join

Adams Tight Lies – Better from Everywhere?

Post image for Adams Tight Lies – Better from Everywhere?

Written By: Tony Covey

A History Lesson

Before we get to the results of our Adams Tight Lies test, a history lesson is probably in order. When Barney Adams designed the original Tight Lies the idea was an easy to hit club to replace not so easy to hit long irons. That's right...the original Tight Lies, though generally regarded as a fairway wood, was conceptually a hybrid.

Once word got out, the Tight Lies became hugely popular with golfers who soon discovered that not only was Tight Lies easier to hit than long irons, it was actually the most versatile club in the bag. Tight Lies was the get out of the jail club; the safety club that could almost literally be hit from anywhere.

With the 2013 incarnation of the Adams classic the design team wanted to remain true to the original design (versatile, and infinitely playable) while raising the performance bar to competitive levels.

Adams will tell you that the Tight Lies isn't a launch monitor killer. That is to say it isn't designed to be the absolute longest fairway on the market. It's not that Tight Lies shouldn't be able to hold its own, but it's not about 13 or 17, or however many more yards either.

Tight Lies is about being easier to hit from everywhere without sacrificing that distance that most of us crave.

We wanted to find out if the 2013 Adams Tight Lies is really is better from everywhere.

Adams Tight Lies-7

How We Tested

We took the Adams Tight Lies, our FlightScope X2, and a bag full of tour quality golf balls out to the 15th hole at McGregor Links Golf Club in Wilton, NY.

The 15th is a brutal challenge. A hazard (complete with waste bunker) runs down the right-hand side while OB lines the left. The waste bunker is little more than dust-covered hardpan and the rough is long and gnarly.

For those in search of a nasty lie, the 15th has plenty to offer. Fortunately, nasty was exactly what we were looking for.

FlightScopelogo

For this test, we asked our testers to hit a small series of shots from 3 distinct lies (fairway, rough, and waste bunker sand) to see find out how the Adams Tight Lies compared to their gamers.

To better replicate on course conditions (and to preserve the course) we had testers hit 4 shots with each club from each location. We didn't want to get our guys too dialed in with any one club, but we needed enough so we didn't use complete garbage shots as the basis for our conclusions.

In each case we tossed the worst shot (often a dribbler or a wild slice). Our averages were derived from the remaining shots.

Adams Tight Lies-5

An Imperfect Test

In a perfect world we’d go head to head and spec for spec, but a fairway wood originally conceived as a long iron replacement fills a unique niche. It's not like many of us actually carry a 16° club (our test samples were limited to the 16° model), so instead of trying to find something to match Tight Lies spec for spec, we asked our testers to hit the Tight Lies side by side against the club they’d be most likely to replace for it.

In some cases it was a club with more loft, in others it was a club with a little less. For some it was a fairway wood, for me it was a hybrid.

With that in mind our conclusions are based primarily on proximity to the centerline and shot dispersion. Now that the Tight Lies is in full release; between Tight Lies and Tight Lies Tour you should almost certainly be able to find a model that gets you to the desired distance.

That said, we know you guys love to see distance numbers, so I included them in our tables.

Let''s do this.

Adams Tight Lies-12

From the Fairway (Downhill Lie)

Just to make things a bit more interesting, we set our testers up with a slight downhill lie. The fairway almost always better, but that doesn't mean it's always perfectly level.

While none (myself included) could provide a concrete explanation why (a couple of the guys cited weight in a general sense) none of our testers actually preferred the Tight Lies to what was already in their bag. Actually, I think everybody would have preferred I let them hit from a perfectly flat lie, but what fun would that have been.

Disdain for the lie and a preference for their own club doesn't mean anybody hit the Tight Lies significantly worse than their gamer. In fact, our numbers suggest that most of us should probably think differently. In 2 of the 3 cases, the Tight Lies was, on average, considerably closer to the target line.

tightlies-fw-2
tc-fw joe-fw Lou-FW

No doubt your eyes are nearly popping out of your head over the distance difference for Lou. The discrepancy in his distance numbers isn't as staggering as it appears, and can be primarily attributed to differences in launch angle. He's generally a very low ball hitter, and while he did a better job getting the ball in the air with his own club, he saw considerably more roll with with the Tight Lies. Lou is in his 60s, and like men of a certain age sometimes do, Lou had trouble getting it (Tight Lies) up.

