Roll Back Discussion

[pendodave]

I can see the people getting most upset in our club will be the lady members..

I'd be staggered if the average lady member will notice more than a yard or two difference.
In fact, if they put their minds to it, manufacturers could probably design a ball which goes exactly as far for slow speed players as the current one, while still being conforming for very high swing speeds.

 

[Backache]

I'd be staggered if the average lady member will notice more than a yard or two difference.
In fact, if they put their minds to it, manufacturers could probably design a ball which goes exactly as far for slow speed players as the current one, while still being conforming for very high swing speeds.

My post wasn't about the distance they would lose, it was about the heavier traffic over the forward tees that could ensue.
But on the latter point I don't know how easy it is to design a ball with those characteristics but the current estimate is 5% of distance which for a 160 yd drive would lose about 8 yds which is probably significant.

 

[pendodave]

Exactly what they want to avoid....

Actually, I'm pretty certain they were very happy with bifurcation, but were forced down this path by faux outrage from sponsored Pro golfers and manufacturers.
So they'll give us 10 years of bifurcation, which will be just fine.
I'm curious how many of the chopper 15 handicap "I want to play the same kit as the pros" brigade will be selling off their pro-vs and buying short balls for the sake of the purity of their beliefs...

 

[Backache]

Well it’s funny you should mention that, our course is under the guise of “ protect the course”. With that in mind I sent an email to our Secretary re going straight from the 12th green to the ladies tee on the 13th. It saves you slipping and sliding to the 13th tee. And it is safer. Obviously for roll ups only and not comps. I was told the 13 th ladies is small and it could become a mess. Oh right, sod safety then coz it “ could” be a mess. To make it more amusing we are going from the back nine onto the front nine from Monday. So like the rest of the back nine it would now have a rest. Apart from the weekends when everyone plays 18 Holes.

We're off mats on tees since the second week of November (permanent mats). Last year when you were meant to place a mat on a tee if playing an iron some clearly did not. There was a par 3 tee that looked like a ploughed field.

 

[Backache]

In fact, if they put their minds to it, manufacturers could probably design a ball which goes exactly as far for slow speed players as the current one, while still being conforming for very high swing speeds.

Thinking about it, if it was easy to design why are they not doing it at the moment? I am sure there would be a big market for a ball that for lower club head speeds goes further even though the higher speed remains conforming to the current rule.

 

[wjemather]

My post wasn't about the distance they would lose, it was about the heavier traffic over the forward tees that could ensue.
But on the latter point I don't know how easy it is to design a ball with those characteristics but the current estimate is 5% of distance which for a 160 yd drive would lose about 8 yds which is probably significant.

Anyone who needs to move up a tee as a result of rollback already needs to do so.

Distance loss will not be linear, i.e. it won't be the same % for everyone. Also, it's unlikely that all existing balls will be non-conforming, so there will be no distance loss at all for some/many. Using a new rollback ball is likely to actually increase distance for some, e.g. those playing a ball ill-suited for their clubhead speed, or that is showing signs of age/wear.

 

[wjemather]

Thinking about it, if it was easy to design why are they not doing it at the moment? I am sure there would be a big market for a ball that for lower club head speeds goes further even though the higher speed remains conforming to the current rule.

There are lots of these balls on the market, but many players would rather play a 'tour' ball that doesn't suit them.

 

[Backache]

There are lots of these balls on the market, but many players would rather play a 'tour' ball that doesn't suit them.

Are there? whenever I see ball testing none of the so called distance balls actually have a distance advantage over premium balls at lower clubhead speeds.
Personally I'm not proud and am older with a lower swing speed and would happily accept a ball that offers me greater distance that is not a tour ball , but on testing this ball does not seem to actually exist.

 

[Backache]

Anyone who needs to move up a tee as a result of rollback already needs to do so.

Distance loss will not be linear, i.e. it won't be the same % for everyone. Also, it's unlikely that all existing balls will be non-conforming, so there will be no distance loss at all for some/many. Using a new rollback ball is likely to actually increase distance for some, e.g. those playing a ball ill-suited for their clubhead speed, or that is showing signs of age/wear.

There are a few men who currently use the forward tees at our club but they are a fair bit forward. If the current tees are right for you it suggests that losing 5% the forward tees should then be right the fact that everyone is suddenly losing 5% may well cause an exodus to the forward tees whether not not they 'should' be playing them currently and they simply are not as big and don't have the room to take as large a number as currently use the other tees.

I don't actually think its anyone 'business' to say what tees you should play from unless you are clearly delaying play to the detriment of everyone.

All I can say is the article above suggests it is likely to be linear as far as distance goes. What balls are currently non linear and go further at lower speeds but are conforming?

