Roll Back Discussion

D-S said:
So losing distance has no effect at all on handicaps?
Click to expand...
losing distance will have an effect. however, 5 yards here and there will make no discernible difference. Maybe a few decimal places here and there. Amateur choppers aren't going to lose 25 yards overnight.

Distance is still king.
 
wjemather said:
No. Ratings are based on the distances the model scratch and bogey golfers hit the ball, not real-world averages.
Rollback will bring the two closer together again, after years of having a technology-driven difference between them.
Click to expand...
Are you saying Course and Bogey ratings are currently inaccurate, due to the impact of technology?
 
Wabinez said:
losing distance will have an effect. however, 5 yards here and there will make no discernible difference. Maybe a few decimal places here and there. Amateur choppers aren't going to lose 25 yards overnight.

Distance is still king.
Click to expand...
OK 10 yards gain good, 5 yards loss no impact - got it.
 
wjemather said:
No. I'm saying they are based on standards distances for model scratch and bogey golfers.
Click to expand...
What is a standard distance for a scratch and bogey player in the year 2023. What would have been the standard distance, in say, the year 1960? And what will be the standard distance in the future if the technology changes again?

I'm not sure how we can make a big deal about equipment that will go longer or shorter, and then argue it will have no impact on standard distances.
 
Swango1980 said:
What is a standard distance for a scratch and bogey player in the year 2023. What would have been the standard distance, in say, the year 1960? And what will be the standard distance in the future if the technology changes again?

I'm not sure how we can make a big deal about equipment that will go longer or shorter, and then argue it will have no impact on standard distances.
Click to expand...
You seem to be overlooking the key word - "model".
 
Before we all get into a bit of a tizzy, I've played rounds with a whole range of balls from 1.62" Dunlop 65s, through old balatas, to the latest Pro V1, and the ball being used makes very little noticeable difference to my scoring.

All those saying that the game will be ruined by a ball roll-back, or that players will leave the game in droves, or that new players won't be attracted by the new difficult golf (boo-hoo :cry: ) are wrong, completely wrong.

Close the thread.
 
Swango1980 said:
Right. So the handicap system is not really based on reality? They just pick a couple of numbers out of the air, call that the model standard distance, job done.

Sounds like these distances are even more arbitrary than Par :)
Click to expand...
No, they were not plucked out of the air. They are simply not changed on a regular basis due to the immense workload that would create in re-rating courses. Indeed, any change at all would probably necessitate a variance in excess of 20 yards between the model and real-world averages.
 
Crow said:
Before we all get into a bit of a tizzy, I've played rounds with a whole range of balls from 1.62" Dunlop 65s, through old balatas, to the latest Pro V1, and the ball being used makes very little noticeable difference to my scoring.

All those saying that the game will be ruined by a ball roll-back, or that players will leave the game in droves, or that new players won't be attracted by the new difficult golf (boo-hoo :cry: ) are wrong, completely wrong.

Close the thread.
Click to expand...
Spot on
 
Doesn't the effect of the ball change depend entirely on the method used to reduce distance?
If they simply reduced the maximum compression it really wouldn't affect the vast majority of non-elite amateur golfers. ProV1 lovers who aren't really good enough to justify them might even gain a few yards if a slightly softer variant was made.

*I haven't really been following this thread, so there's a massive possibility I'm completely missing the point.
 
I thought the reasoning behind this was to "protect" the integrity of some of the classic courses and prevent them being taken apart by the current professional players. If the average new championship courses are designed to a 8000 yds ish from the back tees then why can't the so-called classics be further lengthened with a set of Championship tees to bring the driving hazards back into play.

Whilst I accept this could be difficult there are many courses where there is land available to do this as Augusta has demonstrated over the years.

Surely this is easier than trying to "slug" the ball with all the problems this will cause.
 
wjemather said:
No, they were not plucked out of the air. They are simply not changed on a regular basis due to the immense workload that would create in re-rating courses. Indeed, any change at all would probably necessitate a variance in excess of 20 yards between the model and real-world averages.
Click to expand...
At least all our handicaps are based on outdated numbers. Very reassuring
 
wjemather said:
They are not outdated; they are current. A model golfer is simply not an average golfer.
If you want to learn about course rating, your county would likely welcome another volunteer.
Click to expand...
And a model golfer is not impacted by technology. A model scratch golfer would hit a ball the same distance now as they would in 1960 and will hit it the same distance if roll back happens. Same with a bogey golfer.

It's intriguing that the system is based on model golfers unaffected by technology.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

HomerJSimpson
Roll Up Group Handicaps
31 32 33
Replies
646
Views
33K
HomerJSimpson
HomerJSimpson
B
Spain (Murcia) October 2025 Trip Report
2
Replies
31
Views
2K
Burnsey
B
Klimski
Honma TW XP-1 driver
Replies
7
Views
639
Orikoru
Orikoru
C
The difficulties in arranging golf holidays for groups. Spain or Portugal or somewhere else. Everyone has different opinions on the golf courses...
2 3
Replies
40
Views
7K
gopher99
G
MarkT
Limiting club length to 46 inches
2
Replies
28
Views
4K
Crow
Crow
Top