Titleist golf ball study; Finally, some facts added to the debate

1101113151619
19

Comments

  • UhitUhit  861WRX Points: 0Members Posts: 861
    Joined:  edited Dec 17, 2017 #362

    Shilgy wrote:


    ^^Tex

    I hope you're wrong. Any change that would result in only one group getting penalized is wrong wrong wrong. If the player hitting it 300 is now at 270 and the 240 is still at 240 how is that a solution?

    You threw in the ball as well. We were discussing just club head size. But any change that disproportionately affects just one group of players cannot be tolerated.

    Which is also imo went the so called "Masters ball" is a terrible idea. Telling players they have to play a certain ball only suits certain players. Some like a softer ball, some spinnier, some firmer. And it would be a disaster as no player would be comfortable playing a ball they do not know the characteristics of on all shots.




    Here's why I don't think what I described is a problem. In my opinion, the modern ball and the driver club head size gives the faster swing player or longer hitter an advantage over the slower swinger player or shorter hitter. In my mind, what I describe "rectifies" a current imbalance. Of course, my wife would probably tell you that "in my mind" just means I'm probably wrong more often than I'm right. I know it seems that way when she and I are having "discussion", lol.




    You are wrong, and should rather spend more time with your wife, or try to improve your game - without looking at others: image/wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />



    Posted:
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • North TexasNorth Texas  4536WRX Points: 901Members Posts: 4,536 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #363
    Uhit wrote:


    Shilgy wrote:


    ^^Tex

    I hope you're wrong. Any change that would result in only one group getting penalized is wrong wrong wrong. If the player hitting it 300 is now at 270 and the 240 is still at 240 how is that a solution?

    You threw in the ball as well. We were discussing just club head size. But any change that disproportionately affects just one group of players cannot be tolerated.

    Which is also imo went the so called "Masters ball" is a terrible idea. Telling players they have to play a certain ball only suits certain players. Some like a softer ball, some spinnier, some firmer. And it would be a disaster as no player would be comfortable playing a ball they do not know the characteristics of on all shots.




    Here's why I don't think what I described is a problem. In my opinion, the modern ball and the driver club head size gives the faster swing player or longer hitter an advantage over the slower swinger player or shorter hitter. In my mind, what I describe "rectifies" a current imbalance. Of course, my wife would probably tell you that "in my mind" just means I'm probably wrong more often than I'm right. I know it seems that way when she and I are having "discussion", lol.




    You are wrong, and should rather spend more time with your wife, or try to improve your game - without looking at others: image/wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />







    I have definitely been wrong before. image/swoon.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':swoon:' />

    The wife just retired (I was already retired) so we are spending more time together. image/taunt.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':taunt:' />

    She has won the ladies club championship twice in the last 5 years which is two more times than I have won it. So yes, I need to improve my game. But, hey, my handicap index is lower than hers right now, which is not always the case.

    And I'm not quite sure what you mean by "without looking at others". But there are a lot of things I'm not sure of.



    All that being said, I don't agree with the rest of your post. But that's okay.
    Posted:
  • UhitUhit  861WRX Points: 0Members Posts: 861
    Joined:  #364

    Uhit wrote:


    Shilgy wrote:


    ^^Tex

    I hope you're wrong. Any change that would result in only one group getting penalized is wrong wrong wrong. If the player hitting it 300 is now at 270 and the 240 is still at 240 how is that a solution?

    You threw in the ball as well. We were discussing just club head size. But any change that disproportionately affects just one group of players cannot be tolerated.

    Which is also imo went the so called "Masters ball" is a terrible idea. Telling players they have to play a certain ball only suits certain players. Some like a softer ball, some spinnier, some firmer. And it would be a disaster as no player would be comfortable playing a ball they do not know the characteristics of on all shots.




    Here's why I don't think what I described is a problem. In my opinion, the modern ball and the driver club head size gives the faster swing player or longer hitter an advantage over the slower swinger player or shorter hitter. In my mind, what I describe "rectifies" a current imbalance. Of course, my wife would probably tell you that "in my mind" just means I'm probably wrong more often than I'm right. I know it seems that way when she and I are having "discussion", lol.




