We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Metal spikes and a PGA tiff or two

coolbreeze said:
Like Esox my course has shoe brushes on every ball washer on every hole. With the wet conditions here if they didn't you would have grass filled shoes by the third hole.
Click to expand...

Yeah, without them, at my course you'd start playing at 5' 10" and finish at 6' 2".

Kevin
 
One part of the equation that was mentioned to me that I did forget to post about is why many in the industry wanted a switch. Repeat business in golfers replacing soft spikes. Metal spikes were rarely replaced and the soft spike business is a HUGE one based on revenue and marketshare numbers.
 
TC said:
I have to use an Epoch tee to clean mine. I can trash the floor board of a golf cart with the stuff I dig out of my soft spikes. I've actually never worn golf shoes with metal spikes. I can see how it would be beneficial though.
Click to expand...

when i first started playing in middle school my first shoes were spikes (late 80's). When i graduated high school we had to buy soft spikes and swap em out. (i wasnt an equipment ho then lol) and i remember tightening the spikes on sucked!

Spike marks on greens stunk though and i was a horrid golfer lacking any instruction whatsoever. probably why i gave it up for so many years- sheer frustration- wish i had seen the light earlier though - making up for lost time these days.
 
I've noticed that many have went down the tangent of what is best for the greens, etc. While I agree that is important, at the heart of my question was how it affects competition. I am not very interested in the old debate about which do more damage. That has already been settled in my eyes based on course rules and personal observations from having played when both were the norm.

I'd be much more interested to hear people's thought on who is more in the right, the guy who complains because the person ahead of them is wearing metal spikes and making the greens "crusty" as Poulter said, or the guy who thinks the metal spikes work better (despite only about 5% of the field believing that from what I gathered listening to the coverage) so he does what is best for his game?

Where does a person competing in an individual sport cross the line from being competitive, to selfish, to affecting the outcome? Example, it is Sunday and I am 1 back of leaders. If I break out the 3/4" spikes to enhance my grip and also know it will leave the leaders playing behind to deal with the crusty greens, did I just cheat?

It is an interesting debate mostly because golf is the one sport that you call infractions on yourself and must abide by your conscience. So where is that line for each person?

As I said, for me it is tough since they are still legal, but I wouldn't wear them. If I cost 1 guy a stroke all day, that would be too much for me.

This has been an interesting thread and thanks for so many responses.
 
All4's said:
I've noticed that many have went down the tangent of what is best for the greens, etc. While I agree that is important, at the heart of my question was how it affects competition. I am not very interested in the old debate about which do more damage. That has already been settled in my eyes based on course rules and personal observations from having played when both were the norm.

I'd be much more interested to hear people's thought on who is more in the right, the guy who complains because the person ahead of them is wearing metal spikes and making the greens "crusty" as Poulter said, or the guy who thinks the metal spikes work better (despite only about 5% of the field believing that from what I gathered listening to the coverage) so he does what is best for his game?

Where does a person competing in an individual sport cross the line from being competitive, to selfish, to affecting the outcome? Example, it is Sunday and I am 1 back of leaders. If I break out the 3/4" spikes to enhance my grip and also know it will leave the leaders playing behind to deal with the crusty greens, did I just cheat?

It is an interesting debate mostly because golf is the one sport that you call infractions on yourself and must abide by your conscience. So where is that line for each person?

As I said, for me it is tough since they are still legal, but I wouldn't wear them. If I cost 1 guy a stroke all day, that would be too much for me.

This has been an interesting thread and thanks for so many responses.
Click to expand...

My metal spikes are 3/8 of an inch. To say they are 3/4 of an inch long is a huge exaggeration. If I wear them, it is because it is very wet and it most certainly is not cheating as they are perfectly legal where I play.

I also don't hold alot of stock in anything IP says, as it seems to me he is often outspoken in his use of his Twitter account, but when some people play bad, they blame everything and everyone but themselves.
 
All4's said:
I'd be much more interested to hear people's thought on who is more in the right, the guy who complains because the person ahead of them is wearing metal spikes and making the greens "crusty" as Poulter said, or the guy who thinks the metal spikes work better (despite only about 5% of the field believing that from what I gathered listening to the coverage) so he does what is best for his game?
Click to expand...
I doubt if any player would swap spikes in a tourney, unless it was an extreme weather change. These guys are pros and they know what they prefer. If the pga tour allows steel spikes, then they are allowed. Just like a bellyputter or any other equipment, it is up to the player. I can't imagine a tour pro actually premeditating green damage through his spike marks. Anyone with that kind of mentality wouldn't make it to the tour. Secondly, does anyone give a rip what Poulter tweets?
 
there was a japanese couple visiting our course and the guy had metal spikes
holy cow this guy apparently didnt know how to walk because every single green he was on was torn to shreds

now to be fair ive also seen guys with soft spikes gouge greens from dragging their feet

but i still have yet to play a course that even allows metal so it would be a pointless arguement since all my shoes have soft spikes
 
I used exaggeration and an unrealistic hypothetical to further the philosophical premise I was trying to establish. Please ignore the specific details as they are the crumbs, not the cake. Sorry, I should have made it clear that I was just giving an exaggerated example to show how someone can be within the printed rules but outside the moral rules. My question is regarding that morality.