From the Rough

Rough Lie

When the lies get gnarly, that's when the real benefits of the Tight Lies upside down trapezoidal design start to shine through. As with our fairway test, 2 of the 3 testers actually proved more accurate with the Tight Lies, and the 3rd (as with the fairway test) was only marginally less accurate.

TightLies-Rough2
tc-roughjoe-roughlou-rough

More interesting is the stuff that's difficult to quantify. Our testers were in complete agreement that the Tight Lies gets through the thick grass better than the traditionally designed alternatives we each currently carry.

If you're fortunate enough to avoid trouble...always, then perhaps there's no practical advantage to the Tight Lies. If however, you find yourself playing out of the thick stuff more often than you'd like, there's a case to be made for Tight Lies.

That case gets stronger when you consider that the Tight Lies actually gained relative distance from the rough. Not only  can Tight Lies put you closer to the target line from the unfortunate areas of the golf course, for some, it could actually be longer than otherwise comparable, or even longer clubs.

From the Waste Bunker

The waste bunker that comes into play on the tee shot on #15 isn't quite hardpan. It's not quite sand either. It's garbage. Sidehill lies are abundant. Sometimes you have to hit out of weeds, and more often than not, overhanging branches force you to go more left than you'd like. It just sucks, and given how far away it is from the green, if you're in it and hope to have even the smallest chance of making par, you have little choice but to get as far out of it as you possibly can.

In most cases even a relatively safe 5 iron isn't going to get you anywhere close to where you want to be.

Waste Bunker Lie

Once again the story is more or less the same. 2 of the 3 guys were significantly more accurate coming out of the waste bunker while the 3rd was only marginally less accurate. The distance gains we saw coming out of the rough didn't hold up, but remember, we're talking about an imperfect comparison from a distance perspective.

TightLies-wastebunker2
tc-sandLou - Sand

*Due to operator (me) error we don't have dispersion charts for Joe from the Waste Bunker

It was in the bunker that the difference between my hybrid and the Tight Lies, at least for  me, was most noticeable. With my hybrid the margin for error is tight. It's easy to catch the edge and either dig or have the face flop open (nothing like going from the waste bunker into the the creek below it). The Tight Lies practically glides through the sand. It's much more difficult to get stuck, which means that even when the swing isn't the best, the result is often better than deserved.

It slides like it's been waxed and put on a track.

Adams Tight Lies-18

What to Make from the Results

Considering that some of our guys told us that they wouldn't normally play something like a fairway wood or even a longer hybrid from some of the lies we gave them we were curious to see if they'd feel more inclined to play Tight Lies from those same lies.

Universally the answer was no.

Cowards.

While each felt the Tight Lies did perform a bit better from the gnarly stuff, the advantages weren't so pronounced that they'd be more inclined to take the risk. They'd continue to play safe.

Me, I'm a risk taker. I've never met a lie where I didn't believe I could hit the longest club in my bag. Granted, I've been proven wrong quite a bit, but I'll probably never smarten up and stop taking chances. For a guy like me, I can't help but think that Tight Lies would increase the chances for success.

As I said, we all preferred our own clubs off the fairway. Perhaps it's a comfort level thing, perhaps there's something in the Tight Lies design that can lead one to believe it doesn't play as well from better lies (even if it actually does).

For many of you I'm reasonably certain the Tight Lies will be a an easy and direct replacement for a fairway wood or long hybrid. From everywhere else...the places where I play more shots than I'd like, the Tight Lies handled the nasty stuff a bit better.

Adams Tight Lies-6

Finding Room for Tight Lies

As we talked about the results we began to realize that we're perhaps too constrained by the notion of what the composition of the golf bag is supposed to be. We think about gaps, and carrying the perfect amount of whatevers. No more, no less.

Then I considered my gap wedge. Rounds go by when I don't hit it. I'm also extremely comfortable hitting a 3-quarter pitching wedge to what might otherwise be gap wedge distances. The point is, I could probably pull the gap wedge and not miss it. It sure as hell doesn't do me any good from that waste bunker on 15, but convention wisdom says I'm supposed to have one, so I have one. Do I really need it?

Let me be clear...very clear about something: I'm not actually suggesting you replace your gap wedge with fairway wood. The last thing I want is you walking into a pro shop and telling anybody that MyGolfSpy said gap wedges are stupid. I'm simply trying to get you think differently...maybe even rationally about what makes the most sense for your game. The gap wedge just happens to be my personal example.

