Roll Back Discussion

[Orikoru]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1642626820724908036

Exactly what I thought would happen. There's no chance they'll bother with it. The whole thing is only to protect a couple of Open courses and Augusta anyway, it's rubbish. Wouldn't be surprised if it never happens.


Should we remove the "tomorrow?" part from the topic title now? Tomorrow never comes...

 

[Mel Smooth]

Exactly what I thought would happen. There's no chance they'll bother with it. The whole thing is only to protect a couple of Open courses and Augusta anyway, it's rubbish. Wouldn't be surprised if it never happens.


Should we remove the "tomorrow?" part from the topic title now? Tomorrow never comes...

I was debating this subject on Twitter on Saturday, somebody was bemoaning Par 5’s that the top guys were reaching in two shots. I suggested it might be easier to turn them into par 4’s rather than reinventing the wheel. I didn’t get a response….

 

[Orikoru]

I was debating this subject on Twitter on Saturday, somebody was bemoaning Par 5’s that the top guys were reaching in two shots. I suggested it might be easier to turn them into par 4’s rather than reinventing the wheel. I didn’t get a response….

Agree. If they're hitting the par 5s with a driver and an 8/9 iron now, the roll-back just means they'll be hitting them with a driver and a 6/7 iron instead. Not really much difference. As you say, just change the parameters so only 580+ yard holes are par 5s or something. The course will be a par 70 instead of a 72 - so what?

 

[Backsticks]

I was debating this subject on Twitter on Saturday, somebody was bemoaning Par 5’s that the top guys were reaching in two shots. I suggested it might be easier to turn them into par 4’s rather than reinventing the wheel. I didn’t get a response….

Turning them into par 4s is not a solution. The problem isnt what par we call holes, it is the play of the hole.
Par 4s should present a range of shots, from pw to 5w as second shot, and par 5 design should present drive, fairway wood, and anything from 9i to short pitch spread across the 14 driving holes. Different tees take account of different playing levels (effectively how far you hit it - direct correlation), so that the above broadly applies.
The problem with the longer equipment 20 years ago is that it has spoiled that. The variety had been lost.
The shorter the ball, the better courses could retain their fundamental design across abilities. 40 or 50 yard tee gaps sufficed. The longer the equipment, the less the course can be adapted, and, the more space it needs to try to adapt.
Every one is a loser.
Ball back to 170yds for 20 something hc, and 260ish for the Rory and Brysons, and the game is better for everyone.

 

[Mel Smooth]

Turning them into par 4s is not a solution. The problem isnt what par we call holes, it is the play of the hole.
Par 4s should present a range of shots, from pw to 5w as second shot, and par 5 design should present drive, fairway wood, and anything from 9i to short pitch spread across the 14 driving holes. Different tees take account of different playing levels (effectively how far you hit it - direct correlation), so that the above broadly applies.
The problem with the longer equipment 20 years ago is that it has spoiled that. The variety had been lost.
The shorter the ball, the better courses could retain their fundamental design across abilities. 40 or 50 yard tee gaps sufficed. The longer the equipment, the less the course can be adapted, and, the more space it needs to try to adapt.
Every one is a loser.
Ball back to 170yds for 20 something hc, and 260ish for the Rory and Brysons, and the game is better for everyone.

Absolute nonsense.

 

[Orikoru]

Turning them into par 4s is not a solution. The problem isnt what par we call holes, it is the play of the hole.
Par 4s should present a range of shots, from pw to 5w as second shot, and par 5 design should present drive, fairway wood, and anything from 9i to short pitch spread across the 14 driving holes. Different tees take account of different playing levels (effectively how far you hit it - direct correlation), so that the above broadly applies.
The problem with the longer equipment 20 years ago is that it has spoiled that. The variety had been lost.
The shorter the ball, the better courses could retain their fundamental design across abilities. 40 or 50 yard tee gaps sufficed. The longer the equipment, the less the course can be adapted, and, the more space it needs to try to adapt.
Every one is a loser.
Ball back to 170yds for 20 something hc, and 260ish for the Rory and Brysons, and the game is better for everyone.

Firstly, par 5s haven't been that in the pro game for a long, long time. Secondly your distances in the last line are pie in the sky. They're not going to do anything that brings distances back that much. You'd have to give them a ball made out of cork.