    You are wrong, and should rather spend more time with your wife, or try to improve your game - without looking at others: image/wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />







    I have definitely been wrong before. image/swoon.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':swoon:' />

    The wife just retired (I was already retired) so we are spending more time together. image/taunt.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':taunt:' />

    She has won the ladies club championship twice in the last 5 years which is two more times than I have won it. So yes, I need to improve my game. But, hey, my handicap index is lower than hers right now, which is not always the case.

    And I'm not quite sure what you mean by "without looking at others". But there are a lot of things I'm not sure of.



    All that being said, I don't agree with the rest of your post. But that's okay.




    LOL, you made my day!



    I try to be a nice guy, and don´t wish you to win the ladies club championship... image/derisive.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':derisive:' />
    Posted:
  • North TexasNorth Texas  4536WRX Points: 901Members Posts: 4,536 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  edited Dec 18, 2017 #365
    Uhit wrote:


    Uhit wrote:


    Shilgy wrote:


    ^^Tex

    I hope you're wrong. Any change that would result in only one group getting penalized is wrong wrong wrong. If the player hitting it 300 is now at 270 and the 240 is still at 240 how is that a solution?

    You threw in the ball as well. We were discussing just club head size. But any change that disproportionately affects just one group of players cannot be tolerated.

    Which is also imo went the so called "Masters ball" is a terrible idea. Telling players they have to play a certain ball only suits certain players. Some like a softer ball, some spinnier, some firmer. And it would be a disaster as no player would be comfortable playing a ball they do not know the characteristics of on all shots.




    Here's why I don't think what I described is a problem. In my opinion, the modern ball and the driver club head size gives the faster swing player or longer hitter an advantage over the slower swinger player or shorter hitter. In my mind, what I describe "rectifies" a current imbalance. Of course, my wife would probably tell you that "in my mind" just means I'm probably wrong more often than I'm right. I know it seems that way when she and I are having "discussion", lol.




    You are wrong, and should rather spend more time with your wife, or try to improve your game - without looking at others: image/wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />







    I have definitely been wrong before. image/swoon.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':swoon:' />

    The wife just retired (I was already retired) so we are spending more time together. image/taunt.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':taunt:' />

    She has won the ladies club championship twice in the last 5 years which is two more times than I have won it. So yes, I need to improve my game. But, hey, my handicap index is lower than hers right now, which is not always the case.

    And I'm not quite sure what you mean by "without looking at others". But there are a lot of things I'm not sure of.



    All that being said, I don't agree with the rest of your post. But that's okay.




    LOL, you made my day!



    I try to be a nice guy, and don´t wish you to win the ladies club championship... image/derisive.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':derisive:' />




    Well, I might have a better chance. Or not, lol.



    And hey, you are definitely a nice guy for not wishing I would win the ladies club championship. Thanks.
    Posted:
    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • bladehunterbladehunter Today was a good day... south carolina 30201WRX Points: 6,555Handicap: NONEMembers Posts: 30,201 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #366
    Shilgy wrote:




    Henrik Stenson averages what, about 305 with his 220cc fairway wood?






    Stenson is a stud. Would only be a couple who could match that. And his fairway wood is essentially this small Driver that’s being mentioned. It’s around 11 degrees and is playing at 44 inches. That’s not a 3 wood.
    The point is the size of the head that some think is a cure all. Watch video some time of Jack, Miller or Arnie swinging driver and tell me they are holding something back because of the size of the club head.




    No it’s a combo. It must all be rolled back.
    Posted:
    TM SIM max 10.8 Fuji Ventus red 6x 
    Ping G410 15.5* Graphite Design ADDI 8x
    Ping G410 21* ADDI 105x 
    Ping Blueprint  3- PW   Modus 130X 
    Ping Glide Forged  54 60 s400
    Cameron GSS 1.5 009. Sound slot,  tungsten weights. 


  • GolfjackGolfjack All about the rotation  1408WRX Points: 391Members Posts: 1,408 Platinum Tees
    Joined:  #367
    Uhit wrote:



    Why is Titleist responding to an argument nobody is having? Who has said the absolute longest players are winning at the highest clip? Isn't the argument (regardless of your opinion) that the relative length of the field has changed the way the game is played thus making skills such as long and mid-iron play, and shot making less relevant than they used to be (as well as some classic golf courses)?




