Roll Back Discussion

[Backache]

And there's the problem with this whole issue...
Not having a go at you but "if it's 5%" .....do we know that?
Is it 5% for the Pros but next to nothing for us?
We don't know....

I agree we don't know It may vary but at the moment as far as I can see there are a lot of clubs marketed for older people with slower swing speeds but not a lot of balls and when I see ball tests conducted by the likes of my golf spy, longer balls appear to be longer through all swing speeds though launch angle and peak height may vary a bit so I suspect the longer ball for the slower swing speed golfer at the moment is a bit mythical.

 

[Imurg]

I agree we don't know It may vary but at the moment as far as I can see there are a lot of clubs marketed for older people with slower swing speeds but not a lot of balls and when I see ball tests conducted by the likes of my golf spy, longer balls appear to be longer through all swing speeds though launch angle and peak height may vary a bit so I suspect the longer ball for the slower swing speed golfer at the moment is a bit mythical.

As far as I know most balls out there go a similar distance at the test speed - maybe with exception of the really squishy balls.

 

[Backache]

As far as I know most balls out there go a similar distance at the test speed - maybe with exception of the really squishy balls.

I agree and it seem similar at all swing speeds, my point is that at the moment we don't appear to have a ball which gives an advantage at lower clubhead speeds though it would be a real selling point if this could currently be done and as it isn't I am not sure why we should expect one under altered rules.

Incidentally I may well be wrong, I claim no expertise but that is my current reading from all the independent reviews I've read.

 

[Mel Smooth]

Expand? To you? What's the point?

I’ve asked the same question to multiple people today mate. If you can’t give me an honest answer, fair enough - most of the others struggled as well.

If you feel like you can justify the proposed changes against the will of most golfers, I’d love to discuss it.

 

[Mandofred]

I’ve asked the same question to multiple people today mate. If you can’t give me an honest answer, fair enough - most of the others struggled as well.

If you feel like you can justify the proposed changes against the will of most golfers, I’d love to discuss it.

I'll take a shot at it

-Modern golfers hit it further.....classic courses from years gone are being overpowered by the modern game. True? or not?
-These classic courses at times, cannot expand further without buying homes (possibly yours?) etc.
-Is it worth saving these classic courses?
-Should all golf courses be shut down and move into the country and buy 10,000acres so the people who love monster trucks can see what they want....violent action?
-Is hitting a ball further the main/only thing to admire in golf?

I ask you a question. If the ball will cut 5% from EVERYBODIES shots (drives, wedges etc.)....how does that ruin golf? Can't see it. It's golf, you still have to hit the shot you are trying to hit. That to me is my goal......it's 130yds to the pin....bring out the xxxx club....can I do it? Isn't that the goal of golf for MOST people? MOST people don't hit it 330yds..... Why is hitting it further the only goal you have? Why are you so fixated on distance? I might have a car that can drive 130mph (I don't)....it doesn't mean I have to drive it that fast.

Against what most golfers want.....might be true....might not be. Too early to tell, and if you pick the articles that support your point of view......well, you will be told only what you are looking for.

Now....after all that. I think there are things they could do that might solve the problem without cutting back the ball. Fairways left with longer grass....an extra half inch would cut roll quite a bit. The few times I watch a few minutes of golf....I can't believe how far the ball rolls.....not like where I play. Rough that is nasty enough to make even the pro's weep from fear. Make offline shots be a real penalty. Make the pro's find their own ball.....THAT would be hilarious. The real world. Edit: but there are a lot of people who only want to see how far the ball can be hit. That's it....just the boom.

Everything is a compromise. I don't think there is one answer. For some reason, you are fixated on distance. It isn't all about how big your putter is (wink wink)...

 

[clubchamp98]

I'll take a shot at it

-Modern golfers hit it further.....classic courses from years gone are being overpowered by the modern game. True? or not?
-These classic courses at times, cannot expand further without buying homes (possibly yours?) etc.
-Is it worth saving these classic courses?
-Should all golf courses be shut down and move into the country and buy 10,000acres so the people who love monster trucks can see what they want....violent action?
-Is hitting a ball further the main/only thing to admire in golf?