Forget it was Poulter, imagine it was David Toms or Jim Furyk who complained. Ignore the specifics and consider the fact that 5% of the guys are doing something that is theoretically hurting up to 99% of the tour. (I got to 99% instead of 95% because each person is hurting the 95% that aren't using them AND the other 4% that are)

Another example. 18th holes of The Masters, Fowler hits his putt and a foot from the hole it dives left after hitting a spike mark. CBS shows a replay of the group before and you clearly see Rory's spike leaving the mark and him leaving the green after making his putt before tamping it back down. Fowler loses by 1 shot to Rory. Rory was within the rules.

What if Rory's playing partner saw him twist his foot? What if Rory claims it was on accident? Now is he still within the printed rules but not within the "spirit of the game"? That is what intrigues me about this spat. At what point does someone owe his competitors ample enough respect to not do something within the printed rules but against the spirit of the game?

I think it comes up enough to say that 5% of guys who are still using them are close.
 
It is all really a none issue with me. You simply play the course as you find it, including the greens. They play the same for everyone, including the guys wearing steel spikes. It has been pointed out countless times, that even soft spikes do damage. Everyone who plays the game has or will have something happen on the green that will infuence their ball in a negative way, whether it is a spike mark, a ball mark, a peice of sand, bug or whatever.

I will not get into a debate about anything legal being against the "spirit of the game" We could go around in circles on that topic given the fact we play in a era of 460cc drivers, super lightweight shafts, 3 woods with heads larger than drivers of ten/fifteen years ago, putters that look anything but "simple in design", belly putters, high spinning balls, long flying balls and on and on.

For me the end all is that fact that our PGA professional is a forty plus year award winning member, a longtime member of the GCSAA, a honored member of the Indiana section of the PGA who happens to own & built our course (1959) and if he simply says it is a none issue to him, then it is a none issue to me. He is very quick to point out to anyone who wishes to ask him about spikes, that all them have some degree of negative impact on the greens, depending who's feet they are on, with neither being worse than the other.

If anyone truely is taking a stand for the protection of the greens, then the only bandwagon to be on today would be the one that bans any and all spikes that protrude above the flat cross section of the sole of any shoe.
 
JB said:
One part of the equation that was mentioned to me that I did forget to post about is why many in the industry wanted a switch. Repeat business in golfers replacing soft spikes. Metal spikes were rarely replaced and the soft spike business is a HUGE one based on revenue and marketshare numbers.
Click to expand...

Huh? I wore out steel spikes twice as fast as I do soft spikes. And once steel spikes were down about 1/3 of their length, they were nearly useless. Near the end of the steel spike era I even tried carbide spikes. They lasted longer, but were even more dangerous on hard surfaces than steel.

It's been years since I slipped with soft spikes, unless they were just at the point of needing replacement. Even if a prong or 2 breaks off, there are still enough left to give good traction.
 
I wear soft spikes, but after a few 6:45-7:00 am tee times when the tee boxes and fairways are still dripping with dew and nearly ending up on my butt in soft spikes I can certainly understand the attraction for metal spikes
 
HoosierGolfer said:
It is all really a none issue with me. You simply play the course as you find it, including the greens. They play the same for everyone, including the guys wearing steel spikes. It has been pointed out countless times, that even soft spikes do damage. Everyone who plays the game has or will have something happen on the green that will infuence their ball in a negative way, whether it is a spike mark, a ball mark, a peice of sand, bug or whatever.

I will not get into a debate about anything legal being against the "spirit of the game" We could go around in circles on that topic given the fact we play in a era of 460cc drivers, super lightweight shafts, 3 woods with heads larger than drivers of ten/fifteen years ago, putters that look anything but "simple in design", belly putters, high spinning balls, long flying balls and on and on.

For me the end all is that fact that our PGA professional is a forty plus year award winning member, a longtime member of the GCSAA, a honored member of the Indiana section of the PGA who happens to own & built our course (1959) and if he simply says it is a none issue to him, then it is a none issue to me. He is very quick to point out to anyone who wishes to ask him about spikes, that all them have some degree of negative impact on the greens, depending who's feet they are on, with neither being worse than the other.

If anyone truely is taking a stand for the protection of the greens, then the only bandwagon to be on today would be the one that bans any and all spikes that protrude above the flat cross section of the sole of any shoe.
Click to expand...

Actually they don't play the same for everyone. They play different for every golfer who follows the guy who wore the spikes.

