{"id":658861,"date":"2026-05-22T17:29:13","date_gmt":"2026-05-22T17:29:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/658861\/"},"modified":"2026-05-22T17:29:13","modified_gmt":"2026-05-22T17:29:13","slug":"iron-covers-are-o-k-for-aaron-rai-but-not-for-everyday-golfers","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/658861\/","title":{"rendered":"Iron Covers Are O.K. for Aaron Rai but Not for Everyday Golfers"},"content":{"rendered":"

Welcome back to SI Golf\u2019s Fact or Fiction, where we\u2019re back from Aronimink and already salivating at what carnage might be next at Shinnecock Hills<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Once again, we\u2019re here to debate a series of statements for writers and editors to declare as \u201cFact\u201d or \u201cFiction\u201d along with a brief explanation. Responses may also (occasionally) be \u201cNeutral\u201d since there’s a lot of gray area in golf.<\/p>\n

Do you agree or disagree? Let us know on the SI Golf X<\/a> account.<\/p>\n

The LIV Golf contingent had a largely solid showing at the PGA Championship, led by an encouraging T2 for Jon Rahm<\/a> and a return to form by Cam Smith<\/a>. There are two majors left in 2026 and a LIV player will grab at least one of them.<\/p>\n

Bob Harig: FICTION. Not because Rahm or Smith or Bryson DeChambeau are not capable. Or Tyrrell Hatton or perhaps a David Puig. It\u2019s simply a numbers game. I actually like Rahm\u2019s chances at Shinnecock and Hatton seems a nice fit in his home country for the British Open. But I\u2019ll go with someone from outsid of LIV winning the next two majors.<\/p>\n

John Pluym: FICTION. The only LIV player with any chance of winning a major this year is Jon Rahm. The issue? His putter seems to let him down at the most opportune moments. Bryson DeChambeau won the U.S. Open in 2024, but his game seems to have disappeared in the season\u2019s first two majors. While I like Cam Smith (he won the British Open in \u201922), I don\u2019t think LIV players can put together four high-level rounds in a major championship. \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

\"Jon<\/p>\n

Jon Rahm’s outlook for the U.S. and British Opens is brighter after a T2 at the PGA. | James Lang-Imagn Images<\/p>\n

Jeff Ritter: FACT. If we\u2019re playing the odds, there are many more non-LIV players who currently look major-ready. But Rahm should be a top-two or three favorite, and I think he\u2019s ready to bag one of the summer\u2019s remaining majors.\u00a0<\/p>\n

John Schwarb: FICTION. Bryson DeChambeau has to be in form for me to make this field bet and he clearly is not. But Rahm being Rahm again certainly should make for even more compelling Opens.\u00a0<\/p>\n

In the wake of his PGA first-round tee time tardiness that earned a two-stroke penalty, Garrick Higgo split with his caddie<\/a>. But the bagman has zero blame for his player being late to the tee.<\/p>\n

Bob Harig: FACT. The players who perform the best almost always take ownership for everything\u2014even if a caddie did make a mistake. Too many clubs in the bag? Well, it\u2019s the player\u2019s job to check, too. Wrong club off the tee? The player is the one who swings it. Late for a tee time? The caddie was on the tee waiting, calling out to him to get there! Nobody for Higgo to blame but himself.<\/p>\n

John Pluym: FACT. The responsibility belongs to Higgo. He\u2019s the player. He\u2019s competing. Also, why wouldn’t he have his phone or wear a watch to keep track of time? Does his caddie need to drag him to the tee box? Come on, man!<\/p>\n

\"Garrick<\/p>\n

Garrick Higgo missed the cut at the PGA Championship, then split with his caddie. | Emilee Chinn\/Getty Images<\/p>\n

Jeff Ritter: FICTION. It all comes back to the player, but a caddie also has to keep his player on schedule. The buck stops with Higgo, but his caddie isn\u2019t totally innocent in this one.\u00a0<\/p>\n

John Schwarb: NEUTRAL. Higgo is not innocent here by any means, but this appeared to be an unusual situation with the caddie on the tee while supposedly the player was getting in a couple more practice putts. I don\u2019t know if Higgo had cut it close before, but at a major I\u2019ve got to think the caddie sticks like glue to his guy.<\/p>\n

The PGA Tour resumes this week and next in the Dallas-Fort Worth Metroplex with two of its most enduring tournaments, but both have been marginalized in the signature-event era and by landing between majors. At least one of these tournaments deserves better in a reimagined Tour schedule.<\/p>\n

Bob Harig: FICTION. This week\u2019s tournament has one of the weakest fields of the year, a product of its place on the schedule more than anything wrong with the event. In a new PGA Tour world that sees Tier 1 tournaments with 120-player fields, it is quite possible that both these events will be part of it. But where you are on the schedule and when has so much to do with it these days. Sandwiched after a major championship with another looming is probably not great. Separating them might help.<\/p>\n

John Pluym: FACT. Brian Rolapp and the tour need to think twice about marginalizing any of its events. Do the right thing: move the dates. \u00a0<\/p>\n

\"Ben<\/p>\n

The Charles Schwab Challenge has a rich history at Colonial Country Club, tartan jackets and all. | Raymond Carlin III-Imagn Images<\/p>\n

Jeff Ritter: FACT. Both are strong non-signature events that should safely find homes in the future PGA Tour schedule, but shifting these dates a bit might help them draw better fields\u2014and cooler weather.\u00a0<\/p>\n

John Schwarb: FICTION. These two stops seem to do well on their own, with solid sponsors and local organizations which help run them. Sure, it would be nice for the fields to be more stocked<\/a> but overall these are two events that Brian Rolapp probably isn\u2019t worried about.<\/p>\n

Aaron Rai\u2019s win at Aronimink got the story of why he uses iron covers<\/a> recirculating again. The covers are a controversial subject among weekend players and rightfully so\u2014unless one\u2019s game is good enough to play on a pro tour, keep the covers limited to woods and the putter.<\/p>\n

Bob Harig: FACT. I\u2019m fully on board with Rai\u2019s story as to why he uses them, but for the rest of us it\u2019s a bit silly. And if you take a caddie and stick him with those things, you deserve having him kick your ball into the rough. If the irons are place in the bag properly with a towell separating them from the woods, there is no need for covers. And don\u2019t get me started on golf bags with tubes.<\/p>\n

John Pluym: FACT. Let\u2019s go easy on Two Gloves Aaron. Now that he\u2019s a major champion and a very, very rich golfer, he doesn\u2019t need iron covers. He should be able to afford a new pair of irons each week! And I\u2019d love to see him cover his woods with Pappy Van Winkle rye whiskey covers. Now that would be cool.\u00a0 \u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

Jeff Ritter: FACT. There\u2019s a reason Rai\u2019s iron-cover anecdote has caught on, and it\u2019s because iron covers are ridiculous and should not be used by anyone. (No offense to Rai, who is a great story). Covers are for woods and a putter. Let those irons breathe.<\/p>\n

John Schwarb: FICTION. Spend some time on golf message boards and you\u2019ll see how worked up people get about iron covers, and for no good reason if you ask me. Why do people care about what is in other people\u2019s bags? But iron covers can be left behind on a hole as easily as putter\/wood covers and that can slow down play, so Iron Cover Guy needs to stay vigilant while protecting his precious metals.\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

More Golf from Sports Illustrated\"\"Add us as a preferred source on GoogleFollow<\/a>