I ask you a question. If the ball will cut 5% from EVERYBODIES shots (drives, wedges etc.)....how does that ruin golf? Can't see it. It's golf, you still have to hit the shot you are trying to hit. That to me is my goal......it's 130yds to the pin....bring out the xxxx club....can I do it? Isn't that the goal of golf for MOST people? MOST people don't hit it 330yds..... Why is hitting it further the only goal you have? Why are you so fixated on distance? I might have a car that can drive 130mph (I don't)....it doesn't mean I have to drive it that fast.

Against what most golfers want.....might be true....might not be. Too early to tell, and if you pick the articles that support your point of view......well, you will be told only what you are looking for.

Now....after all that. I think there are things they could do that might solve the problem without cutting back the ball. Fairways left with longer grass....an extra half inch would cut roll quite a bit. The few times I watch a few minutes of golf....I can't believe how far the ball rolls.....not like where I play. Rough that is nasty enough to make even the pro's weep from fear. Make offline shots be a real penalty. Make the pro's find their own ball.....THAT would be hilarious. The real world.

Everything is a compromise. I don't think there is one answer. For some reason, you are fixated on distance. It isn't all about how big your putter is (wink wink)...

It is worth saving these classic courses but!!

They are only under threat from the pros.

I don’t know many am golfers that can overpower a golf course,.

Maybe a referendum of club golfers to ask us. Anyone who pays affiliation fees!

They always go well.

 

[SteveW86]

I take much more satisfaction in hitting a short iron wedge very close than I do hitting a long drive

 

[Deleted member 29109]

A lot of fuss because some people wish is was the 60s and the R&A suits not liking the old course being made irrelevant. They should leave things as they are and leave the Old Course to milk money from amateurs then take The Open to some of the much better courses available.

 

[mikejohnchapman]

One interesting point is how is this going to be policed?

The move from 1.62 to 1.68 was fairly obvious to all concerned.
The groove change was completely opaque, people even use groove tools which often make the club non-conforming but impossible to check outside a manufacturer's facility.

Is there going to be a starter / Rules Official on the first tee inspecting what people are playing with? Even then what about the 2nd hole, 3rd hole etc.

 

[Crow]

One interesting point is how is this going to be policed?

The move from 1.62 to 1.68 was fairly obvious to all concerned.
The groove change was completely opaque, people even use groove tools which often make the club non-conforming but impossible to check outside a manufacturer's facility.

Is there going to be a starter / Rules Official on the first tee inspecting what people are playing with? Even then what about the 2nd hole, 3rd hole etc.

I imagine that it'll be a simple matter of the new balls being new models, with maybe even a mark saying 2028 conforming or whatever, no difficulty in policing that.

 

[Crow]

Here's a question for all the anti-rollback people, would you consider creating a breakaway rules body and a "Golf2" type of thing?

There's nothing stopping you, you could run your own competitions etc.

In fact you could go even further by removing all distance limits and restrictions on clubs too, as some seem to wish?

It's not as daft as it sounds and would be a good way of proving that most golfers don't want rollback.

GO FOR IT!

 

[Doon frae Troon]

The change to the 1.68" ball was such a long and drawn-out affair that by the time the 1.62" ball was made illegal for all (1990) just about everyone was playing the 1.68" already.

Surprised it was that long [24 years ?]
I don't recall being able to buy 1.62 balls from the early 1970's

 

[wjemather]

If its 5% that's about 11 yds of an amateur drive not 5 yds.
Equivalent of increasing a course from 6000 to 6300 yds.
I suspect we will notice but will adapt and most handicaps will drift up a stroke or so.

Only if every shot it flushed, which it isn't; not for scratch players, or even tour pros.

