Rolling back the pro game

[Lucifer MorningStar]

You're talking about people who generally play random balls that would be 20 yards different for a long hitter without noticing any difference at all for them. And that's not just because they are too inconsistent to notice, it's because the difference at those clubhead/ball speeds speeds is minimal.

People seem to forget we already had a rollback when we adopted the large American ball. The sky didn't fall in, most didn't notice the distance difference, and no-one stopped enjoying the game.

No you’re assuming I’m talking about people who play random balls.

I’m talking about absolutely everyone that plays recreationally. Yes clubhead speed has a massive impact on spin generation and how the ball performs. But whether you want to admit or are too stubborn to admit it will affect people and will affect some people’s enjoyment. Just because it won’t affect you doesn’t mean it won’t bother others.

Re: your last point the sky didn’t fall in and nobody stopped enjoying it. It’s a completely irrelevant point the past is gone we live in the present people have evolved and moved on. Maybe golf should do the same instead of harking back for glory days. The game is in the healthiest place it’s been for years, recreationally, professionally and financially yet oh no we need to go backwards now because people are hitting it further.

I wonder was the same tripe being spouted when the switch was made from
Featheries, gutter perchie balls etc, no one cried when the balata became non existent! Why not roll it right back because to do so now would admit all advancements in ball tech have come to far where but does it end!

Yes, the freak of one generation is the norm of the next. However, this generation suffers no distance or direction consequences for mishitting while whaling away as hard as they can. That's entirely down to equipment, and nothing at all to do with athleticism.

No it isn’t it’s down to the course set ups they play! Riviera is one of the shortest courses they play all year and regularly one of the lowest scoring events as its penal off the tee. The shortest par 4 they can all reach with 3 Wood and the scoring average for that hole is always over par and that’s because it’s penal in the right places !!

 

[Mel Smooth]

You and they are wrong and miss the entire point, but they are paid to do so by manufacturers.

What point have I missed and why is my experience wrong?

 

[irip]

Nothing would take that away (except perhaps crazy course changes).
"Hitting bombs" is relative.
People marvelled at Sam Snead, Arnold Palmer, Jack Nicklaus, Greg Norman, Fred Couples, Davis Love, John Daly, etc. and none hit anywhere near today's (equipment fueled) distances.

It would be weird though watching the big hitters smashing the ball 200 yards after what we are now seeing

 

[D-S]

There are around 38,000 courses in the world, there are around 108 million golfers in the world.

We are going to make every golf ball in the world illegal in order to make a few dozen courses every so slightly more relevant to a few hundred golfers. Those same courses are currently, with existing equipment, nigh on unplayable from the Pro tees for 95% or more of the golfers who play them on a regular basis (be they club members or visitors).

It seems like an awful lot of cost and upheaval for a tiny fraction of the courses and golfers.

 

[The Fader]

Redesigning the game for the 0.01% of elite players and the less than1% of courses that host elite golf whilst making the game less enjoyable for the other 99+%.

That sounds like a really good plan doesn't it?

Lots of good suggestions here about course set up - narrower fairways, penal rough, firmer greens, internal out of bounds and I really like the idea of no ball spotters. We quite rightly talk about not wanting bifurification but how many of us have ball spotters in the monthly medal? Add in stringent penalties for slow play - to include time spent looking for balls by the player and caddy only and you start to put the emphasis on accuracy as well as power.

None of the above changes require radical or costly redesign.

And if the bombers can still hit it 350 yards straight and stay on the fairway - good on them.

Courses that host elite golf are already closing the course to their members whilst the course is made ready for the pro's - closing it for another few days after whilst the GK's put it back to its normal conditions is not really a hardship.

And one final point. How many of the courses all of us play on every week are taken apart on a regular basis by the best players in the club? Very few I would suggest - which means the current courses and equipment are absolutely fit for purpose the for vast, vast majority of golfers.

 

[D-S]

We played quite a few courses on the Robert Trent Jones trail in Alabama a few years ago.
In Muscle Shoals there are two courses on the Trail.
Fighting Joe is 8,092 yards and The Schoolmaster is 7,971 yards, plenty long enough with current equipment I can assure you.
The Judge at Capitol Hill at 7,807 was no pushover either.