Is there a club in your bag you rarely use? You carry it, it serves little actual purpose, and you could quite functionally achieve the same results with a different club. Maybe it's your gap wedge, maybe it's a hybird, or a fairway wood.

Whatever it might be, the question to ask yourself is this: Do I hit this club more often than I get myself into trouble?

If the answer is no, than the solution might be to make room in your bag for Tight Lies; the long club you can hit from nearly anywhere.

If the answer is yes, then it still might be worth looking into replacing one of your longer clubs (fairway or hybrid) with an equivalent Tight Lies. It's perfectly functional from the fairway, and our results suggest that for many of you the new Tight Lies will be easier to hit from those nasty places we wish we didn't have to hit from.

For the rest of you...the guys who play from the short grass all the time...all I can say is "it must be nice", but like I said, Tight Lies works pretty well from the fairway too.

 

{ 30 comments… read them below or add one }

dru_ November 7, 2013 at 9:13 am

This is interesting because when I tried a tight lies on a simulator the other day, it’s numbers were good, but I had the same reaction as your testers. It didn’t “feel” good at contact. The results were consistent, but there was no difference in feel between a clean center mass “sweet spot” ball and one that was less well struck, with the sound and feel of all of them having that slightly “dead” sound and feel we have come to associate with a miss hit stroke.

Reply

John Barry November 7, 2013 at 9:36 am

I am a Tight Lies fan and I am for sure going to give them a fair and honest try for 2014!!

Reply

Shark November 7, 2013 at 10:39 am

I’d like to try it. But to dru above…. In a simulator?
Really?
This tight lies is famous only for… Well tight lies… Bad situations on a golf course… Rough, uneven lies etc… You can compare drivers but for me that’s where the sim ends.
Irons need turf interaction as does the tight lies.
An opinion hitting off astroturf….. No.

Reply

Dru_ November 7, 2013 at 11:21 am

Sim was the only option at the time, they did not have a demo club available yet that I could take out on the course. I haven’t disregarded it, but it sound and feel do play a part in buying decisions, even if numbers don’t support the choice :( .

Reply

Zach November 7, 2013 at 1:17 pm

Hey Dru_ golf clubs “feel” (sound) different in a closed space than to a open space

Reply

finalist November 7, 2013 at 1:02 pm

We are seeing how TaylorMade is going to position Adams.

Reply

markb November 7, 2013 at 1:27 pm

It’s no secret how Tmag is going to position Adams. You can see it in everything from the change in Adams’ logo fonts to old-timey cursive, to which pros are wearing their hats and appearing in their TV ads (Watson and Perry) to the revival of the tight lies (the quintessential old duffer’s club).

They have decided that Taylormade will cater to the young and radical and early adopters, while Adams will sweep up the over 50 crowd.

Reply

Tony Covey November 7, 2013 at 5:37 pm

I don’t think your assessment is quite right. Both Perry and Watson wear Adams hats and appear in their ads because they are under contract with Adams. Both have been so since before TaylorMade acquired Adams.

It’s not a case of age, but I do think you’re going to see the Adams brand slant towards the game-improvement player. I think you’ll see Adams focus on the mid to high handicap golfer while TaylorMade caters to the low to mid. There’re not going to giveaway the middle, but I suspect they’ll allow Adams to compete there as well.

I think the days of Adams products like the CMB or MB2 are probably behind us.

Reply

markb November 7, 2013 at 8:48 pm

Of course Perry and Watson are Adams contract players. My point is that Adams puts them front and center in advertising because they will appeal to senior buyers. if Adams were trying to skew younger (like Cobra-Puma) you would see them sign and use players like Ricky and Lexi. Instead, the only time you see the Adams logo on TV is when their hats and bags shuffle past from carts to greens during a Champions Tour telecast. From the C tour they have Allen, Perry, Watson, Langer and about 10 others on Staff. Who do they have on the PGA tour? Baddeley and Garrigus and Garrigus has only one Adams club in his bag. I’m saying that this AARP skew is by DESIGN, not by accident.

Reply

markb November 8, 2013 at 1:45 am

Oh yeah, one more thing… Adams just signed Ernie Els away from Callaway. How odd that they would court another well-respected but aging superstar and not a young gun? I’m sure that’s just coincidence and not part of a well thought out marketing plan.