It's certainly not going to make any difference to anyone's air shots, fats, tops, shanks, bad mishits, water balls, OBs, lost balls, duffed chips, etc. or give anyone the yips - i.e. all the things that actually make a difference to handicaps.

Only the very best players will notice anything. Everyone else simply isn't consistent enough.

 

[Crow]

Surprised it was that long [24 years ?]
I don't recall being able to buy 1.62 balls from the early 1970's

There's a YouTube video about it made by someone wishing it was still the 1960s.

 

[Backache]

Only if every shot it flushed, which it isn't; not for scratch players, or even tour pros.

It's certainly not going to make any difference to anyone's air shots, fats, tops, shanks, bad mishits, water balls, OBs, lost balls, duffed chips, etc. or give anyone the yips - i.e. all the things that actually make a difference to handicaps.

Only the very best players will notice anything. Everyone else simply isn't consistent enough.

Well it clearly won't make a difference to air shots. However will an off centre hit go the same distance with each ball?
To what extent does it need to be off centre?
I know virtually no golfers for whom an air shot is part of their armamentarium, nor do I know any golfer who flushes it all the time including professionals when they are honest .
But why does a mishit go exactly the same distance with different balls but a flushed hit go different distances?
Lots of things make up handicap and I certainly am not a party to the distance is all but it is certainly part of the equation of golfing success.

 

[Mel Smooth]

Here's a question for all the anti-rollback people, would you consider creating a breakaway rules body and a "Golf2" type of thing?

There's nothing stopping you, you could run your own competitions etc.

In fact you could go even further by removing all distance limits and restrictions on clubs too, as some seem to wish?

It's not as daft as it sounds and would be a good way of proving that most golfers don't want rollback.

GO FOR IT!

I’d be 100% behind it

 

[Backsticks]

I can write the benchmark for them : 92mph average competant average male golfer, from a solid straight 146 smash factor hit, ball to carry 185 yards.
Golf for EVERYONE would be the better for it.

 

[Backsticks]

Lots of people getting a touch warm under the collar when we know very few details...
If the change means the average golfer loses 5 yards it will not be noticeable....it simply won't.
We are not good enough to hit a ball , regularly, within a 5 yard area from more than about 20 yards away...
I'll wait until I've heard the details.

Would agree with the gist that the average golfer will see no difference. The margin is too small to be discernable for his dispersion.
But would be lukewarm under the collar that the roll back isnt greater. I would like it to be a full iron for the average golfer.

 

[Backsticks]

I’ve asked the same question to multiple people today mate. If you can’t give me an honest answer, fair enough - most of the others struggled as well.

If you feel like you can justify the proposed changes against the will of most golfers, I’d love to discuss it.

1 : it is not against the will of most golfer to put clamps on elite distance. Bifurcation was clearly against the will of most golfers, unions, and associations. Hence this revised solution.

 

[wjemather]

Out of Golf Digest.

• 52 percent don’t like the proposed rule.
• 23 percent are in favor of the proposed rule.
• 13 percent don’t know enough yet to have an opinion.
• 12 percent don’t care.

Among those who DO NOT SUPPORT the Model Local Rule:

• 72 percent indicate they “like knowing that everyone plays by the same rules.”
• 55 percent don’t think it is necessary.
• 43 percent believe it “complicates” the rules.
• 7 percent indicate they play “high level competition” and the proposed rule complicates things for them.

I can understand the first one.....52% against, 48% are iffy.
The second one is silly. How does a new ball "complicate" things? It's a ball. You hit it....then hit it again. All other rules are the same aren't they? Just use legal balls. If you ask people who do not like golf at all if they should close all golf courses.....likely get a response of "close them".....which makes sense from their opinion.

Only 13% recognised the lack of sufficient information - this highlights that the USGA/The R&A need to stop letting the manufacturers set the agenda and control the narrative.

72% of those against the proposed MLR didn't (probably still don't) realise that the pros already play by different rules.
Doesn't seem to me like these were people who really had enough information before giving their opinion.