 

[Mandofred]

I'm curious how many of the chopper 15 handicap "I want to play the same kit as the pros" brigade will be selling off their pro-vs and buying short balls for the sake of the purity of their beliefs...

I'm less than 15 handicap, I'll play the balls I'm legally supposed to play.......because those would be the rules, not because of the "purity". I don't know how many times over the years golfers have tried to claim that they are more honest than other people.....they aren't....they are just normal people afflicted with a horribly costly habit. As far as I've ever noticed.....they cheat about the same as everybody else.

I only play "cheapish" balls.....almost always under £30 a box.

 

[pendodave]

I'm less than 15 handicap, I'll play the balls I'm legally supposed to play.......because those would be the rules, not because of the "purity". I don't know how many times over the years golfers have tried to claim that they are more honest than other people.....they aren't....they are just normal people afflicted with a horribly costly habit. As far as I've ever noticed.....they cheat about the same as everybody else.

I only play "cheapish" balls.....almost always under £30 a box.

I'm talking about the (probably quite lengthy) period when the pros are playing the short ball and the rest of us can carry on regardless.
I'm suggesting that there's been a lot of brouhaha about "playing the same kit", but when the wheel hits the road, no-one will actually care.

 

[Wabinez]

I'm talking about the (probably quite lengthy) period when the pros are playing the short ball and the rest of us can carry on regardless.

2 years…. Not that lengthy.

if they make the new ball available in 2028, I’ll switch immediately. I doubt there will be much difference, or at least not the damage some on here think will happen

 

[D-S]

How is the roll back achieved? Is it, for example, by compression or dimple pattern? Will it change the spin characteristics? I assume it has to be a very common feature as all manufacturers have their own, I assume protected, tweaks that give them their USPs.

 

[Swango1980]

I hate being cynical but this smacks of a sop to the manufacturers to allow them to sell more conforming balls as people will have to trash their stocks of the old stuff.

There are 10's of millions of balls out there - by shares in Titleist, Bridgestone, etc.

Thing is, even on the date of any rule change to golf balls, every course will have thousands of lost balls littered all over them. Bushes, ponds, etc. Golfers will continue to find these balls for months, if not years later. No chance these golfers will bin the balls, many will stuff them in their bag and use them for future use.

 

[Wabinez]

How is the roll back achieved? Is it, for example, by compression or dimple pattern? Will it change the spin characteristics? I assume it has to be a very common feature as all manufacturers have their own, I assume protected, tweaks that give them their USPs.

I imagine dimple patterns, core makeups, maybe materials.

drag co-efficiency will be played with. increase drag at higher speeds, but make it less draggy at lower speeds.

manufacturers will have some clever people working on it already

 

[Slab]

Thought it through now, I think the R&A/USGA should fund a 'buyback' scheme

We not only get to trade in the non conforming balls we have but also folks will search out the ones lost on courses to trade in

Players benifit, ruling bodies get quicker/easier transition, manufacturers sell more conforming balls and better for environmental

Win win win win

Edit PIF could sponsor it, they'd be heros

 

[Backache]

How is the roll back achieved? Is it, for example, by compression or dimple pattern? Will it change the spin characteristics? I assume it has to be a very common feature as all manufacturers have their own, I assume protected, tweaks that give them their USPs.

I imagine it will be entirely up to the manufacturer how it is achieved. The specification is as I understand it entirely about the distance the ball travels on the authorities testing machine at a given club head speed. They suggestion is that they are not actually changing the distance the ball travels but using a higher clubhead speed on the test.

 

[Backsticks]

I'd be staggered if the average lady member will notice more than a yard or two difference.

And seriously, who plays golf to the accuracy of a yard or two ?

So they will notice no difference.

 

[Backsticks]

Thought it through now, I think the R&A/USGA should fund a 'buyback' scheme

We not only get to trade in the non conforming balls we have but also folks will search out the ones lost on courses to trade in

Players benifit, ruling bodies get quicker/easier transition, manufacturers sell more conforming balls and better for environmental

Win win win win

Edit PIF could sponsor it, they'd be heros

No need for buy back. There will be a very long lead in to this for us. The same as the change to 1.68", or 0.83 drivers. Nothing is happening over night. This is a move for the long term, and there is no hurry with the phase in.
There will be 5 years or something for tge likes of us.

 

[Imurg]

Reducing compression is one way to reduce distance.
A softer ball, at high speeds, goes less distance.
That's shown in tests.
But lower compression balls tend to spin less so could reduce that gap.
A lower compression ball that spins more when hit harder sounds like an option.
It would make little difference to 99% of golfers.

You'd get as much difference from a poor strike or 2 or 3 mph difference in swing speed.