    In my opinion Titleist made a overview, which helps to look at the theme from different angles - if someone is willing to...



    The argument is, that nothing has changed, distance wise, since the last 15 years - neither the long hitter, nor the field has changed since more than a decade (in terms of carry distances).





    Shot making becomes more difficult, the farther the ball travels - no matter which number is written on the golf club...



    ...the evidence can be found in the numbers the OP mentioned.





    Btw...



    ...remember, that nowadays a 6 iron has about the same loft, as a 4 iron had in the past.



    Would you be more satisfied, if they simply change the numbers, to make it easier for those who don´t realize that the same numbers represent a different loft nowadays?




    Not that I don't agree with you, but does that my blade 3 iron is as easy to hit as a GI 5 iron? Hm....
    Posted:
    TM M4 Driver 10.5
    TM M4 3 wood 16
    4H (22) Aeroburner TP
    Mizuno MP-15 5 iron, Project X LZ 6.5
    Mizuno MP-5 6-PW, Project X LZ 6.5
    Wedges Mizuno T7 50, 56, 60
    Scotty Phantom X6 STR
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • UhitUhit  861WRX Points: 0Members Posts: 861
    Joined:  #368
    Golfjack wrote:

    Uhit wrote:



    Why is Titleist responding to an argument nobody is having? Who has said the absolute longest players are winning at the highest clip? Isn't the argument (regardless of your opinion) that the relative length of the field has changed the way the game is played thus making skills such as long and mid-iron play, and shot making less relevant than they used to be (as well as some classic golf courses)?




    In my opinion Titleist made a overview, which helps to look at the theme from different angles - if someone is willing to...



    The argument is, that nothing has changed, distance wise, since the last 15 years - neither the long hitter, nor the field has changed since more than a decade (in terms of carry distances).





    Shot making becomes more difficult, the farther the ball travels - no matter which number is written on the golf club...



    ...the evidence can be found in the numbers the OP mentioned.





    Btw...



    ...remember, that nowadays a 6 iron has about the same loft, as a 4 iron had in the past.



    Would you be more satisfied, if they simply change the numbers, to make it easier for those who don´t realize that the same numbers represent a different loft nowadays?




    Not that I don't agree with you, but does that my blade 3 iron is as easy to hit as a GI 5 iron? Hm....




    Do you think, that one shouldn't allow hybrids for professional golf?



    Or what is your point?



    Why should a pro use a long iron for the second shot on a par 4, instead of a hybrid, or a 7 wood - if he can not reach the green with a short iron?



    -



    If true shot-making is restricted to the use of long blades, then you have to dump all the GI stuff (at least for professional golf).



    You can be sure, that professionals would use less long irons, and more GI hybrids etc. if they would have to play in a tournament with a even more restricted ball.



    -



    The idea, that a even more restricted ball would help the game golf is either short sighted, or a fraud.
    Posted:
  • storm319storm319 US 4057WRX Points: 322Members Posts: 4,057 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #369
    Is there anyone pro-rollback that was born after 1970? It would be interesting to see the age demographics of this debate.
    Posted:
  • ByeBye England 1362WRX Points: 124Handicap: 0.9Members Posts: 1,362 Platinum Tees
    Joined:  #370
    storm319 wrote:


    Is there anyone pro-rollback that was born after 1970? It would be interesting to see the age demographics of this debate.




    Me, 1979.



    Having said that I bought my kids a old games consol for Christmas to introduce them to gaming. It's not quite as good as I remember.
    Posted:
    Taylormade M3 9.5 - Aldila Rogue Silver 60X
    Callaway Rogue 3 Wood - Aldila Rogue Silver 70X
    Titleist 816 H2 20 degrees - Aldila Rogue Black 85X
    Titleist 716CB 4-9 - X100
    Vokey SM7 46.10, 50.08, 54M, 59M - S400
    Scotty Cameron Studio Stainless Newport 2.5
    Titleist Pro V1
  • starsail85starsail85  4832WRX Points: 205Members Posts: 4,832 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #371
    Set the courses up so that there is a correlation between driving ACCURACY and scoring . The whole point in golf should be that if you hit fairways you should have advantages . Making a par 4 530 just asks you to drive as close to the green as possible



