Bifurcation......do we or don't we?

[duncan mackie]

Absolutely agree!

After all when we play at a Tour or Open venue we aren't playing from the same tees as the pros and the green speed and pin positions will be different.

If the Tours and rules makers feel that tournament golf can be improved by rule changes then they should go ahead and introduce different rules.

IMO bifurcation will not be detrimental to the recreational golfer

Course set up is generally related to capability and happens at every level all around the world. If anything the UK is massively behind the curve on this because of the historic courses - recent builds in most countries will have some 6 - 10 tees built on everyhole; on many UK courses it's one, with 3 plates on it! If you are competent to play from 7400yd tees with top tour green speeds and pin positions then you will have the opportunity - the reason they aren't set up that way for everyone lies in the 8 hour rounds that would result!

The only rule implemented by the tours, but rarely elsewhere, is the use of TIOs. This is entirely consistent with the fact that they introduce them in the first place!

Hard cards (tour specific local rules) are the same local rules we all use but standardised across all the venues they use. They aren't alone in doing this, and I've even played in societies that do this!

As someone who's had to pick up the pieces over the years when people have acted on their perception of what they saw the pros do (and it must therefore be correct - we all know how this aspect is consistent with golf swings etc!) I can certainly see some detrimental elements. However, my biggest reason not to implement it is that I see no benefit in doing so. On the arguments initially presented the flagstick is applicable to everyone, and what actually happens is yet to be seen. Shouldn't be seen as a reason for bifurcation. The change to the rules on spike marks is almost entirely because of the tours - despite what was posted about soft spikes. Look at the contentious issues that have occurred over the years because of it.

 

[Deleted member 15717]

In short. No.

 

[clubchamp98]

You are not really in a position to believe what I appreciate: I certainly do know that successful tour pros are the best.However, you can't deny, if you regularly watch the televised tour events, that there are quite a few hits made by the players where the ball would have been lost had the only people to be present and watching the ball were those stood on the tee. And if the ball is lost then that is two extra shots- something of a disaster for a pro.

But, keep it lighthearted, it's only a game😀

I do agree with most of this .
It’s why some pros don’t shout fore as they hope someone’s head / body / umbrella or bag will stop the ball .
It’s not the 270yrd shots over water that make the difference ,as most rulings come when you have made a mistake.

Do we need to change the rules in any sport just because the pros are better than us?
The next F1 Grand Prix would be raced in Fiat 500s.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

The next F1 Grand Prix would be raced in Fiat 500s.

Haha! Yes, imagine the tyre changes!

 

[Crow]

To have bifurcation of equipment would be too costly in the eyes of manufacturers and they'd also lose out on promoting/selling the clubs used by their star golfers so it won't happen.

I do think that there should be a shorter ball for Pro/elite amateurs though, the game is a mockery of what it used to be.
The ball can be made available to all players so that should average golfers want to "test themselves against the best" then they can just buy a sleeve or two of shorter Pro-balls for the experience.
But in reality I can't see many average players taking up this as an option as all that most are concerned about is making the game as easy as possible.

In the OP's post there was a comment about help from technology - club golfers may only have got a fractional gain when compared to the top players but it's a big fraction! I'd argue that many older courses are too short for lots of today's golfers.

I've given my opinion on today's equipment many times before but to repeat, I think it got out of hand when we went to steel woods and things have been creeping ever since with multi material/hollow irons etc. Baseball is one of the few sports where bifurcation has occurred and it's wooden bats only for the Major League players.

In the final analysis though, I don't give a hoot (nice mod-safe word there!) about the Pro-game as 1, it's no longer on terrestrial TV and 2, the distances hit are stupid.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

We already have a degree of bifurcation.

For example we can use range finders and GPS devices, these are not allowed on the Tours.

In any event my agreement with the idea of different rules is more about restrictions on equipment than anything else .

Introducing a Tour ball would be a first step in saving us from 8000 yard courses to cope with the "bomb and gouge" brigade, although I am also in favour of courses being set up in more testing ways.

