The Distance problem

[Trapdraw]

Willow Valley

Obviously you don't like a challenge. ;-)

https://www.wvgc.co.uk/

American style parkland resort course ??

 

[Mel Smooth]

Limiting the equipment for pro’s means older more interesting courses can be used again.
The big hitters will still be the longest, but short hitters will be brought back in the mix because what they excel at will be relevant again.
The recent presidents cup was great to watch, firm and fast course, no thick lush rough. Tiger was head and shoulders the best player because he had every shot in the book.
Clubs wouldn’t have to spend millions to buy land to increase the length of the course.
Growing rough and then making it OOB just to trick up a course is crap.
Rough, ponds, etc is artificial crap that has made watching pro golf boring.
Big drive, wedge, putt, repeat yawn yawn yawn.

Be interested to know what kind of course you play, and what features you like to see in a course. If there's no rough, no water, no OOB and the course is short, what would it's redeeming features be?

 

[Mel Smooth]

American style parkland resort course ??

You've played it then?

American Styled resort course - on the top of a hill in West Yorkshire - Err, Ok.

 

[Trapdraw]

You've played it then?

American Styled resort course - on the top of a hill in West Yorkshire - Err, Ok.

It doesn’t matter if it’s on a hill in Yorkshire, it’s still an American resort style course.

 

[Mel Smooth]

It doesn’t matter if it’s on a hill in Yorkshire, it’s still an American resort style course.

In your opinion.

As I've made clear earlier in the post, the course isn't necessarily for the big hitters, infact the most consistent players at the club, and the lowest handicappers were those that played with consistency, accuracy, and the ability to adapt a shot for each scenario
Isn't that what you want to see the pro's demonstrating?

 

[Trapdraw]

Be interested to know what kind of course you play, and what features you like to see in a course. If there's no rough, no water, no OOB and the course is short, what would it's redeeming features be?

I play a heathland course, in the summer it’s super firm and fast with knee deep rough and really windy a lot of the times.
Every course has out of bounds, generally the course boundary, but ones with internal out of bounds are largely due to bad design.
I don’t find long parkland courses a challenge, give me heathland or links golf any day.

 

[Mel Smooth]

I play a heathland course, in the summer it’s super firm and fast with knee deep rough and really windy a lot of the times.
Every course has out of bounds, generally the course boundary, but ones with internal out of bounds are largely due to bad design.
I don’t find long parkland courses a challenge, give me heathland or links golf any day.

Well, may I suggest if you're ever in West Yorkshire and have an afternoon free, you try Willow Valley, if the wind is blowing even better.

I'm sure it might change your views on parkland courses being a challenge.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

What we can't do is complain about slow play and then suggest course revisions that will obviously make play slower.

What needs to be done is nothing.

The R&A / USGA need to understand that golf is primarily about the recreational player.
They need to simply stop caring if the top couple hundred players on the planet shred par regularly when using playable equipment on playable courses.

And if those bodies won't do that, it's time to stop being wimps and challenge them with alternative sanctioninbodies.
Recreational players make worss competre important than what they are, but golf is

I think this is a fair point. The course I play is long enough for the people who play it. Same for other courses in the area. The Pros don't play ( mostly) the same courses that we do.
If the Pros are killing "their" courses, then have them play different balls.
Someone argued this wouldn't be fair on the amateurs who play with Pros.
Well, those amateurs are few and far between: they are elite ( means damn good ) amateurs: and finally they have the choice whether to play the same conditions as the Pros they are pitting their skills against. So they wouldn't mind playing against them "on a level playing field"
So, not a strong argument against bifurcation really.
Ball difference is easy to do, easy to Police and doesn't spoil any player's enjoyment of the game.
And solves the problem

 

[Swango1980]

I think this is a fair point. The course I play is long enough for the people who play it. Same for other courses in the area. The Pros don't play ( mostly) the same courses that we do.
If the Pros are killing "their" courses, then have them play different balls.
Someone argued this wouldn't be fair on the amateurs who play with Pros.
Well, those amateurs are few and far between: they are elite ( means damn good ) amateurs: and finally they have the choice whether to play the same conditions as the Pros they are pitting their skills against. So they wouldn't mind playing against them "on a level playing field"
So, not a strong argument against bifurcation really.
Ball difference is easy to do, easy to Police and doesn't spoil any player's enjoyment of the game.
And solves the problem

I'm definitely not a fan of having one set of equipment for us, and worse performing equipment for pros.