    Please grow real rough and real width fairways at 6800 yards , keep courses that way and report back to me in 15 years when the NATURE of the game has evolved to a precision skilled sport from a smash and score sport
    Posted:
    Mizuno ST190G atmos 6s
    Mizuno MP18 2fh / PX 6.0
    Mizuno MP18 3-Pw/ PX 6.0
    Mizuno S18 5310+5812/PX 6.0
    Ping TR Anser 1966/ 34”

    Ball - pro v1x
    Grips - Crossline cord

    Lofts 18 , 21.5, 25, 29, 33, 37, 41, 45, 49, 53, 58
  • storm319storm319 US 4057WRX Points: 322Members Posts: 4,057 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #372
    Bye wrote:

    storm319 wrote:


    Is there anyone pro-rollback that was born after 1970? It would be interesting to see the age demographics of this debate.




    Me, 1979.



    Having said that I bought my kids a old games consol for Christmas to introduce them to gaming. It's not quite as good as I remember.




    Nostalgia can be a b**ch. I am sure many pro-rollbackers would find shorter balls and smaller, less forgiving clubs to be less fun than they remember...
    Posted:
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • North ButteNorth Butte  11741WRX Points: 1,541Members Posts: 11,741 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #373
    starsail85 wrote:


    The whole point in golf should be that if you hit fairways you should have advantages . Making a par 4 530 just asks you to drive as close to the green as possible




    Huh?



    Hit your tee shot into the woods on a 530-yard hole and tell me accuracy doesn't matter and you wouldn’t have an advantage being in the fairway.
    Posted:
    “1lb beefstak, with
    1pt bitter beer
    every 6 hours.
    1 ten-mile walk every morning.
    1 bed at 11 sharp every night.
    And don't stuff your head with things you don't understand.” 
  • starsail85starsail85  4832WRX Points: 205Members Posts: 4,832 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #374

    starsail85 wrote:


    The whole point in golf should be that if you hit fairways you should have advantages . Making a par 4 530 just asks you to drive as close to the green as possible




    Huh?



    Hit your tee shot into the woods on a 530-yard hole and tell me accuracy doesn't matter and you wouldn’t have an advantage being in the fairway.




    Accuracy doesn’t matter right now



    It’s better to be hitting a 9 iron from the “primary rough” precision mown at 2” than a 5 iron from the fairway



    All the tree lined courses on tour (what are there half a dozen each year tops ?) and the big hitters are nowhere to be seen (or don’t enter)
    Posted:
    Mizuno ST190G atmos 6s
    Mizuno MP18 2fh / PX 6.0
    Mizuno MP18 3-Pw/ PX 6.0
    Mizuno S18 5310+5812/PX 6.0
    Ping TR Anser 1966/ 34”

    Ball - pro v1x
    Grips - Crossline cord

    Lofts 18 , 21.5, 25, 29, 33, 37, 41, 45, 49, 53, 58
  • North ButteNorth Butte  11741WRX Points: 1,541Members Posts: 11,741 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #375
    Oh, so you mean it doesn’t “matter” enough to make someone steer the ball around scared spitless of being in the rough. If you make the ball go 50 yards shorter, why would someone fear the rough more?



    If someone isn’t scared of their 320-yard tee shot going in the rough, why would they be scared of a 270-yard tee shot going in the rough?



    And surely you realize that hitting it 320 requires far more “accuracy” than hitting it 270. The longer, inaccurate shot will go much farther offline.
    Posted:
    “1lb beefstak, with
    1pt bitter beer
    every 6 hours.
    1 ten-mile walk every morning.
    1 bed at 11 sharp every night.
    And don't stuff your head with things you don't understand.” 
  • ShilgyShilgy Phoenix 12228WRX Points: 1,360Handicap: 3.2Members Posts: 12,228 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #376
    The pros do play courses with trees, they just don't hit into them. And rough is the norm compared to what we all play every day. Watch carefully an event on television. 4" or so is the primary rough on tour. It seems some posts think the only reason the guys on your can score well is because of no rough and wide open runways. Couldn't be further from the truth.