 

[Slab]

Just to note, your course isn't impacted for a few days or a few weeks as its prepared and restored pre/ post a tournament

It's many weeks into months that members etc have to play a tougher course

 

[D-S]

And one final point. How many of the courses all of us play on every week are taken apart on a regular basis by the best players in the club? Very few I would suggest - which means the current courses and equipment are absolutely fit for purpose the for vast, vast majority of golfers.

My course held the Carris Trophy a few years ago. The English under 18 strokeplay championship. It is open to the best players in Europe, we had four players with handicaps over +7 playing and the tournament was balloted out at +1.6.
We are a standard 6,500 yard parkland course.
4 rounds in perfect weather, the winner was Harley Smith (the first player since Justin Rose to win the MacGregor and the Carris in the same year) at 8 under par, I believe he was 2 or 3 shots ahead of 2nd place.
I realise there is a world of difference between the best under 18s and the top Pro tour game but even a normal course such as ours is not irrelevant for elite younger amateurs - there are many, many tougher longer courses than ours than can present decent enough challenges to elite amateurs and slightly lesser professionals. It is only the very small pinnacle of the sport that this is even a discussion point. Changing the key component for all golfers worldwide has sledgehammer/nut vibes.

 

[The Fader]

Just to note, your course isn't impacted for a few days or a few weeks as its prepared and restored pre/ post a tournament

It's many weeks into months that members etc have to play a tougher course

But golfers who join such clubs know this in advance and no doubt have reciprocals at clubs of a similar standing during pre and post tournament preparation?

 

[D-S]

Just to note, your course isn't impacted for a few days or a few weeks as its prepared and restored pre/ post a tournament

It's many weeks into months that members etc have to play a tougher course

That is a trade off that the owners or members of courses that want the Kudos or possible increased future revenue of hosting such events might bring have to weigh up.
. I honestly don’t think there will be a time any time soon when certain (and enough) clubs won’t be queuing up to redesign, reconfigure, lengthen, grow up rough etc. etc.for the opportunity of hosting events. Certain clubs, Oakmont for example, pride themselves on the toughness of their course.

 

[Steve Wilkes]

You're talking about people who generally play random balls that would be 20 yards different for a long hitter without noticing any difference at all for them. And that's not just because they are too inconsistent to notice, it's because the difference at those clubhead/ball speeds speeds is minimal.

People seem to forget we already had a rollback when we adopted the large American ball. The sky didn't fall in, most didn't notice the distance difference, and no-one stopped enjoying the game.

This was a rollforward

 

[Steve Wilkes]

Just to note, your course isn't impacted for a few days or a few weeks as its prepared and restored pre/ post a tournament

It's many weeks into months that members etc have to play a tougher course

Just get the members to play of the shorter tees

 

[Crow]

It's been said many times before but the ball "rollback" won't impact most golfers as most existing balls are already compliant with the proposed changes anyway.

It's just the top end balls like the ProV1 etc that would need tweaking, and only to a small degree that wouldn't effect most golfers as they don't swing hard enough.

To my mind the proposed changes are just pissing in the wind for all the impact they'll have on the Pro game.

I've given up arguing the toss on this subject, people can play what they like as far as I'm concerned, and I've lost all interest in the Pro game anyway.

To end, a query I've raised many times before; how much help from equipment would you consider too much?


Would 450 yard drives be too long? If so, why? And what should be the limit?

Drivers that never miss a fairway too forgiving? If so, why? And how much forgiveness should be the limit?

Putters that stay true to the line set at address every time too extreme? If so, why? Etc, etc.

 

[wjemather]

No you’re assuming I’m talking about people who play random balls.

I’m talking about absolutely everyone that plays recreationally. Yes clubhead speed has a massive impact on spin generation and how the ball performs. But whether you want to admit or are too stubborn to admit it will affect people and will affect some people’s enjoyment. Just because it won’t affect you doesn’t mean it won’t bother others.

Re: your last point the sky didn’t fall in and nobody stopped enjoying it. It’s a completely irrelevant point the past is gone we live in the present people have evolved and moved on. Maybe golf should do the same instead of harking back for glory days. The game is in the healthiest place it’s been for years, recreationally, professionally and financially yet oh no we need to go backwards now because people are hitting it further.