 

[Deleted member 15717]

As someone alluded to earlier...when do amateurs turn to elite amateurs and need to use the new ball? How would that be fair?

If they need to ‘roll back’ the ball then it needs to be for everyone. Even then, the longer hitters now will still be the longer hitters after this.

As it is, technology has helped somewhat...but gym work, nutrition and knowledge has increased, and speed is a skill.
For me, the courses need to be looked at to make it more competitive.

 

[cliveb]

I have often thought but not seen any comment on golf tv ,or elsewhere , on just what score the pros would make if they played the game as we do!
Meaning - No ball spotters on the strategic points on the course: no tv cameras to assist where the ball went:no spectators to do the same ball spotting ,and finding ,and stopping the ball from finding unplayable positions etc.

Indeed. Watching things like The Open, I was struck by the thought that a lot of them would have half a dozen extra shots on their cards if it weren't for the spectators finding balls for them.

The other thing that tour pros seem never to have to put up with is playing out of dodgy bunkers. Their bunkers always seem perfectly manicured and filled with exactly the right amount of nice fluffy sand. I can't remember the last time the bunkers on my home course were remotely like that.

Here's a real life example. A while back Callum Shenkwin played my home course in a charity society, not long after he had come 2nd in the Scottish open. This is a tour pro having to play a typical parkland course set up for amateur golfers. I asked our pro what he expected him to shoot. "Oh, about 59, I guess". He actually scored 75. (Although in his defense I am told he was probably drunk).

 

[shortgame]

Slightly off tack , but I think it relevant in that we are talking about the differences between the pro game and us amateurs game.
I have often thought but not seen any comment on golf tv ,or elsewhere , on just what score the pros would make if they played the game as we do!
Meaning - No ball spotters on the strategic points on the course: no tv cameras to assist where the ball went:no spectators to do the same ball spotting ,and finding ,and stopping the ball from finding unplayable positions etc.
I reckon that pros hitting 300 yd drives "off piste " would be hard put to find their ball alone, so easily, and 3 off the tee would be a lot more common.
So, maybe 3 or 4 more shots per round?
What do you think?😀

Well bearing in mind they generally turn Pro off +4 or +5 or more I don't think they'd struggle on a standard course!

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I think the biggest problem with the toughen the course argument is these are still largely members courses for the remainder of the year and by growing lush rough, tightening the fairways extra bunkering etc may make it much harder and therefore less enjoyable for them in the run up and after the event. Also, it would cost extra money to grow the rough higher (watering, feeding the grass, etc) and I'm not sure how much of that cost would be reimbursed by the tour back to the club, if at all.

I am all in favour of a pro only ball and really don't see how that would really divide the pro/elite amateur game and the one the rest of us play. I think that is a much easier, less expensive (for the host course) and more long term solution.

 

[Grant85]

Course set up is generally related to capability and happens at every level all around the world. If anything the UK is massively behind the curve on this because of the historic courses - recent builds in most countries will have some 6 - 10 tees built on everyhole;

Reading Tom Coyne’s book, A Course Called Scotland, he documents many courses that are a Tom Morris layout but updated by James Braid at a later date and often someone else further down the line. Clearly they maybe didn’t quite have the same sentimentality to their course or realise the significance of an Old Tom course when they hired someone to make changes (albeit the changes may often have been extending a 9 or 12 holes to 18)

I think courses shouldn’t be afraid to tweak certain holes or redesign certain sections if it has proper architectural merit. Ideally done with an architect who will put his name on it. Clearly when most U.K. courses were laid out, there wasn’t much in the way of earth moving equipment and most courses will have blind holes and / or weaker holes that are simply a way of getting from that area of the property to another.

However biggest issue with this is resource and there simply isn’t a business case in most respects, even if it would radically improve a course.

Both the Old Course and Augusta have changes made over the years, but these certainly aren’t widely publicised. Why is it so acceptable to move a tee 25 yards back but absolute sacrilege to move or reshape a green or add / remove bunkers?

 

[Hobbit]

I think before we say that the game needs changing to accommodate the ability of pro's we need to look at what the winning scores are. Are pro's murdering championship courses, or are the winning scores pretty much the same as they were 40+years ago?

And then there's the argument of do spectators want to see birdies and eagles or pars winning comps? Do they want to see 300+yd drives or 250yd drives? And do amateurs want to be able to relate to pro's using the same equipment?

Let the pro's carry on as they are, and let the winning scores be what they will be. Lets be honest, with the yardages of most championship courses, most of the field in any competition isn't murdering the course.

 

[Spear-Chucker]

I don’t like the idea of needing bifurcation but think we absolutely do need it for the pro game. Sick of courses being made irrelevant by boring ‘bomb and gauge golf’ and I’d introduce a pro only ball.

Pro’s haven’t played a game like ours for a long time, where everything in their world is optimised - swing, clubs, ball, diet, fitness, routines, course, greens, bunkers, etc etc and it needs reigning in or compensating for badly if the appetite is there for some degree of parity.

 

[Deleted member 18588]

And do amateurs want to be able to relate to pro's using the same equipment

But is that not one of the great myths of modern golf, certainly as far as the very top players are concerned.

No matter what is stamped on the sole of their clubs neither you nor I could purchase the same.

 

[Blue in Munich]

I think before we say that the game needs changing to accommodate the ability of pro's we need to look at what the winning scores are. Are pro's murdering championship courses, or are the winning scores pretty much the same as they were 40+years ago?

And then there's the argument of do spectators want to see birdies and eagles or pars winning comps? Do they want to see 300+yd drives or 250yd drives? And do amateurs want to be able to relate to pro's using the same equipment?

Let the pro's carry on as they are, and let the winning scores be what they will be. Lets be honest, with the yardages of most championship courses, most of the field in any competition isn't murdering the course.

I want to see skill & finesse Brian. I loved the likes of Faldo, Norman & Seve, Trevino and Watson from a previous era, who could work the ball every way, plot their way round the course. It always surprises me to see the way T20 cricket is panned on this forum as appealing to the lowest common denominator whereas bomb & gouge golf seems to be deemed perfectly acceptable. The current race for distance will see more & more classically designed courses made redundant in my opinion.

 

[Homer]

When they are good enough to play in events like the Brabazon Trophy, Amateur Championship etc;

So if I’m not quite good enough yet but

But is that not one of the great myths of modern golf, certainly as far as the very top players are concerned.

No matter what is stamped on the sole of their clubs neither you nor I could purchase the same.

Oh please get in the real world. Have you ever looked at a run of the mill pro’s clubs? Same clubs just custome fit better.

 

[richart]

What is bifurcation ??? Never heard of it, but it sounds horribly American.

 

[Blue in Munich]

So if I’m not quite good enough yet but


Oh please get in the real world. Have you ever looked at a run of the mill pro’s clubs? Same clubs just custome fit better.

Someone needs to get in the real world and it's not MM...

 

[Homer]

Someone needs to get in the real world and it's not MM...

Do we have some examples then please? Tour choppers and not Rory please - thanks.

 

[Hobbit]

I want to see skill & finesse Brian. I loved the likes of Faldo, Norman & Seve, Trevino and Watson from a previous era, who could work the ball every way, plot their way round the course. It always surprises me to see the way T20 cricket is panned on this forum as appealing to the lowest common denominator whereas bomb & gouge golf seems to be deemed perfectly acceptable. The current race for distance will see more & more classically designed courses made redundant in my opinion.

We saw bomb and gouge beaten in the Ryder Cup with the current rules and a course set up to reward good play. But why can't there be a few bomber's holes and a few holes tightened up at bomber's distance? Why can't length be rewarded, it is after all a skill?

Yes put a limit to technology, and to a certain extent its already there with MOI limits, club size limits and ball limits. However, I'm quite happy to see a Dustin Johnson bomb it over a bunker. Its when every pro can do it that there's a problem.