Using a golf bag

[rulefan]

I introduced a rule at our club. If you have a cart bag with fourteen full length individual dividers PLUS a putter well, then fifteen clubs are OK. Never got a response so I assume it's OK!

I assume you know the correct answer but if not it is Rule 4.1b

 

[jim8flog]

Speaking of rules related issues, I bet that most of you are too young to have ever played the old 1.62" diameter R&A rules ball. I have. My uncle brought me a dozen from Bermuda when I was a kid.

It was an easy decision for me when I first started to play it was only going to be a few years before the 1.62 was going to be declared non conforming so I started out with the 1.68. I got to play with the 1.62 quite a bit though, Xmas presents etc from well meaning family who did not know the difference and lots of pick ups. Played with the 1.70 for quite some time as well.

 

[clubchamp98]

The 1.62 ball also was harder to use and sorted good ball strikers from the rest of us.

 

[Swinglowandslow]

The 1.62 ball also was harder to use and sorted good ball strikers from the rest of us.

Just as a matter of curiosity, does the 1.62 ball go longer or shorter when hit by modern clubs. I ask, presuming that Crow doesn't use them with modern clubs, but maybe someone has given them a go just to see.(obviously not seriously)?

 

[rulefan]

The 1.62 ball also was harder to use and sorted good ball strikers from the rest of us.

By which of course you mean the very good ball strikers.

 

[chrisd]

Just as a matter of curiosity, does the 1.62 ball go longer or shorter when hit by modern clubs. I ask, presuming that Crow doesn't use them with modern clubs, but maybe someone has given them a go just to see.(obviously not seriously)?

To Crow any clubs from 1962 onwards are "modern" ??

He did once let me hit an old 3 iron he was carrying and, to be fair, it was pretty darn good - love him !

 

[rulefan]

The 1.62 ball also was harder to use and sorted good ball strikers from the rest of us.

Presumably that's why the USGA persuaded the R&A to agree to the change

 

[duncan mackie]

Just as a matter of curiosity, does the 1.62 ball go longer or shorter when hit by modern clubs. I ask, presuming that Crow doesn't use them with modern clubs, but maybe someone has given them a go just to see.(obviously not seriously)?

Longer - it is the same weight but larger volume so more dense.

Whilst there are aerodynamic aspects that favour the 1.68 balls carry capabilities (in the right hands!) the 1.62

The most obvious way to deliver an across the board reduction in the distances being hit would be to reduce the maximum weight of the ball slightly.

 

[clubchamp98]

Just as a matter of curiosity, does the 1.62 ball go longer or shorter when hit by modern clubs. I ask, presuming that Crow doesn't use them with modern clubs, but maybe someone has given them a go just to see.(obviously not seriously)?

Hard to tell as most would be quite old.
But all things equal I would guess longer less drag .
But modern balls are very long.

 

[clubchamp98]

By which of course you mean the very good ball strikers.

Yes because if you misshit a balata ball it was dead , big smile looking at you.
I practice my short game with some.
Anybody struggling with chipping try these it sorts your ball striking out very quickly.

 

[Crow]

Just as a matter of curiosity, does the 1.62 ball go longer or shorter when hit by modern clubs. I ask, presuming that Crow doesn't use them with modern clubs, but maybe someone has given them a go just to see.(obviously not seriously)?

Using an equivalent date 1.68" ball, the 1.62" would be the longer which is why all the visiting American Pros switched to 1.62" when playing in The Open.

The 1.62 ball also was harder to use and sorted good ball strikers from the rest of us.

Strangely enough the opposite is actually the case.
There was a long campaign by such as John Jacobs (and I believe Henry Cotton before him) to move to the 1.68" ball so that we could compete with the Americans. The 1.68" was more controllable and so encouraged more creativity with the ball, and it also stopped better which suited the move to watered golf courses that was going on at the time and so destroyed the UK tradition of the running game and replaced it with boring target golf. Of course today's balls are designed not to spin on anything other than a wedge shot and so the skill of shaping the ball is now almost redundant.