I wonder was the same tripe being spouted when the switch was made from
Featheries, gutter perchie balls etc, no one cried when the balata became non existent! Why not roll it right back because to do so now would admit all advancements in ball tech have come to far where but does it end!


No it isn’t it’s down to the course set ups they play! Riviera is one of the shortest courses they play all year and regularly one of the lowest scoring events as its penal off the tee. The shortest par 4 they can all reach with 3 Wood and the scoring average for that hole is always over par and that’s because it’s penal in the right places !!

It absolutely will not affect anyone's enjoyment. This narrative is just scaremongering drivel peddled by equipment manufacturers who have been using distance as their primary promotional tool for 30 years.

Courses cannot keep being modified and extended to the detriment of the environment and the challenge they present in order to pander to self-interested OEMs.

The fact you are talking about scoring (and citing one of the worst holes in all of golf) demonstrates how little you understand the issues.

 

[wjemather]

There are around 38,000 courses in the world, there are around 108 million golfers in the world.

We are going to make every golf ball in the world illegal in order to make a few dozen courses every so slightly more relevant to a few hundred golfers. Those same courses are currently, with existing equipment, nigh on unplayable from the Pro tees for 95% or more of the golfers who play them on a regular basis (be they club members or visitors).

It seems like an awful lot of cost and upheaval for a tiny fraction of the courses and golfers.

The vast majority of balls currently in use would pass the new specifications.
Where is the cost? There is negligible effect to ball manufacturers existing R&D budgets and zero effect on almost every golfer (as they don't have several years supply of potentially non-compliant golf balls). The cost of doing nothing to re-regulate the ball and instead overhauling and lengthening golf courses is huge - both financial and environmental - even if it is only a relatively small number of courses.

 

[wjemather]

It would be weird though watching the big hitters smashing the ball 200 yards after what we are now seeing

The effect of rolling back won't be any more than the equivalent of playing in slightly cooler weather or into a very slight breeze. It will be unnoticeable to the naked eye.

 

[irip]

The effect of rolling back won't be any more than the equivalent of playing in slightly cooler weather or into a very slight breeze. It will be unnoticeable to the naked eye.

I was joking hence the emoji.

I think they can make courses tougher if they want to bring the scoring down as opposed to trying to take distance off players.

Maybe restrict equipment to a maximum but the manufacturers will probably find ways round it anyway.

 

[wjemather]

You’re an absolute delight aren’t you.

Nobody is saying keep extending course you’ve changed every word to suit your argument whilst dismissing others in everything you post. I wonder are you my ex wife she has a similar tendency to only see her way as the right way!

I used one hole as an example and your only defence is apparently it’s one of the worst holes in golf. Either you’re a bit of a drama queen with a penchant for exaggeration to make your point more relevant than others or when people touch a nerve with a fact you can’t get around you have to deride it.

I absolutely stand by my points but to discuss it further with an oracle such as yourself is as I’ve said like talking to my ex wife, utterly pointless because you can’t possibly be anything other then right

All you've done is peddle OEM talking points (that don't stand scrutiny) and not address any of the actual issues, or even acknowledge them.

 

[wjemather]

I was joking hence the emoji.

I think they can make courses tougher if they want to bring the scoring down as opposed to trying to take distance off players.

Maybe restrict equipment to a maximum but the manufacturers will probably find ways round it anyway.

Making scoring more difficult is not the aim, even though that will be a side-effect at the elite level.

 

[D-S]

The vast majority of balls currently in use would pass the new specifications.
Where is the cost? There is negligible effect to ball manufacturers existing R&D budgets and zero effect on almost every golfer (as they don't have several years supply of potentially non-compliant golf balls). The cost of doing nothing to re-regulate the ball and instead overhauling and lengthening golf courses is huge - both financial and environmental - even if it is only a relatively small number of courses.

So I assume we will very shortly have a list of which balls will be non conforming as the “vast majority” will be conforming? Also my assumption is that the information needed is out there?

Doing this would surely promote sales of those balls which will be conforming.