I don't know why people cry over par 5s continually being reached in two shots - the par doesn't matter that much, it's just another golf hole they're trying to play in the least shots. Change them from a 4 to a 5 and that problem goes away, but instead of a chance of an easy birdie, it's now a tricky par.

 

[D-S]

Firstly, par 5s haven't been that in the pro game for a long, long time. Secondly your distances in the last line are pie in the sky. They're not going to do anything that brings distances back that much. You'd have to give them a ball made out of cork.

I don't know why people cry over par 5s continually being reached in two shots - the par doesn't matter that much, it's just another golf hole they're trying to play in the least shots. Change them from a 4 to a 5 and that problem goes away, but instead of a chance of an easy birdie, it's now a tricky par.

Isn’t that what they always (or very often) do in the US Open? I seem to recall that it is frequently par 70, the reason given is that it is to ‘protect par’ whatever that means.

 

[Imurg]

Firstly, par 5s haven't been that in the pro game for a long, long time. Secondly your distances in the last line are pie in the sky. They're not going to do anything that brings distances back that much. You'd have to give them a ball made out of cork.

I don't know why people cry over par 5s continually being reached in two shots - the par doesn't matter that much, it's just another golf hole they're trying to play in the least shots. Change them from a 4 to a 5 and that problem goes away, but instead of a chance of an easy birdie, it's now a tricky par.

The first at Wentworth is a par 5 for the Plebs but a par 4 for the Pros...

 

[Orikoru]

Isn’t that what they always (or very often) do in the US Open? I seem to recall that it is frequently par 70, the reason given is that it is to ‘protect par’ whatever that means.

Yeah I've definitely seen it in plenty of majors already. Ultimately just a small change and helps prevent the scores looking ridiculous. Some people seem to hate it when certain players are 20 under par or whatever.

 

[Backsticks]

Firstly, par 5s haven't been that in the pro game for a long, long time. Secondly your distances in the last line are pie in the sky. They're not going to do anything that brings distances back that much. You'd have to give them a ball made out of cork.

I don't know why people cry over par 5s continually being reached in two shots - the par doesn't matter that much, it's just another golf hole they're trying to play in the least shots. Change them from a 4 to a 5 and that problem goes away, but instead of a chance of an easy birdie, it's now a tricky par.

A par 5 being reached in 2, is a par 4. Thats the problem.
The majority of par 4s, being reached with a wedge second, leaves the game the poorer. Thats the problem.

 

[Orikoru]

A par 5 being reached in 2, is a par 4. Thats the problem.
The majority of par 4s, being reached with a wedge second, leaves the game the poorer. Thats the problem.

So call it a par 4. First problem solved!
Second one I don't think is a problem. They still have to hit that green and hole the putt, plenty of them don't.

 

[Backsticks]

The point is being missed. A par 5 is a three shotter. Not a long two shotter. The issue is not what par you call it, nor the sum par of a course. It is how holes are played.
Golf is best if it truly had three or 4 three shotters. And a variety of par 4s according to length of second shot.

 

[Orikoru]

The point is being missed. A par 5 is a three shotter. Not a long two shotter. The issue is not what par you call it, nor the sum par of a course. It is how holes are played.
Golf is best if it truly had three or 4 three shotters. And a variety of par 4s according to length of second shot.

I know what it means, I'm just saying it doesn't matter. It makes no difference if everyone reaches the par 5 into, they're competing against one another, not against the par. The game has changed, just because a hole is a par 5 from birth 100 years ago, doesn't mean it is by today's standards. If 90% of the field can reach it in two then it might as well be a par 4. They're not playing Stableford or a Bogey comp so it doesn't matter what you call it. Par is relevant to us hackers but it's not really relevant to the pros. A genuine par 5 to them would be a par 6 for me!

 

[wjemather]

I know what it means, I'm just saying it doesn't matter. It makes no difference if everyone reaches the par 5 into, they're competing against one another, not against the par. The game has changed, just because a hole is a par 5 from birth 100 years ago, doesn't mean it is by today's standards. If 90% of the field can reach it in two then it might as well be a par 4. They're not playing Stableford or a Bogey comp so it doesn't matter what you call it. Par is relevant to us hackers but it's not really relevant to the pros. A genuine par 5 to them would be a par 6 for me!

It only doesn't matter if you want to see golf played without obstacles, and elite golf reduced to a long (accuracy optional) drive, pitch/chip and putt contest (which many PGA Tour events already are).