With all due respect to your PGA Pro who sounds like a guy I would be proud to have as my Pro at any club I was a member of, HD cameras don't lie and today's PGA courses have greens that are very fast and can make a spike mark very problematic as evidenced by this week's TV coverage.
 
Although I don't use metal spikes, my course here are friendly toward them. Honestly, people not fixing their ball marks on the green are a much larger problem to me than scuffs from the spikes. It really pisses me off to see 15 ball marks drying up/dying on a green because people are too lazy and careless. If I could, I would fix each one of them.. but I don't have the time to do that. Have some class

That being said, I'd like to try metal spikes out. I used them pretty much all of my baseball career as the plastic replaceable ones were basically useless. Metal spikes will cost more in the long run
 
I would think replacing soft spikes was a fairly common occurrence when they first came out as they were just terrible in my view. That is probably less the case now as people tend to have multiple pairs of shoes and the soft spikes both last longer and stay threaded in better. I could surely see it as a factor back when the industry moved toward soft as they were terrible for a goodly length of time. I bought a pack last year and it remains sealed as there has as yet not been an opportunity to use any of the replacements.

To be honest I really don't think about it much because the courses I play the most both restrict metal spikes. Since this thread has forced me to think about them again, I would love to be able to use them. As I mentioned earlier, you feel so much more connected to the turf. I doubt anybody would rat me out if I decided to ignore the club policy but i am just not going to do that. The policy is the policy and that is that.

I might try to flesh up some material to present though in an effort to see if I can flip the club policy.
 
I was always under the assumption that metal were outlawed only because of damage they caused to the clubhouse and other surfaces. I would think they would help aerate the greens.
 
Fourputt said:
Huh? I wore out steel spikes twice as fast as I do soft spikes. And once steel spikes were down about 1/3 of their length, they were nearly useless. Near the end of the steel spike era I even tried carbide spikes. They lasted longer, but were even more dangerous on hard surfaces than steel.

It's been years since I slipped with soft spikes, unless they were just at the point of needing replacement. Even if a prong or 2 breaks off, there are still enough left to give good traction.
Click to expand...

I never said metal lasts longer nor do I have an opinion either way. I can only go based on information that was given to us for a story we are doing. I said the industry wanted a switch because of golfers replacing soft spikes. According to golf datatech spike business has increased 714% in replacement business since 1995 and 949% since 1985 (Golf Datatech 12/09 based on replacement spikes purchased).
 
Last edited:
the 2nd round of golf i ever played was in -2 conditions and everywhere was frozen. i was wearing soft spikes and the green keeper told me to be carefull cause if i slipped anywhere that wasnt grass and wasnt signed to be carefull i could sue the course and he said that he had been telling the course owners to only allow metal spikes in winter.
They never listened and i could see where he was coming from cause a couple of the wooden bridges was a nightmere in soft spikes when frozen
 
metal spikes/soft spikes... you know what really damages greens
goose slime... its like instant herbicide
 
All the courses in my area require soft spikes now. I just don't see spike marks on the greens like I used to when everyone wore metal spikes. I vote for soft spikes for that reason. Although, on side hill lies, steep up and down slopes and very wet conditions, I don't ever remember slipping when I wore metal spikes. On normal fairway or light rough shots, soft spikes do just as well as metal spikes.

But spike marks on the greens just get my goat. Some people are advocating a change in the rules to allow spike marks to be repaired. The rules also used allow stymies, too!! So, maybe the rules might be changed in the future.
 
I haven't used metal spikes in a decade I think. I don't have any use for it, but then again I'm not even 150lbs, so it'll take a very slippery slope for me to lose my grip.
 
thepete said:
I haven't used metal spikes in a decade I think. I don't have any use for it, but then again I'm not even 150lbs, so it'll take a very slippery slope for me to lose my grip.
Click to expand...

I also haven't used metal spikes in a very long time. But for slippery slopes the metal spikes were very stable. I'm 6' 1" and 260 lbs. with a new knee so I am very careful on wet slippery slopes.
 
Apologies for the skimming, but can someone explain to me what the proper way to walk with soft spikes is?
I can absolutely see that if someone were to pivot on their foot on a green how it would destroy the turf, but is there more to be considered?


On a side note, I have noticed that even wtih just my runners, I have left footmarks on the green even from walking as gingerly as I possibly can. Just a trait of sharp grips.
 
Poulter is posting jabs at Rory McIlroy on twitter this morning about steel spikes, including picts of aerator boots for the garden as Rory's new golf shoes. Almost tongue in cheek but not quite.
 
All4's said:
It turns out there more complaints than just Ian this week. Check this out. Rose brought up the same philosophical point I was making about them being used to affect others play and better your odds of winning.

http://www.weiunderpar.com/post/metal-spike-mark-paranoia-spreads-discontent#more-15480
Click to expand...

Interesting article and the comments were even more interesting. Lot's of "ban the metal" comments and quite a few for just tapping down the marks with dissent about "slow play". Thanks for posting the link. I don't typically read her posts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top