    But these guys are good is true.
    Posted:
    WITB
    Tools for the job!

    To paraphrase Dr Seuss: Don't cry because the round of golf is over-smile because it happened . :)

    Game is recovering from total ankle replacement. Getting there and glad to be pain free!
  • rawdograwdog Cleveland, OH 3043WRX Points: 144Handicap: 7.9Members Posts: 3,043 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #377
    Uhit wrote:

    Golfjack wrote:

    Uhit wrote:



    Why is Titleist responding to an argument nobody is having? Who has said the absolute longest players are winning at the highest clip? Isn't the argument (regardless of your opinion) that the relative length of the field has changed the way the game is played thus making skills such as long and mid-iron play, and shot making less relevant than they used to be (as well as some classic golf courses)?




    In my opinion Titleist made a overview, which helps to look at the theme from different angles - if someone is willing to...



    The argument is, that nothing has changed, distance wise, since the last 15 years - neither the long hitter, nor the field has changed since more than a decade (in terms of carry distances).





    Shot making becomes more difficult, the farther the ball travels - no matter which number is written on the golf club...



    ...the evidence can be found in the numbers the OP mentioned.





    Btw...



    ...remember, that nowadays a 6 iron has about the same loft, as a 4 iron had in the past.



    Would you be more satisfied, if they simply change the numbers, to make it easier for those who don´t realize that the same numbers represent a different loft nowadays?




    Not that I don't agree with you, but does that my blade 3 iron is as easy to hit as a GI 5 iron? Hm....




    Do you think, that one shouldn't allow hybrids for professional golf?



    Or what is your point?



    Why should a pro use a long iron for the second shot on a par 4, instead of a hybrid, or a 7 wood - if he can not reach the green with a short iron?



    -



    If true shot-making is restricted to the use of long blades, then you have to dump all the GI stuff (at least for professional golf).



    You can be sure, that professionals would use less long irons, and more GI hybrids etc. if they would have to play in a tournament with a even more restricted ball.



    -



    The idea, that a even more restricted ball would help the game golf is either short sighted, or a fraud.




    Here's a guy who understands unintended consequences. Plenty of ways to counter a higher-spinning ball.
    Posted:
    Cobra LTD Driver
    Aldila Rogue Black, 9.5*
    On -, @44.5"

    In1Zone Single Length Fairway Woods
    Graffaloy ProLaunch Axis Blue
    On -, @41.5" 5W = 19*

    Graffaloy ProLaunch Axis Blue
    On -, @41.5" 7W = 23*

    Cobra F7 One Length Irons
    Nippon Modus 105 Stiff @ 36.5"
    6I = 24* 7I = 29* 8I = 34* 9I = 39* PW = 44* GW = 49* SW = 54* LW = 59*
    Odyssey #9 HT Metal X Milled
    On -, @33.5"

    Maxfli SoftFli
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • bladehunterbladehunter Today was a good day... south carolina 30201WRX Points: 6,555Handicap: NONEMembers Posts: 30,201 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #378
    storm319 wrote:


    Is there anyone pro-rollback that was born after 1970? It would be interesting to see the age demographics of this debate.




    1979...dec.... so almost 1980....
    Posted:
    TM SIM max 10.8 Fuji Ventus red 6x 
    Ping G410 15.5* Graphite Design ADDI 8x
    Ping G410 21* ADDI 105x 
    Ping Blueprint  3- PW   Modus 130X 
    Ping Glide Forged  54 60 s400
    Cameron GSS 1.5 009. Sound slot,  tungsten weights. 


  • starsail85starsail85  4832WRX Points: 205Members Posts: 4,832 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #379


    Oh, so you mean it doesn’t “matter” enough to make someone steer the ball around scared spitless of being in the rough. If you make the ball go 50 yards shorter, why would someone fear the rough more?



    If someone isn’t scared of their 320-yard tee shot going in the rough, why would they be scared of a 270-yard tee shot going in the rough?



    And surely you realize that hitting it 320 requires far more “accuracy” than hitting it 270. The longer, inaccurate shot will go much farther offline.