Dave S November 8, 2013 at 12:10 pm

What about the new XTD forged iron? It’s essentially a newer version of the CMB (maybe slightly more game improvement), but you don’t see TMaG pushing the MBs or CBs (which were discontinued) hard at all… instead they’re all about the goo … If anything, I see TMaG as a more game-improvement, for-the-masses brand than Adams currently.

Reply

Qwagmire November 7, 2013 at 1:15 pm

Im like you Tony. I hit them straighter, but lost distance.

To the point my Adams Super 17* hybrid is longer (and more accurate) than the 16*. (Disclaimer: 16* has regular shaft, I hit a stock stiff in hybrid, so not true apples to apples)

My X Hot 17* 4w is noticably longer (while not quite as accurate) as the Tight Lies 14.5*.

I think a proper fitting with aftermarket shaft is required for me to even consider this club.

Reply

Craig November 7, 2013 at 1:54 pm

I’ve never had a gap wedge in the bag. Just a pitching wedge & sand wedge. I also carry a 1-iron for those low, out-from-under-the-trees shots. The pitching wedge works pretty darned well around the greens. I’ve learned how to work it enough so that when it’s in my hand I feel confident.
I will generally use a hybrid out of the rough when there’s still some distance to be covered; or maybe a 5-wood.
Always wanted to try the Tight-Lies clubs, for those iffy get-out-of-trouble shots. Never had the pleasure. Thanks for the review. Appreciate it. If I get the chance I’ll try them one day.

Reply

Hellsing November 7, 2013 at 2:33 pm

It would be nice to see a picture or two from the address position next to a ball so we can se how big the head is relative to the ball.
thanks

Reply

Drew November 7, 2013 at 2:47 pm

Didn’t MGS say fairway woods have been obsoleted by hybrids not too long ago? :)

Reply

Tony Covey November 7, 2013 at 2:54 pm

I did say that… Nobody believes me. They just keep making more.

Reply

revkev November 7, 2013 at 3:42 pm

No T,

They did believe you so they re-invented a different design by borrowing something old. :)

Nice little test – I would have liked it best if you guys had whacked a few off the tee also. At any rate your results are similar to my informal ones – I fit inbetween T and Lou distance wise. In comparing it to what I remember from the tight lies of yesteryear I believe the new one is much better out of the rough and off the tee.

It does have an odd look and feel in my opinion but it’s producing some results – if that continues I’ll get used to the look and feel.

Thanks as always for hitting an equipment topic in a timely manner.

Reply

overninety November 7, 2013 at 4:05 pm

Although I am not a TM fan by any means I have a Taylor Made RAYLOR that I cant get out of my bag. I bought this club without even try it as a rescue club and it has become my trust club, its so easy to hit mostly from the rough. Its more or less the same concept as the Tight Lies. I would love to see a comparison between these tho clubs.

Reply

Qwagmire November 7, 2013 at 6:39 pm

My Raylor is always in my truck. Rarely used anymore, but it is money…

Reply

Mike H. November 7, 2013 at 8:39 pm

I bought a 16 degree Tight-Lies soon after it came out. I was hitting a Callaway 15 degree X-Hot. The X-Hot was the better feeling club and easily longer off the tee but needed a perfect lie in the fairway to be of much use. The T-L was very accurate but the sound and feel left something to be desired. The T-L also seemed to balloon if not totally flushed. Between the loss of distance, sound and feel, the T-L couldn’t stay in my bag.

I recently purchased a G25 3-hybrid and absolutely love it. So to fill out my bag on the high end I ordered a 17 degree G25 2-hybrid. I think I won’t lose too much distance between a 3-wood and the 2-hybrid and feel like I will gain accuracy for using off the tee on short par 4s and when I decide to try and reach short par 5s in two.

Reply

RAT November 8, 2013 at 12:00 am

I did have one of the first tight lies clubs and loved it but $199.00 bucks is tooooo high!
The price for golf equipment has reached the peak for me to make any more new purchases.