In some respects, it is nice to compare your own attributes with the pros, to actually appreciate how much better they are. Imagine Rory mcilroy beasting a drive 250 yards compared to the tour average of 220 yards. You then play with some 35 handicapper, who happens to get one decent contact, and it rolls out 250 yards. All of a sudden he is bouncing down the fairway thinking he is the next McIlroy. Until you try and explain, had McIlroy had his driver, he'd probably hit it 350 yards.

Sure, try and do something to stop clubs being able to hit it further and further (although, without switching to a rubber ball, I wonder how much further they could go, has distance increased much over last 5 or so years?). But, at least let us all have the opportunity to use the same equipment.

 

[robinthehood]

Pro golfers know that distance is king and hitting much further is more of a benefit than any amount of short game skill. That's why so many pros now average over 300.

 

[Ye Olde Boomer]

I'm definitely not a fan of having one set of equipment for us, and worse performing equipment for pros.

I not generally but totally agree. But whose performance should be evaluated when determining the rules for equipment:

millions of recreational players or a couple hundred elite touring professionals?

Which group not only supports the game of golf, but for that matter, the other group as well?

I don't care if a few hundred players ravage par playing major tournaments. I don't think that the R&A and USGA should either.

The priority should be we, not they.

 

[Swango1980]

I not generally but totally agree. But whose performance should be evaluated when determining the rules for equipment:

millions of recreational players or a couple hundred elite touring professionals?

Which group not only supports the game of golf, but for that matter, the other group as well?

I don't care if a few hundred players ravage par playing major tournaments. I don't think that the R&A and USGA should either.

The priority should be we, not they.

Yes, but I'm pretty sure the equipment, as it is today, is 100% developed for the masses. Not the pro's. The pro's don't make companies money. in fact, the companies pay the pro's big sums to promote their equipment. to who? Us. We are the ones who are willing to pay hundreds of pounds to buy clubs and balls that all hit it "longer and straighter". So, we shouldn't fool ourselves by thinking it is the pro's benefitting, and what we meer mortals desire is to have shorter hitting clubs so we can display our course management and short game skills.

By all means, I'm all for stopping further major gains in distance if possible, and trying to stay as we are now. But, the best players on the planet will always hit it further than us generally, unless we give them vastly inferior equipment. That is why they are the elite of the world, they'll pretty much be excellent at every possible attribute you can think of, and be a master in a few of them.

 

[Swango1980]

I not generally but totally agree. But whose performance should be evaluated when determining the rules for equipment:

millions of recreational players or a couple hundred elite touring professionals?

Which group not only supports the game of golf, but for that matter, the other group as well?

I don't care if a few hundred players ravage par playing major tournaments. I don't think that the R&A and USGA should either.

The priority should be we, not they.

PS I think I agree with you though. Any restrictions to equipment should be made with us normal people in mind. And, then let the pro use the same equipment, and if they shoot -30 or +10, so be it. There are plenty of interesting courses out there that require course management rather than purely big hitting. To be fair, the pro's will always play more open courses than us, because they need to get spectators in and get good views set up for cameras, so I guess more reliance is needed on longer courses, penalty areas and bunkers to protect course when playing pro tournaments. The rough to a point, but I guess it gets trampled down pretty quick in most places

 

[ScienceBoy]

Its time we made golf great again.

I say we build a distance wall no pro can hit the ball through AND they will pay the bill for it!

 

[Swinglowandslow]

This thread prompts a thought which may be slightly relevant,( enormous distance) but which you may wish to comment on.(or not ?)
I have not yet seen comment (on TV )about what I think is an enormous advantage the Tour Pros have in their competitions, in terms of their scores.
Often I see on tv that a player has hit ,say, 6 out of 11 fairways, or some such.
That means that several of their 300 yd drives have landed in rough etc.
If they were playing in that manner without tv coverage, without spectators being about, without "spotters", that would be a lot of lost balls would it not??
If they were playing like you and I play, I.e just the two of us on the tee and no one else watching where the ball might go, the prospect of either of the two knowing where the ball has landed 280-300yds away and finding it, is pretty remote.
So. How many more shots would be added to their round?
This is just a thought. I am not suggesting that there is a problem to be solved, because you cannot have Pro's golf tournaments in any other situation than obtains at present, TV, spectators etc can you.?