    I don’t think the ball needs rolling back



    I think the player needs rolling back



    Your 320/270 point confirms exactly the point in trying to make . IF the courses were set up so you had to hit the fairway to be able to compete , players wouldn’t be trying to hit it 320 . Accuracy would have a far bigger part to play and players would actually try and work on hitting the fairways . When you can win your events hitting it 330 into the rough, then wedge up for easy birdie , where is the incentive to hit it straight ?



    Courses like Hilton Head , Southern Hills, Valderama etc protect themselves easily



    The rough really isn’t an issue on most tour stops , whereas in my opinion it should be long and thick enough to require a hack back out to the fairway .



    Stop playing “bomber” courses and start playing real golf courses , and the type of player that is successful on tour will begin to change , and driving distance will start to fall (on average)
    Posted:
    Mizuno ST190G atmos 6s
    Mizuno MP18 2fh / PX 6.0
    Mizuno MP18 3-Pw/ PX 6.0
    Mizuno S18 5310+5812/PX 6.0
    Ping TR Anser 1966/ 34”

    Ball - pro v1x
    Grips - Crossline cord

    Lofts 18 , 21.5, 25, 29, 33, 37, 41, 45, 49, 53, 58
  • Tyler1puttTyler1putt  116WRX Points: 5Members Posts: 116 Bunkers
    Joined:  #380
    storm319 wrote:


    Is there anyone pro-rollback that was born after 1970? It would be interesting to see the age demographics of this debate.


    Yep right here 1987
    Posted:
    • Taylormade M4 9.5 Accra TZx455 M5
    • Callaway Epic Sub Zero 15 Accra TZx465 M5
    • Callaway Razr Fit 19 Diamana Whiteboard 73X
    • Callaway Apex Pro 2018 4 Iron Nippon Modus 125X
    • Callaway Apex Oil Can MB 2018 5 - PW Nippon Modus 125X
    • Callaway MD4 Black 52 Nippon Modus 125X
    • Callaway MD4 Black 56 Dynamic Gold Tour Issue S400
    • Callaway MD4 Black 60 Dynamic Gold Tour Issue S400
    • Ping Vault 2.0 ZB in Black
    • Titleist Pro V1
  • North TexasNorth Texas  4536WRX Points: 901Members Posts: 4,536 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #381
    storm319 wrote:

    Bye wrote:

    storm319 wrote:


    Is there anyone pro-rollback that was born after 1970? It would be interesting to see the age demographics of this debate.




    Me, 1979.



    Having said that I bought my kids a old games consol for Christmas to introduce them to gaming. It's not quite as good as I remember.




    Nostalgia can be a b**ch. I am sure many pro-rollbackers would find shorter balls and smaller, less forgiving clubs to be less fun than they remember...




    You guys do realize nostalgia and wanting to protect records has absolutely zero to do with this debate don't you? As in zero, zip, nada.



    People who think that really, really can't see the forest for the trees.
    Posted:
  • North ButteNorth Butte  11741WRX Points: 1,541Members Posts: 11,741 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  edited Dec 28, 2017 #382
    Yeah, it’s so that every golf course in the country will be bulldozed and rebuilt at 80% scale to suit s rolled back ball, thereby saving billions of dollars.



    Or was it so rich guys won’t keep building more and more expensive courses in an effort to prove theirs is longer than the other rich guy’s?



    At least the nostalgia argument would be based on an honest emotion rather than silly, counterfactual, wishful thinking.
    Posted:
    “1lb beefstak, with
    1pt bitter beer
    every 6 hours.
    1 ten-mile walk every morning.
    1 bed at 11 sharp every night.
    And don't stuff your head with things you don't understand.” 
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • raynorfan1raynorfan1  3826WRX Points: 349Members Posts: 3,826 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #383

    storm319 wrote:

    Bye wrote:

    storm319 wrote:


    Is there anyone pro-rollback that was born after 1970? It would be interesting to see the age demographics of this debate.




    Me, 1979.



    Having said that I bought my kids a old games consol for Christmas to introduce them to gaming. It's not quite as good as I remember.




    Nostalgia can be a b**ch. I am sure many pro-rollbackers would find shorter balls and smaller, less forgiving clubs to be less fun than they remember...