Reply

egdewrich November 8, 2013 at 9:18 am

I love to shop the “remiander” bins at Golfsmith and Golf Galaxy and Goler’s Warehouse here in New England for the 2010 and 2011 top of the line equipment, especially drivers, wedges, hybrids and fairway woods. Right now, most of the good, high end stuff is marked down about 75% in the stores, not on the websites. I have found an Adams 9064 driver for $50 and a Minzuno T 11 wedge for $45, endless hybrids for under $50. Test them all in the simulator bins first.
Have my eye on JPX 800 fairway woods, and a Srixon ZTX fway and driver.
I also feel the new off the rack costs are too high, and Ebay has the clubs within two months or so of issue for 25% off. Oh, I am selective,not trying to hoard too much! BUt Mizuno JPX 800 7 wood for $50 is tempting me at this moment…grrrr.

Reply

Super K November 8, 2013 at 8:58 pm

Gentlemen – I recently put a 14 degree Tight Lies to a real test hear on my home course in Jack Nicklaus land (Royal American). I am a 16 HCAP, in shape 58 y/o that decided long ago to carry 16, 19, 22, 25, and sometimes 28 degree Taylor rescue dual or 2007 burner steel hybrids. I am always looking for long iron or long he’s of good quality. Just recently I have started to hit 3W consistently so long he’s are my bread and butter. TL is just as MGS review has stated, not super long, although I did give it good rides often. The reviewer who commented that every shot felt solid was also correct, on the course or in the simulator, everything is a thunk. I did send a few sideways, to be expected for a new club. It performs very well out of the rough and the distance and direction are excellent. But I must say that off the FW is where the club really excels as it is right at the target. I tested the club from the rough on par 5′s after weak drives and easily reached all in 3, and the recovery shot was not far off my target. Trajectory is mid. I went through a stretch my test day of 340 yd par 4, 388 yd par 4, and a 422 yd par 4. Each drive was weak, leaving long second shots. The first, from 186 to an uphill green from the FW was pin high just on the right fringe. Second was from 197, pin in center of green, and I put it 10 feet from the back of the green. Third was from 220 in the FW and I put that one to 20 yds of uphill green. Made par on each hole. Club goes a little further than the rescue dual 16 but not as far a a well struck R9 15 d FW. In the end I really like the club and will carry it, but it wasn’t necessary for me to buy in hindsight. I agree with the reviewer who said that clubs have reached their limit in terms of cost, and the extra performance is not so stellar that it is worth the $199 tag unless you really like it. But it will likely continue make it easier (that was easy) for me to save my crappy tee shots. However, I never played those 3 holes in par par par in 7 years at that course, so …..it stays in the bag. Oh mommy!!

Reply

Kit Lefroy November 10, 2013 at 9:46 am

I recently retrieved a couple of the original Tight Lies clubs from a dark corner in my basement with a view to giving them a shot to be in the daylight again. Much to my surprise, the 3 and 7 woods performed extremely well, especially from the rough. Next Spring I will do a comparison of the old and equivalent new Tight Lies. If the new version is substantially better I will beat up my credit card. My suggestion to anyone contemplating buying a Tight Lies is to find and try out the original version before spending $199 on the new version. If that is not possible go to the new version. Either way you can’t lose.

Reply

Acer February 10, 2014 at 1:36 pm

The testers of this club suck at golf I am 13 and have the tight lies 19 degree and can out hit u any day on a bad shot it goes 200. The club is great on every surface of the course. It is a great buy. You are idiots for criticizing this club it is the best in my bag,

Reply

Mike Shivley February 13, 2014 at 9:21 pm

I’m “that” golfer. 57 years old, hovering between a 15 and 17 handicap, low swing speed and not super consistent on my best days. That being said I tried out the Tight lies 3wood a few months ago. Was hitting the TM RBZ HL 3 wood before that. a few things were immediately apparent.
1) Off a perfect flat lie in the fairway I was at least as long given a good strike and longer with a not so good strike. Also I was significantly more consistent.
2) from the rough, waste bunkers, bad lies even some fairly level fairway bunkers I was a lot more accurate, no loss of distance and in many cases significantly longer, partly due I’m sure in the ability for it to “dig the ball out” without having to move to a more lofted club.
3) Given my less than perfect, less than consistent swing I have a marked tendency to hook a hybrid. Not so with the Tight Lies. If anything I tend to have a slight push which is a lot more controllable and due mostly I think to timing my release. Hence I got rid of the Hybrids and now carry both the 5 and 7 wood Tight Lies instead. I have been ecstatic with these clubs.
4) So I tried the 3 wood of the tee. The one shot were i really loved the RBZ and not only was I longer, (constantly over 200 yds which is outstanding for me, but also much more accurate.

