Since the dawn of civilization, humans have been driven by creating theories that explain the world around them. Some of these have formed the backbone of our understanding of our universe, some have been believed for a time only to be overwritten by more accurate findings, and some have been widely dismissed as delusional. While conspiracy theories may offer little in their value to society, I still find their existence entertaining even if I don't subscribe to their validity. It's fascinating to get a glimpse into the inner workings of someone's mind as they attempt to connect the dots that allegedly conceal information from the public, even though there's often no connection or the dots don't even exist.
Given it's reputation of a game built on honesty and integrity, it's no surprise that the golf world is subject to claims of attempts to subvert these values. Let's dive in to some of the proposed conspiracies and see if there's any truth to the theories:
We'll kick things off with a question some golf fans have been asking for 24 years: what happened with Tiger Woods' drive on the final playoff hole at the 2000 PGA Championship? The topic reared its head again with the PGA Championship returning to Valhalla earlier this year, the site of an epic duel between Tiger Woods and Bob May in 2000. Most will remember Tiger walking in his putt from that day, but others remain dubious of a different event from that round.
Golf Digest has a fascinating deep dive into the moment with conflicting eyewitness accounts and attempts at recreating the shot digitally, but here's the short version. Woods and May were in a three-hole playoff, with Woods holding a one-stroke advantage going into the final hole. On the 18th, Tiger pulled his drive way left. As the ball lands, the camera loses sight of it for a few seconds as spectators scramble towards the area, then the ball appears again moving quickly back toward the tee box. Woods was able to get out of trouble, get up-and-down for birdie, and take home the PGA Championship.
The debate rests on what happened in that brief moment where the ball is out of view. You can see in the video a person running towards the ball, who also goes out of frame behind a bush, before the ball comes bouncing back. The popular conspiracy is that this person kicked the ball back towards a more open area to assist Tiger. This theory is fueled by live speculation as this happened by announcers Jim Nantz and Ken Venturi, who seem to suggest that ball acted "unnaturally". Also, it wouldn't be the first time that Tiger (legally, in this case) received some assistance from a fan. There are numerous eyewitness reports from the day that seem to contradict each other, so we may never know for certain what caused the ball to behave the way it did.
The most likely answer, in my opinion, is that the ball was on a hill (you can see as the alleged kicker moves toward it that they're running downhill) and caught the cart path as it came rolling back. The real question though is if this ball didn't come rolling back, whether on its own or through an outside force, would it have affected Tiger and his legacy? After all, this victory did ultimately represent the third leg of the "Tiger Slam". Even in this hypothetical universe though, the answer is probably not. First, there's no guarantee that he wouldn't still have found his way out of trouble and birdied the hole, or even if he didn't, that he wouldn't have won the playoff eventually. This also speaks to the larger point, which is that Tiger and his talent are undeniable, so does this even matter in the long run?
Perhaps the most iconic feature of golf's most prominent track, the vibrant azaleas that surround the facility at Augusta National every April are part of what make The Masters feel so special. But could these brilliant displays of color actually be a farce?
This isn't to suggest that the flowers themselves aren't real, but that the grounds crew at Augusta National has a method of forcing these flowers to bloom just at the right time. The theory posits that they cover the flower beds throughout the club with ice in order to "trick" the flowers into not blooming too early.
There's a few major holes in this theory. First, even when you consider the massive amount of resources available to Augusta National, I don't think there's any way they could actually produce enough ice to give them the coverage to accomplish this. Second, even if they could, no amount of ice in flower beds is going to change the ambient climate, meaning the ice is just going to melt away as soon as they can lay it all out. Isn't it just much more likely that The Masters occurs every year in the heart of the season when flowers bloom?
No, this isn't some spin-off of the viral parody conspiracy that's claiming birds are actually drones used by broadcasters to accurately track golf shots. However, it does have to do with golf broadcasts.
Returning back to the hallowed ground of Augusta National, many of those fortunate enough to be patrons at The Masters have commented on the surprising lack of wildlife on the grounds. And yet, one of the signature characteristics of the television broadcast of the event is the bird calls you'll hear in the background. Now while there have been confirmed bird sightings on the property, they seem to be rarer than the sounds of the broadcast would indicate. So are the broadcasts pumping in artificial bird noises to enhance the atmosphere?