There are several things to consider, not just the obvious difference between reaching the green with a 5/6 iron or a wedge. Holes are designed to present certain challenges at certain distances; greens designed to be approached with a mid-long iron have different features to those designed to be approached with a short iron or wedge; green complexes for short par 5s are generally designed to be much more challenging than those for long par 4s; etc.

With the ball travelling so far, the designed challenges of many courses have been neutered, even for mid-low handicap amateur players but especially for elite players. Without major renovations (extending tees, redesigning bunkers, fairways, greens, tree/bush positioning, etc.) these courses remain pale imitations of their former selves. These kind of course changes are unsustainable on a large scale; but reducing the distance the ball goes in order to suit the playing fields is not.

 

[Backsticks]

Absolute nonsense.

Thats a pretty weak reply. Can you back up, or give reasons justifying your disagreement.

 

[Mel Smooth]

Thats a pretty weak reply. Can you back up, or give reasons justifying your disagreement.

Yeah I can - I've got a 13 year old who wants to hit the ball as far as he possibly can, if I told him he was hitting it too far, and some old dudes are going to change the rules so that his drives drop below 200 yards, he'd have mixed emotions of disappointment, frustration, and resentment to the people that made those changes.


I'd feel exactly the same. I honestly do not give one of Augusta is getting overpowered, or if a few misty eyed people want to see Rory hitting a long iron into a green - it's a ridiculous notion that the entire game should regress because of a view of a very, very small minority. Anyway, it ain't happening on LIV, which is great news because if LIV stick two fingers up to the idea, the ball technology will remain in place to the mortals.

 

[Backsticks]

Yeah I can - I've got a 13 year old who wants to hit the ball as far as he possibly can, if I told him he was hitting it too far, and some old dudes are going to change the rules so that his drives drop below 200 yards, he'd have mixed emotions of disappointment, frustration, and resentment to the people that made those changes.


I'd feel exactly the same. I honestly do not give one of Augusta is getting overpowered, or if a few misty eyed people want to see Rory hitting a long iron into a green - it's a ridiculous notion that the entire game should regress because of a view of a very, very small minority. Anyway, it ain't happening on LIV, which is great news because if LIV stick two fingers up to the idea, the ball technology will remain in place to the mortals.

So no real argument then - the views of an 13 year dont really count when adults are making adult decisions for the good of the game - and it is not an issue of Augusta or Rory, but the wider game. You are not alone in missing that element.

And LIV, cripes man, give it a rest for once. You dont have to bring it into every thread.

 

[wjemather]

Yeah I can - I've got a 13 year old who wants to hit the ball as far as he possibly can, if I told him he was hitting it too far, and some old dudes are going to change the rules so that his drives drop below 200 yards, he'd have mixed emotions of disappointment, frustration, and resentment to the people that made those changes.

Irrelevant. The proposed MLR will only apply to elite golf - it will not apply to 99% of amateurs, including your 13yo. And even if it did, someone hitting the ball 200yds would not see any noticeable difference with a rolled-back ball - how could they when they wouldn't notice the difference in distance between a Titleist ProV1 and a Kirkland Signature.

I'd feel exactly the same. I honestly do not give one of Augusta is getting overpowered, or if a few misty eyed people want to see Rory hitting a long iron into a green - it's a ridiculous notion that the entire game should regress because of a view of a very, very small minority. Anyway, it ain't happening on LIV, which is great news because if LIV stick two fingers up to the idea, the ball technology will remain in place to the mortals.

If you just want to see guys smashing that ball anywhere with impunity, long drive contests are probably more your scene (rather than golf). However if you do actually want to watch golf, then something has to change to keep up - and it can't keep on being the courses.

And the players will decide what LIV do - not Feherty the clown trying to hype the product - and those that are in the majors aren't going to want to be adjusting to a different ball for the tournaments that really matter.

 

[Mel Smooth]

So no real argument then - the views of an 13 year dont really count when adults are making adult decisions for the good of the game - and it is not an issue of Augusta or Rory, but the wider game. You are not alone in missing that element.

And LIV, cripes man, give it a rest for once. You dont have to bring ot into every thread.

The views of 13 year old golfers are more important than yours buddy. And I'll talk about what I like, there's a block function for anybody that doesn't want to see my posts.

 

[Crazyface]

The simple answer to the pros whacking the ball miles is to move the bunkers on the courses they play. Put the obstacles where they will hit the ball. Simples.