Yes, it sounds and feels different coming off the face, but I found within a month or so that, that “feel and sound” became normal for me. And even if it hadn’t given the results I would have just sucked it up and been happy with it.

It’s still the “archer not the arrow,” but given this archer’s abilities I’ll take these clubs any day.
I have 3 wedges in my bag, (48, 52 and 58) and can manufacture most anything I want out of them. That leaves me with a hole that I can fill with a 4 iron or 5 hybrid depending on my mood and ability on any given day.
So I really don’t care where TM is positioning Adams, although they seem to be positioning it to golfers like me. The fact remains that these clubs work for ME and at the end of the day that’s what matters.

Oh by the way came off the course out here in Northern calif a few hours ago and it was mostly sunny and 71 degrees. Had to put the sunscreen on since I was in shorts and short sleeves. Yes there are some advantages to living on the “left coast.” Here’s hoping the rest of you get back out on the course soon.
Mike

Reply

Bob March 12, 2014 at 12:43 am

Similar experience to Mike. Recalling the glory days of the original TL and not sure what happened to it, I bought the new TL 16. Yes it doesn’t sound a nice as my HotX or HotX hybrid but it really performed. In the first outing it saved me at least two pars. Considering adding one or two others to my bag based on the good result so far. But maybe it is just new club euphoria…

Reply

Kit Lefroy March 12, 2014 at 10:48 am

Years ago I had a Tight Lies 3 wood and 7 wood. Last season I decided to put the 7 wood back in my bag. I liked it so much that I replaced the steel shaft with graphite. It is incredibly versatile and particularly useful from the rough. From time to time I use it to chip and even do a bump and run. I am very pleased it is back in my bag and wonder why I ever took it out in the first place.

Reply

Desmond April 27, 2014 at 10:07 pm

Okay, It’s April 2014, and the pricing is now $149 on the TL. I wanted to try one for the traditional shaft lengths and ease of getting it up on tight fairway lies, and worse… It’s typically drought-ish where I play and I needed a compact, shallow headed fairway for confidence. The Mitsu Eagle Shaft is fine for me, but for stronger players, you can ask for any shaft that Adams installs in its other clubs at no up charge from what I was told.

I demoed the 16 and 19, thought they were easy to elevate and I hit it them on the screws. The sound/feel is muted – I prefer a metallic zing like an XHot or Tity, but performance is what matters. It took about 5 strokes to get accustomed to the club, and I hit one bomb after another – straight, high yet boring. Can’t tell you about distance, as I was probably a bit hesitant. I have the 19 and 22, and am looking for a 14 or 16 as a long club … deciding between it and the BB.

I did tee up the TL very low and had no issues off the tee — very easy. I may end up with the 14/16 and the BB — using the Adams when I have no lie, and the BB on courses when I’ve got some cushion.

And yes, I rarely hit a gap wedge … so

Reply

Tony Covey November 8, 2013 at 9:03 am

I think you’re putting the cart before the horse and then saying…and so there’s your proof. Els is almost definitely leaving Callaway, all the signs are there, and its not a leap of any kind to see Adams as the destination. He fits their mold (and yes…that mold is an older golfer whose career is in decline) That said, you can’t point to that as evidence that TMaG is positioning Adams as the brand for old men. Look at the Adams Tour Staff…signing guys like Els…that’s business as usual. It is operationally speaking, EXACTLY how they did business before TaylorMade took over.

Arguably with TMaG behind they have more $$$ to work with, but when you’re a smaller brand, you spend where you get the most spread/exposure, for a company of Adams size, that as ALWAYS been the Champions Tour and the LPGA (note that their LPGA roster is almost as long as their Champions Tour Roster). It’s a staff who for the most part plays clubs with more of a GI slant…and that’s your Adams demographic…not old men. The old man market isn’t substantially enough for anyone to target exclusively. The GI/SGI market…that’s huge, and Adams can go after it without stepping on daddy’s toes. TaylorMade almost certainly isn’t going to spend to build the Adams brand on the PGA tour.

So yes…absolutely, it’s all part of a well thought out marketing plan, but it’s also the same plan they’ve been running for as long as anyone can remember. It’s top talent on the Champions Tour. Top Talent on the LPGA Tour, and PGA underachievers (Baddeley) for the cost of a song. It’s business as usual sans the product for better players (which was never where the Adams bread was buttered anyway).

Reply

Leave a Comment