There is actually some historical weight to back up this theory. During the aforementioned 2000 PGA Championship, bird enthusiasts recognized some calls coming from species that are not indigenous to Louisville, at which point CBS admitted to inserting the noises. However, they have remained steadfast to this day that they do not do this for The Masters and that all the sounds you hear are live. Given the dense plant life that surrounds Augusta National, it's reasonable to assume that there are plenty of birds that have no interest in being near crowds of people hiding in the trees. How the broadcasts capture their sounds is another question (hidden mics?), but the truth we may never have a definitive answer on this theory either way.
Any time a company or organization comes along that disrupts the establishment, there's bound to be inquiries about its origin or true intentions. So it should come as no surprise that when the PIF created LIV Golf as a PGA Tour rival and poached a number of top players, only to later reach an agreement to provide funding to the PGA Tour, some started to question how these two tours are intertwined.
The majority of the conspiracies on the topic seem to revolve around the same starting point: the PGA Tour, in some shape or form, was involved in the creation of LIV Golf. The end goal of creating their own rival is where these theories start to diverge; some ideas include creating drama in order to drum up interest in the sport, testing the waters on team play formats, or to create a "villain" that ultimately leads to the two leagues squaring off in head-to-head battles. The very fact that there's no one clear answer on what the purpose of the PGA Tour doing this leads me to believe that there's not any merit to this. But regardless of the origin, golf fans are anxious to see what a potential merger means for the future of the sport.
Now we shift from wider conjectures about the professional games to myths that you create about your own game. The first is that you trick yourself into believing that the problem with your game isn't actually with your game at all. Every year manufacturers pump out the next line of the latest and greatest technological advancements in golf equipment, and you can't help but to jump at the opportunity to find the easy fix for your broken swing.
Spoiler alert: it won't. That's not to diminish the advancements in golf technology over the years or say that trading in your dad's hand-me-down clubs you've been using for 15 years for a new fitted set isn't going to give you more distance or consistency. But constantly switching out your gear instead of focusing on incremental tweaks to your game isn't going to make you a better golfer. Nor will it change the fact that some pro golfer from 1924 could roll up with their persimmon and hickory clubs and take your money because they're just better than you.
The point above is really just a microcosm with this bigger problem to how most of us approach golf. Why do think every content creator giving tips on YouTube titles their video "1 SIMPLE TRICK to Unlock Your Golf Game" or "NEVER Do This If You Ever Want to Break 80"? Because we fall for it every darn time. The idea that we're one alteration away from winning the club championship and getting our Tour card is so alluring, but it's just not meant to be.
The first flaw in this delusion is that your game is constantly evolving, for better or for worse. Every change that you make to your swing can, whether intentionally or not, change something else you were doing that has the potential to help or harm you. Also, just because something is clicking for you one day doesn't necessarily mean it's here to stay. How many times has a professional golfer appeared poised to be the next big thing for six months only to suddenly lose it? And those are the best players in the world, while you're just working on getting that handicap down. Golf is a game of constantly working to piece it all together.
The second problem is that your game is exactly that: YOUR game. There's no two of them that are alike. Sure, there are some basic fundamentals in swing mechanics that everyone needs to understand, but applying them to your own swing looks different for different golfers. Just look at how many pros have quirks in their swing that would throw off just about any other player. There's no magic fix, just a constant struggle to get better.
When something is specifically designed to make a competition fair, there's going to be scrutiny when someone feels like they got unfair treatment. So when a high handicapper rips off a career round to win a net tournament, you may just hear some gripes from competitors (especially from lower handicap players) that the World Handicap System is rigged against them.
There is some merit to the concept that it's easier for someone with a Handicap Index of 20+ to have an significantly low net score than it is for someone with a Handicap Index in the single digits. The higher you typically score, the more opportunities there are to shave strokes by playing well. It's a lot easier to drop from your score from 100 to 90 than it is to drop it from 80 to 70. This is why most large tournaments will flight the field by Handicap Index, even in a net competition.
But does this mean that the system is inherently unfair? Not when you consider the fact that your Handicap Index is based on your playing potential, not just your average score. Your Handicap Index is calculated using only the best 8 scores of your last 20 rounds and on average, players will shoot at or below their handicap 15-20% of the time. That means that while it's theoretically easier for a high handicapper to shoot 10 strokes lower than their Course Handicap, the likelihood of them making that leap overnight is just about as likely as a 5 handicap shooting under par.
So while you may bemoan that opponent coming out of nowhere to play their best round ever, that doesn't mean that the World Handicap System is working against you. Plus, the alternative is only competing against players who share your approximate skill level which just means less people that you can enjoy playing against.
Ready to come out from the shadows of conspiracy? Get your Handicap Index free for 60 days here.