Roll Back Discussion

[Slab]

Been thinking about just some of the things that currently impact my ‘expected’ distance by 4 or more yards… it’s a lot of things… from tee marker placement to last night’s rain, from off center hits to pre round warm up, from playing pre-lunch to post lunch, from wind speed to tee height, from ball condition to wear level of grip etc etc etc the list just goes on and on and virtually every swing I make includes one or more of these things

I can’t even recall the last time I hit driver under what I’d consider optimum conditions (if I ever have!)

4 yard Ball rollback?… It’s not an issue that even makes the top 5 things that can reduce my distance



edit: jeez I never even mentioned my swing! or alignment or how much grip wear on my shoes or if my head is still thinking about previous missed/made putt or if I mistakenly have any muscle tension in shoulder, wrist, torso, forearm.......... aarrgghh its a bleedin wonder the ball doesn't (often) finish behind me

 

[Backsticks]

Crossfield and Stagne4 worth a listen on Hack it Out. For how bad it is. And I say that as normally a fan. But good example of how reason has been left out of the anti rollback thinking. They are against it, and Crossfield cynical mocking tone stronger even than normal. But the discussion isnt a rebuttal of rollback, more a teenage scatter gun tantrum. Spurious reasons, whataboutery, and no cogent case to justify their view. Red mist.

On the otherside, the R&A statement is very poor. As with WHS, no effort has been put in to communicating thorougly their basis for the change. They really need to up their game. Nonesense, false facts, speculation, knee jerk negativity, and cynicism are filling the void. And that is not good. Up your game please Mr Slumbers.

 

[Deleted member 15717]

On the otherside, the R&A statement is very poor. As with WHS, no effort has been put in to communicating thorougly their basis for the change. They really need to up their game. No esense, false facts, speculation, knee jerk negativity, and cynicism are filling the void. And that is not good. Up your game please Mr Slumbers.

I mean, it’s all come out of the distance insights report that was rolling from 2018, and was mooted in around 2011. USGA and R&A have being doing a lot of research into it and made it all public knowledge

 

[Backsticks]

I mean, it’s all come out of the distance insights report that was rolling from 2018, and was mooted in around 2011. USGA and R&A have being doing a lot of research into it and made it all public knowledge

Yes, and thats one reason I think Crossfield and Stagner are being disingenuous. The data and their thinking is there. Published papers, consultations, expressions of interest etc. But R&A needs to give a better summary of all of that now they they are pressing an obligatory rule change button. Its fine for those in the deep of it for the last 10 years. The rationale may be blindingly obvious. But they need that message clrarly understood by the wider golfing public.

 

[RichA]

Yes, and thats one reason I think Crossfield and Stagner are being disingenuous. The data and their thinking is there. Published papers, consultations, expressions of interest etc. But R&A needs to give a better summary of all of that now they they are pressing an obligatory rule change button. Its fine for those in the deep of it for the last 10 years. The rationale may be blindingly obvious. But they need that message clrarly understood by the wider golfing public.

Used to like them on car journeys but I can't listen anymore. It's just relentless pointless stats, condescending sniggering and contradictory statements.
The useful nuggets of golf knowledge have pretty much disappeared.

 

[Jimaroid]

Used to like them on car journeys but I can't listen anymore. It's just relentless pointless stats, condescending sniggering and contradictory statements.
The useful nuggets of golf knowledge have pretty much disappeared.

Best description of this forum’s decline yet

 

[Deleted member 15717]

Yes, and thats one reason I think Crossfield and Stagner are being disingenuous. The data and their thinking is there. Published papers, consultations, expressions of interest etc. But R&A needs to give a better summary of all of that now they they are pressing an obligatory rule change button. Its fine for those in the deep of it for the last 10 years. The rationale may be blindingly obvious. But they need that message clrarly understood by the wider golfing public.

Crossfield has turned into a parody of himself recently. Gone are the days of useful information from him.

Stagner is going to be annoyed that he is going to lose all of the data and relevance of the information he has built up.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

According to Rory, we’re doing it to save the planet.

"me thinks the lady doth protest too much"

 

[Mel Smooth]

"me thinks the lady doth protest too much"

I'm just reporting the facts mate.

 

[clubchamp98]

How do they know it’s going to be 15yds for the pros and varying for us mortals if a ball hasn’t been developed yet?
Or has it?

It sounds like some sort of testing has been done already!