 

[slowhand]

The OTB Golf podcast we’re discussing the distance report this week and made an very good point (which I had already heard before). The pros hut the ball with greater club head speed, and with greater consistency in regard to where on the club face, than 99% of amateurs. Due to the solid core golf ball, they then get a much greater distance increase than said amateurs. Hence, when distance reports are commissioned, manufacturers can point to the lack of increase in amateur distance and claim there is not a problem. Were everyone be made to use the old style wound core balls, the pros would be a lot closer to amateurs in terms of distance

 

[Swango1980]

The OTB Golf podcast we’re discussing the distance report this week and made an very good point (which I had already heard before). The pros hut the ball with greater club head speed, and with greater consistency in regard to where on the club face, than 99% of amateurs. Due to the solid core golf ball, they then get a much greater distance increase than said amateurs. Hence, when distance reports are commissioned, manufacturers can point to the lack of increase in amateur distance and claim there is not a problem. Were everyone be made to use the old style wound core balls, the pros would be a lot closer to amateurs in terms of distance

In that case, I'm glad the pros are currently getting the rewards they deserve for their vastly superior ability of finding the sweet spot.

 

[Swango1980]

This thread prompts a thought which may be slightly relevant,( enormous distance) but which you may wish to comment on.(or not ?)
I have not yet seen comment (on TV )about what I think is an enormous advantage the Tour Pros have in their competitions, in terms of their scores.
Often I see on tv that a player has hit ,say, 6 out of 11 fairways, or some such.
That means that several of their 300 yd drives have landed in rough etc.
If they were playing in that manner without tv coverage, without spectators being about, without "spotters", that would be a lot of lost balls would it not??
If they were playing like you and I play, I.e just the two of us on the tee and no one else watching where the ball might go, the prospect of either of the two knowing where the ball has landed 280-300yds away and finding it, is pretty remote.
So. How many more shots would be added to their round?
This is just a thought. I am not suggesting that there is a problem to be solved, because you cannot have Pro's golf tournaments in any other situation than obtains at present, TV, spectators etc can you.?

If the pros played courses like most of us, with bushes trees and hay just off the fairway, where basically it is pretty much a lost ball if you miss fairway by much, then their courses would be much shorter (as in, like the ones we play). In that case, they could easily just knock a shorter club for easy safety. I bet McIlroy could hit his 6 iron the same distance many club golfers hit their driver.

Likewise, put is on the courses they play, and I'm pretty sure we would not be easily playing to our handicap. Far from it most likely. I heard Gary lineker, who plays of single figures, maybe scratch, went round in 120 at Augusta.

So, I'm not buying the pros have it easier than us. They may find their ball, but they have other obstacles to face we probably don't, mainly tougher longer courses.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

If the pros played courses like most of us, with bushes trees and hay just off the fairway, where basically it is pretty much a lost ball if you miss fairway by much, then their courses would be much shorter (as in, like the ones we play). In that case, they could easily just knock a shorter club for easy safety. I bet McIlroy could hit his 6 iron the same distance many club golfers hit their driver.

Likewise, put is on the courses they play, and I'm pretty sure we would not be easily playing to our handicap. Far from it most likely. I heard Gary lineker, who plays of single figures, maybe scratch, went round in 120 at Augusta.

So, I'm not buying the pros have it easier than us. They may find their ball, but they have other obstacles to face we probably don't, mainly tougher longer courses.

I agree with everything you say. I think we are discussing apples and oranges!
I'm not saying that Pros have it easier than us, but that they have an assistance we don't have. So they have it easier playing the Tournament courses than if they played it "on an ordinary day, just two of them having a day's golf"
Let me put it this way. If Rory and Gary Lineker and me arrived at Carnoustie unannounced and played a round together off the tournament tees, then (obviously) Rory would win, Lineker would be a poor second and I would be an abysmal last.?
But I'd wager that if RORY played his best shots for the Course( rather than course manage just to beat us ), his total would be more than when he played in , say, the Open.
Merely because when he went off the fairway on Drives, he wouldn't always find the ball. At his driving distances I'd say he would mostly lose his ball when going "off piste"

 

[Springveldt]

For people that don’t want the pro’s to play different equipment, they essentially are already.
TaylorMade had about 9 different conforming balls on the list last year yet you could only buy 2 of them. All the Chromesoft guys were playing a different ball than you can’t buy in the shop, one that goes further btw.

A few of them play new wedges every week, ones that have been ground down to their exact specs for that week depending on conditions.

I don’t see a problem with them playing different equipment compared to amateurs.