
Apparently just a one-year deal, necessitated by renovations to the Stanford Golf Course this coming spring. Perhaps others can elaborate?
Apparently just a one-year deal, necessitated by renovations to the Stanford Golf Course this coming spring. Perhaps others can elaborate?
08-12-2017, 10:09 AM
(08-12-2017, 08:14 AM)SF_Cardinal_Fan link Wrote:As an SF resident, I am especially grateful for what Mr. Tatum and another Stanford graduate (Charles Schwab) did to restore Harding Park Golf Course. Considering the political climate of SF, the competitive environment of the PGA Tour , and more, Tatum and Schwab's use of their connections and resources to make Harding Park world class is a truly stunning accomplishment.
The renovation of Harding Park after three-and-a-half decades of neglect was nothing short of amazing, given the city's political climate and preferences. Full story here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TPC_Harding_Park
Audaces fortuna iuvat
(08-12-2017, 08:14 AM)SF_Cardinal_Fan link Wrote:As an SF resident, I am especially grateful for what Mr. Tatum and another Stanford graduate (Charles Schwab) did to restore Harding Park Golf Course. Considering the political climate of SF, the competitive environment of the PGA Tour , and more, Tatum and Schwab's use of their connections and resources to make Harding Park world class is a truly stunning accomplishment.
The renovation of Harding Park after three-and-a-half decades of neglect was nothing short of amazing, given the city's political climate and preferences. Full story here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TPC_Harding_Park
Audaces fortuna iuvat
08-12-2017, 12:14 PM
I know conservatives like nothing better than to rag on SF, but my read of that wikipedia page doesn't seem like the experience was all that crazy. One Supervisor opposed turning the course over to a private management company and publicized the possibility that rising fee schedules would cut out public access to the course. Later, a few neighborhood advocacy groups opposed the use of grant money on the golf course instead of on other recreational facilities. From my experience living in several other cities, this is pretty much, pardon the pun, par for the course - any time a large amount of city money and land is at stake.
For example, read about NYC's experience attempting to erect the Westway on the west side of Manhattan and Harding Park's experience was a walk in the park by comparison.
For example, read about NYC's experience attempting to erect the Westway on the west side of Manhattan and Harding Park's experience was a walk in the park by comparison.
I know conservatives like nothing better than to rag on SF, but my read of that wikipedia page doesn't seem like the experience was all that crazy. One Supervisor opposed turning the course over to a private management company and publicized the possibility that rising fee schedules would cut out public access to the course. Later, a few neighborhood advocacy groups opposed the use of grant money on the golf course instead of on other recreational facilities. From my experience living in several other cities, this is pretty much, pardon the pun, par for the course - any time a large amount of city money and land is at stake.
For example, read about NYC's experience attempting to erect the Westway on the west side of Manhattan and Harding Park's experience was a walk in the park by comparison.
For example, read about NYC's experience attempting to erect the Westway on the west side of Manhattan and Harding Park's experience was a walk in the park by comparison.
08-12-2017, 12:41 PM
(08-12-2017, 08:26 AM)Hulk01 link Wrote:This year's Goodwin will be held at Harding Park, another nice tribute to Sandy Tatum.Â
Apparently just a one-year deal, necessitated by renovations to the Stanford Golf Course this coming spring. Perhaps others can elaborate?
That is correct. The golf course is undergoing a year long renovation, one to two holes at a time. It will not be complete in time to host the Goodwin next spring. All bunkers are being replaced, rebuilt, and in some cases moved. As an example, the right fairway bunker on #1 is being moved 40 yards out and towards the fairway. It will present a real risk/reward decision for the bombers. The right fairway bunker on #2 is being relocated as well. Lots of grumbling about some of the changes.
Irrigation is being replaced, too.
Currently, #1 is closed and #2 is a 150 yd par 3 from a temporary tee in the middle of the fairway. #19, the practice hole to the right of #18, is the new finishing hole.
It is fantastic that the Goodwin found a worthy temporary home in Harding Park.Â
The women are hosting an NCAA regional next spring; I guess that puts a drop-dead date on completion of the renovation.
(08-12-2017, 08:26 AM)Hulk01 link Wrote:This year's Goodwin will be held at Harding Park, another nice tribute to Sandy Tatum.Â
Apparently just a one-year deal, necessitated by renovations to the Stanford Golf Course this coming spring. Perhaps others can elaborate?
That is correct. The golf course is undergoing a year long renovation, one to two holes at a time. It will not be complete in time to host the Goodwin next spring. All bunkers are being replaced, rebuilt, and in some cases moved. As an example, the right fairway bunker on #1 is being moved 40 yards out and towards the fairway. It will present a real risk/reward decision for the bombers. The right fairway bunker on #2 is being relocated as well. Lots of grumbling about some of the changes.
Irrigation is being replaced, too.
Currently, #1 is closed and #2 is a 150 yd par 3 from a temporary tee in the middle of the fairway. #19, the practice hole to the right of #18, is the new finishing hole.
It is fantastic that the Goodwin found a worthy temporary home in Harding Park.Â
The women are hosting an NCAA regional next spring; I guess that puts a drop-dead date on completion of the renovation.
08-12-2017, 12:54 PM
(08-12-2017, 12:14 PM)2006alum link Wrote:I know conservatives like nothing better than to rag on SF, but my read of that wikipedia page doesn't seem like the experience was all that crazy. One Supervisor opposed turning the course over to a private management company and publicized the possibility that rising fee schedules would cut out public access to the course. Later, a few neighborhood advocacy groups opposed the use of grant money on the golf course instead of on other recreational facilities. From my experience living in several other cities, this is pretty much, pardon the pun, par for the course - any time a large amount of city money and land is at stake.