 

[harpo_72]

I fall into the “storm in a tea cup” group.
The amateur IMHO will see nothing unless they deliver the 110mph + swing speeds.
I also think compression will control the distances.. as discussed prior. So all the effort to get speed in will be a waste of effort and as a consequence the aero will adapt to aid the flight characteristics. Usually soft balls roll a bit more or spin less so I suspect they will address this.
For me these 230yard plus par 3s are a waste of time and space. I also consider them to be unimaginative.. a short par 3 with small green with undulations etc .. present challenges to all.

 

[Backsticks]

Crossfield has turned into a parody of himself recently. Gone are the days of useful information from him.

Stagner is going to be annoyed that he is going to lose all of the data and relevance of the information he has built up.

Handicap golfer are sooo stuuupid. They're hiiiilaaaarious.

 

[Backsticks]

How do they know it’s going to be 15yds for the pros and varying for us mortals if a ball hasn’t been developed yet?
Or has it?

It sounds like some sort of testing has been done already!

Science. Of course its possible.

 

[harpo_72]

I also forgot to say, that it’s not a big impact to the pro game .. in reality.
I would like to see a bigger impact, larger distance reduction.. move it to 110mph swing speed distance max and then we see who can hit a long iron.

Driver head size I don’t think will have a significant impact but perhaps the face consistency does but they would maintain that even for smaller volume drivers .. so in the end little impact for the pros .. average Joe will possibly suffer or need to practice more, use a shorter shaft etc ( my 5wood is quite small and I seem to be okay with it .. so not scared of a small driver to be honest)

 

[Orikoru]

I also forgot to say, that it’s not a big impact to the pro game .. in reality.
I would like to see a bigger impact, larger distance reduction.. move it to 110mph swing speed distance max and then we see who can hit a long iron.

Driver head size I don’t think will have a significant impact but perhaps the face consistency does but they would maintain that even for smaller volume drivers .. so in the end little impact for the pros .. average Joe will possibly suffer or need to practice more, use a shorter shaft etc ( my 5wood is quite small and I seem to be okay with it .. so not scared of a small driver to be honest)

Changing the balls is doable because we tend to lose them, but if they try and make drivers smaller or worse then I'll probably just keep mine and stop playing competitions if need be. I fail to see why the weekend golfer has to be punished twice over just because Bryson can hit a ball 400 yards.

 

[D-S]

Changing the balls is doable because we tend to lose them, but if they try and make drivers smaller or worse then I'll probably just keep mine and stop playing competitions if need be. I fail to see why the weekend golfer has to be punished twice over just because Bryson can hit a ball 400 yards.

He'll only be able to hit it 385 next year - who on earth could overpower classic courses only hitting it that far?

 

[Orikoru]

He'll only be able to hit it 385 next year - who on earth could overpower classic courses only hitting it that far?

Yeah, this is why I think the whole thing is stupid. It won't affect the pro game much at all in my opinion. If they'd have just brought more out of bounds areas into play in the pro events they'd have needed to be more selective about where they hit. Now they'll probably just add swing speed, decrease loft and continue annihilating the ball.

 

[wjemather]

Yes, and thats one reason I think Crossfield and Stagner are being disingenuous. The data and their thinking is there. Published papers, consultations, expressions of interest etc. But R&A needs to give a better summary of all of that now they they are pressing an obligatory rule change button. Its fine for those in the deep of it for the last 10 years. The rationale may be blindingly obvious. But they need that message clrarly understood by the wider golfing public.

The reason people like Stagner and Crossfield are being disingenuous is because they are paid ambassadors of equipment manufacturers.

All of them ignore the real issues that the USGA and The R&A seek to address (and the data from the mid-90s through to 2003/4, which clearly shows the effect of big drivers and the modern ball) and run with the false narrative that more distance is golf's panacea - amateurs need more of it to enjoy the game or they'll give it up, people won't watch pros unless they have more distance, etc. - it's all a marketing fantasy invented to upsell equipment to existing players. They even seem to claim people won't take up the sport unless they see people hitting it huge distances.

 

[Deleted member 25172]

Reading reactions from some people here and in other places I do wonder how they cope with actual real issues they encounter in life.

 

[Backsticks]

There is also a touch of longest willy contest about some of it, as if shortening drives is shortening manhood and barstool distance bragging. Hence the 'shorter is backward' nonsense. If longer was better, there would be no problem giving us a ball that we could all drive 350 with a 90mph swing. Nobody was clamouring for that 30 years ago, as necessary to keep people in the game, make it more fun, make par 5s reachable in two for all, etc.