As another aside, there was a short lived effort to introduce a 1.64" ball as a compromise between the US and UK but as this would have meant that all manufacturers would need to retool it was obviously a non-starter. If anyone has one of these 1.64" balls I'd be interested to see it!

Using old 1.62" balls today is a pretty hit and miss affair, one ball will perform well, another from the same box can be like hitting a wet sock.

 

[clubchamp98]

Using an equivalent date 1.68" ball, the 1.62" would be the longer which is why all the visiting American Pros switched to 1.62" when playing in The Open.



Strangely enough the opposite is actually the case.
There was a long campaign by such as John Jacobs (and I believe Henry Cotton before him) to move to the 1.68" ball so that we could compete with the Americans. The 1.68" was more controllable and so encouraged more creativity with the ball, and it also stopped better which suited the move to watered golf courses that was going on at the time and so destroyed the UK tradition of the running game and replaced it with boring target golf. Of course today's balls are designed not to spin on anything other than a wedge shot and so the skill of shaping the ball is now almost redundant.

As another aside, there was a short lived effort to introduce a 1.64" ball as a compromise between the US and UK but as this would have meant that all manufacturers would need to retool it was obviously a non-starter. If anyone has one of these 1.64" balls I'd be interested to see it!

Using old 1.62" balls today is a pretty hit and miss affair, one ball will perform well, another from the same box can be like hitting a wet sock.

That might be the case for professionals .
But most ams can hit the ball better with the larger ball. IMo .

But if the 1.68 is more controllable it’s easier to hit or am I reading it wrong.

 

[Ye Olde Boomer]

The most classic 1.62" ball, the Dunlop 65, was wound with a thin natural balata cover.

They could bring it back tomorrow and I wouldn't play it. But I did play it--badly--as a boy.

Now a 1.62" modern, urethane covered ball? I'd like to at least try that.

 

[williamalex1]

I preferred playing the 1.62 ball pre 1990, I thought the 1.68 looked enormous in comparison. I think I lost some distance and found it harder to putt with, as it seemed so big to fit in the hole

 

[Crow]

That might be the case for professionals .
But most ams can hit the ball better with the larger ball. IMo .

But if the 1.68 is more controllable it’s easier to hit or am I reading it wrong.

For a high handicap golfer that would probably be true, but generally things aren't changed for high handicappers, they were just fortunate that the needs of the Pros benefitted them too!

The 1.62" went straighter so as long as you weren't intimidated by it and got a decent shot away it could be easier to score with. It also flew lower so got good run out.

 

[jim8flog]

The 1.62 ball flew lower than the equivalent 1.68 particularly in to the wind. One of the reasons it was a ball of choice for pros at Opens on Links golf courses.

 

[bladeplayer]

Ive read this and only 1 part doesnt sit wel ..

the decision was made to DQ him, however when I looked into it further, I could not find any rule or stipulation that a bag had to used to carry your club..


I just surprised youd DQ some1 before u checked it was allowed or not . Ive come across this a few times and do think if u DQn someone u need to explain u DQd acording to rule .... etc .
What do u say when.player comes back and asks why or what rule they have bn DQd under When u cant show or explain them.the reason ?
Thanks

 

[duncan mackie]

Ive read this and only 1 part doesnt sit wel ..

the decision was made to DQ him, however when I looked into it further, I could not find any rule or stipulation that a bag had to used to carry your club..


I just surprised youd DQ some1 before u checked it was allowed or not . Ive come across this a few times and do think if u DQn someone u need to explain u DQd acording to rule .... etc .
What do u say when.player comes back and asks why or what rule they have bn DQd under When u cant show or explain them.the reason ?
Thanks

you may want to pm him if you want more - hasn't been on the forum since the day he posted this.
However, from what was posted I got the impression it was very relaxed event with no consequence to the DQ itself, so hopefully just a learning experience for some

 

[bladeplayer]

you may want to pm him if you want more - hasn't been on the forum since the day he posted this.
However, from what was posted I got the impression it was very relaxed event with no consequence to the DQ itself, so hopefully just a learning experience for some

Thanks Duncan . It not important to me to be honest and im sure ther was no bad intention or ill will behind it .. just thought he had it the wrong way around . But as you say it a learning experience .