For example, read about NYC's experience attempting to erect the Westway on the west side of Manhattan and Harding Park's experience was a walk in the park by comparison.
That Wiki article is not detailed enough.
For example, the business of Harding Park's operations, , like all other SF golf courses, has traditionally been been leased to private entities.
However, the maintenance of SF's courses has always, and continues to this day, to be controlled by the powerful Laborers union Local 261.
Therein has lay the fundamental problem with the maintenance of SF's golf courses and parks. I am sure the late Hoover Insititute member Milton Friedman would agree, but that is a separate subject.
To ensure a standard of excellence at Harding, Sandy Tatum and Charles Schwab orchestrated a commitment of the PGA Tour to host 5 events over a 15 year period. This meant that the Laborers union, rather than neglect the golf course as they had done for decades, would be consistently pressed to maintain the course up to PGA Tour and the PGA of America's highest standards. This has worked well and Harding Park was recently rewarded in the form of two major event commitments, including the 2020 PGA Championship and 2025 President's Cup .
Sandy Tatum, with assistance from Charles Schwab, made this happen. Without their efforts Harding park would have continued on its downward spiral and never become the jewel (for both the world of golf and the city of SF) that it is today.
(08-12-2017, 12:14 PM)2006alum link Wrote:I know conservatives like nothing better than to rag on SF, but my read of that wikipedia page doesn't seem like the experience was all that crazy. One Supervisor opposed turning the course over to a private management company and publicized the possibility that rising fee schedules would cut out public access to the course. Later, a few neighborhood advocacy groups opposed the use of grant money on the golf course instead of on other recreational facilities. From my experience living in several other cities, this is pretty much, pardon the pun, par for the course - any time a large amount of city money and land is at stake.
For example, read about NYC's experience attempting to erect the Westway on the west side of Manhattan and Harding Park's experience was a walk in the park by comparison.
That Wiki article is not detailed enough.
For example, the business of Harding Park's operations, , like all other SF golf courses, has traditionally been been leased to private entities.
However, the maintenance of SF's courses has always, and continues to this day, to be controlled by the powerful Laborers union Local 261.
Therein has lay the fundamental problem with the maintenance of SF's golf courses and parks. I am sure the late Hoover Insititute member Milton Friedman would agree, but that is a separate subject.
To ensure a standard of excellence at Harding, Sandy Tatum and Charles Schwab orchestrated a commitment of the PGA Tour to host 5 events over a 15 year period. This meant that the Laborers union, rather than neglect the golf course as they had done for decades, would be consistently pressed to maintain the course up to PGA Tour and the PGA of America's highest standards. This has worked well and Harding Park was recently rewarded in the form of two major event commitments, including the 2020 PGA Championship and 2025 President's Cup .
Sandy Tatum, with assistance from Charles Schwab, made this happen. Without their efforts Harding park would have continued on its downward spiral and never become the jewel (for both the world of golf and the city of SF) that it is today.
08-12-2017, 01:38 PM
Ironically, an article on Gleaneagles, another SF city-owned course, makes the access to Laborers Union Local 261 seem like a luxury, proving that (again pardon the pun) the grass is always greener on the other side:
Looks like at least someone in the city is happy to have their assistance!
Quote:City-owned Gleneagles never has enjoyed the perks of Harding Park, its well-heeled municipal sibling that rims Lake Merced on the city's west side, at least not since Hsieh has run the course.
While Harding Park was flush with union labor, Gleneagles' success (or failure) largely was left to the imagination and slight of hand of whoever leased it from the city. For the past 12 years, that has been Hsieh. He puts his own money, not the city's, into the course and gets to keep the profits if there are any, and usually there aren't any. . . .
In 2014, he entered into negotiations with the Local 261 and city agencies to start a program that would provide much-needed labor help on the golf course, would give the city's at-risk community a chance for a new start and the union an avenue to train them.
Union workers spent much of the first year learning how to clear debris and trees using a skid steer and other equipment and haul everything off the property. There is enough work to keep workers in the union program busy for years.
"This program just happens to have met the needs of each party," Hsieh said. "The union needed a site for their workers, workers needed new training and we certainly can use the help. The concept of turning our site into a classroom made sense. There is still so much work that needs to be done."
Looks like at least someone in the city is happy to have their assistance!
Ironically, an article on Gleaneagles, another SF city-owned course, makes the access to Laborers Union Local 261 seem like a luxury, proving that (again pardon the pun) the grass is always greener on the other side:
Looks like at least someone in the city is happy to have their assistance!
Quote:City-owned Gleneagles never has enjoyed the perks of Harding Park, its well-heeled municipal sibling that rims Lake Merced on the city's west side, at least not since Hsieh has run the course.
While Harding Park was flush with union labor, Gleneagles' success (or failure) largely was left to the imagination and slight of hand of whoever leased it from the city. For the past 12 years, that has been Hsieh. He puts his own money, not the city's, into the course and gets to keep the profits if there are any, and usually there aren't any. . . .
In 2014, he entered into negotiations with the Local 261 and city agencies to start a program that would provide much-needed labor help on the golf course, would give the city's at-risk community a chance for a new start and the union an avenue to train them.
Union workers spent much of the first year learning how to clear debris and trees using a skid steer and other equipment and haul everything off the property. There is enough work to keep workers in the union program busy for years.
"This program just happens to have met the needs of each party," Hsieh said. "The union needed a site for their workers, workers needed new training and we certainly can use the help. The concept of turning our site into a classroom made sense. There is still so much work that needs to be done."
Looks like at least someone in the city is happy to have their assistance!
08-12-2017, 01:43 PM
Meanwhile Albane Valenzuela won her QF 4&3 and her SF 3&2 to reach the final against Sophia Schubert (rising senior at Texas).
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »