• We'd like to take this opportunity to wish you a Happy Holidays and a very Merry Christmas from all at Golf Monthly. Thank you for sharing your 2025 with us!

Increased distance - Golf Balls vs Club Technology?

delc said:
Does hitting the ball an extra 30 yards really make golf a more pleasurable sport? I would suggest not as it is all relative. As a late teenager I could hit the ball about 250 yards with a wooden headed driver and that was considered quite long at the time. The course I played on was well under 6000 yards. Rounds were just as much fun and a lot quicker! :)
Click to expand...

Are you going to answer the points people, including myself, have made above or just go off on another tangent.
 
Last edited:
delc said:
As a late teenager I could hit the ball about 250 yards with a wooden headed driver and that was considered quite long at the time.
Click to expand...

Still is. Hell, if you were to quote that as your average drive now, a lot of people on this forum wouldn't believe you!
 
delc said:
Does hitting the ball an extra 30 yards really make golf a more pleasurable sport?
Click to expand...

Just hitting it further (assuming you are not hitting it further into the rough every time) will make it more rewarding, and therefore more pleasurable a lot of the time. Especially for the vast majority of golfers who play for fun.

But the modern clubs are also a lot more forgiving and make it easier to get the ball airborne. So if the game, especially golf which lets face it is a very difficult game, is made easier for everyone by the use of more forgiving clubs that may also hit it further, then I would say by definition it becomes more pleasurable as well.

Of course you can go to extremes and say why not make the hole 5 foot wide as that will make it easier. But you need a common sense compromise, and changing clubs back to what they were 20 years ago thus making the ball harder to hit does not seem to make any sense whatsoever.
 
delc said:
Does hitting the ball an extra 30 yards really make golf a more pleasurable sport?
Click to expand...

Too bleedin' right it does!

And you are contradicting yourself - again! 250 yard Drive would make getting on a 400 yard Par 4 quite easy (6 iron max).

Stop living in the past and move forward with the game! Speaking of moving forward.... it should take less than 10 minutes to walk the 800 yards or so difference in length between then (mid sixties!) and now! If you take longer, you should quit the game!
 
Gil_Emott said:
Still is. Hell, if you were to quote that as your average drive now, a lot of people on this forum wouldn't believe you!
Click to expand...

I was still winning long driving prizes in my 40's and 50's, but alas no more! My swing seems to have got a lot shorter due to loss of flexibility and strength. Even with modern equipment the best I can manage is 220 - 230 yards. However on a proportional basis I have lost a lot more distance with my irons. 7-iron down from 150 to 125 yards!
 
delc said:
I was still winning long driving prizes in my 40's and 50's, but alas no more! My swing seems to have got a lot shorter due to loss of flexibility and strength. Even with modern equipment the best I can manage is 220 - 230 yards. However on a proportional basis I have lost a lot more distance with my irons. 7-iron down from 150 to 125 yards!
Click to expand...

You really don't think this through do you.

You have lost 20 to 30 yds on your drives, hit your 7i shorter than you did before yet you still advocate changing technology so that drives go 30yds(ish) less and you think this will speed up play and be just as enjoyable :confused:
 
HawkeyeMS said:
You really don't think this through do you.

You have lost 20 to 30 yds on your drives, hit your 7i shorter than you did before yet you still advocate changing technology so that drives go 30yds(ish) less and you think this will speed up play and be just as enjoyable :confused:
Click to expand...


No problem if the tees are moved forward a few yards to compensate! Allegedly, modern three or four piece golf balls are more beneficial to long hitters in terms of added length than short hitters. Would people accept a ball where this wasn't the case, i.e. long hitters lose a lot of length but short hitters lose very little, if this is technically feasible? :)
 
delc said:
No problem if the tees are moved forward a few yards to compensate! Allegedly, modern three or four piece golf balls are more beneficial to long hitters in terms of added length than short hitters. Would people accept a ball where this wasn't the case, i.e. long hitters lose a lot of length but short hitters lose very little, if this is technically feasible? :)
Click to expand...
That would be related to compression... And it's easily possible, but if you make the effort to become a fast swinger should you be penalised? We all start with the same some just go off and work on it, you can take different approaches but you can end up in the same place.... Basically figure out a strategy, work on it and get the result.
 
"It seems to be a commonly held belief that the longest hitters get some additional benefit from modern balls. In fact, hitting golf balls obeys the law of diminishing returns, namely for each mile per hour of added swing speed a slower golfer gains more distance than a high swing speed golfer, like Bubba Watson. The longest hitters have to combat additional losses due to extra compression and also overcome greater drag forces; as well as needing to keep the ball closer to the target line."


http://www.randa.org/en/RandA/News/News/2013/May/Drive-Distance.aspx

Might explain 5 hour rounds as well ;)
 
delc said:
No problem if the tees are moved forward a few yards to compensate! Allegedly, modern three or four piece golf balls are more beneficial to long hitters in terms of added length than short hitters. Would people accept a ball where this wasn't the case, i.e. long hitters lose a lot of length but short hitters lose very little, if this is technically feasible? :)
Click to expand...

Tees moved forward to compensate. To where. My club has several holes where entirely new tees would need built. We can't afford that. Do you ever think anything through????
 
EuanRoss said:
Tees moved forward to compensate. To where. My club has several holes where entirely new tees would need built. We can't afford that. Do you ever think anything through????
Click to expand...
Does your club always position the tee markers right at the front edges of the teeing areas then? Ours doesn't! :)
 
delc said:
Does your club always position the tee markers right at the front edges of the teeing areas then? Ours doesn't! :)
Click to expand...
Neither does mine but we'd have to put them at the front all the time and I think that would have wear and tear issues. Also we have some quite small island kinda tees. Never mind though, we'll just build loads of new ones and go out of business to please you.
 
EuanRoss said:
Neither does mine but we'd have to put them at the front all the time and I think that would have wear and tear issues. Also we have some quite small island kinda tees. Never mind though, we'll just build loads of new ones and go out of business to please you.
Click to expand...

A lot of clubs have added extra back tees over the years to lengthen the course. These could just revert to their original tees! :)
 
BTatHome said:
What's the point ? Reduce how far the ball goes then move the tees up to compensate?
Click to expand...
New courses could be built shorter. Many existing short courses would become more of a test again. If courses can't be shortened for any reason, then increase the SSS. Simples! :)
 
delc said:
Allegedly, modern three or four piece golf balls are more beneficial to long hitters in terms of added length than short hitters. Would people accept a ball where this wasn't the case, i.e. long hitters lose a lot of length but short hitters lose very little, if this is technically feasible? :)
Click to expand...

So you would penalise those with the talent and wherewithal to hit the ball longer. That's simply unfair! Though they are already 'suffering' by having to be more accurate!

Utterly ridiculous!

It's up to the Short hitters to either get longer or be better in other areas!

Luke Donald was certainly able to get to #1 and he was by no means a Long Hitter - though far 'less Short' than most think.

And the following would seem to disprove your assertion anyway!

palindromicbob said:
"It seems to be a commonly held belief that the longest hitters get some additional benefit from modern balls. In fact, hitting golf balls obeys the law of diminishing returns, namely for each mile per hour of added swing speed a slower golfer gains more distance than a high swing speed golfer, like Bubba Watson. The longest hitters have to combat additional losses due to extra compression and also overcome greater drag forces; as well as needing to keep the ball closer to the target line."


http://www.randa.org/en/RandA/News/News/2013/May/Drive-Distance.aspx
Click to expand...

So .... Wrong again!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

T
Balls
15 16 17
Replies
338
Views
14K
Tashyboy
Tashyboy
Klimski
Honma TW-U
Replies
2
Views
345
Klimski
Klimski
Klimski
Honma TW XP-1 driver
Replies
7
Views
697
Orikoru
Orikoru
B
Spain (Murcia) October 2025 Trip Report
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
Burnsey
B
bighairydel
Best colour ball for short sightedness
Replies
16
Views
2K
inc0gnito
inc0gnito
Top