    You guys do realize nostalgia and wanting to protect records has absolutely zero to do with this debate don't you? As in zero, zip, nada.



    People who think that really, really can't see the forest for the trees.




    Then what is the point?



    I asked the question on the first page, and the only answer has been: "I liked golf better when guys had to move the ball both ways and it looked more challenging for them".
    Posted:
  • storm319storm319 US 4057WRX Points: 322Members Posts: 4,057 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  edited Dec 28, 2017 #384
    raynorfan1 wrote:


    storm319 wrote:

    Bye wrote:

    storm319 wrote:


    Is there anyone pro-rollback that was born after 1970? It would be interesting to see the age demographics of this debate.




    Me, 1979.



    Having said that I bought my kids a old games consol for Christmas to introduce them to gaming. It's not quite as good as I remember.




    Nostalgia can be a b**ch. I am sure many pro-rollbackers would find shorter balls and smaller, less forgiving clubs to be less fun than they remember...




    You guys do realize nostalgia and wanting to protect records has absolutely zero to do with this debate don't you? As in zero, zip, nada.



    People who think that really, really can't see the forest for the trees.




    Then what is the point?



    I asked the question on the first page, and the only answer has been: "I liked golf better when guys had to move the ball both ways and it looked more challenging for them".




    Sounds like nostalgia to me image/smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />



    I agree that most pro-rollback responses lack identification of what the perceived "problem" even is and seem to be based more on feeling than fact.
    Posted:
    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • storm319storm319 US 4057WRX Points: 322Members Posts: 4,057 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #385

    storm319 wrote:

    Bye wrote:

    storm319 wrote:


    Is there anyone pro-rollback that was born after 1970? It would be interesting to see the age demographics of this debate.




    Me, 1979.



    Having said that I bought my kids a old games consol for Christmas to introduce them to gaming. It's not quite as good as I remember.




    Nostalgia can be a b**ch. I am sure many pro-rollbackers would find shorter balls and smaller, less forgiving clubs to be less fun than they remember...




    You guys do realize nostalgia and wanting to protect records has absolutely zero to do with this debate don't you? As in zero, zip, nada.



    People who think that really, really can't see the forest for the trees.




    This statement is ironic considering that most pro-rollback posts seem to be more focused on the clubs players are using on certain shots than the final score they are signing which is in reality is the real big picture.



    Also, saying that nostalgia has zero to do with this argument is disingenuous.
    Posted:
  • bladehunterbladehunter Today was a good day... south carolina 30201WRX Points: 6,555Handicap: NONEMembers Posts: 30,201 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #386
    it isnt nostalgia for me... i only started playing this game competitively in 2014.. i have no real memories of balata and persimmon.. i was around the game working at a course.. but didnt really play..
    Posted:
    TM SIM max 10.8 Fuji Ventus red 6x 
    Ping G410 15.5* Graphite Design ADDI 8x
    Ping G410 21* ADDI 105x 
    Ping Blueprint  3- PW   Modus 130X 
    Ping Glide Forged  54 60 s400
    Cameron GSS 1.5 009. Sound slot,  tungsten weights. 


  • UhitUhit  861WRX Points: 0Members Posts: 861
    Joined:  edited Dec 29, 2017 #387


    it isnt nostalgia for me... i only started playing this game competitively in 2014.. i have no real memories of balata and persimmon.. i was around the game working at a course.. but didnt really play..




    Well, then I would assume, that you have seen things like that:



    https://www.youtube....h?v=NAGN-BV31Nw



    ...to come to the conclusion, that driving distance is very depending on the course conditions.





    Balls bouncing and running more than 50 yards, adding to the average driving distance.





    Or you may have read, that since 1980, the average swing speed on tour has increased from 104 mph to 113 mph in 2016. image/read.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':read:' />



    If you assume roughly 2.5 yards additional distance per mph, you get a distance gain from noticeably over 20 yards - solely based on the athletes capabilities to swing it faster...

    ...which is completely independent from the ball.
    Posted:
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • starsail85starsail85  4832WRX Points: 205Members Posts: 4,832 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #388
    Uhit wrote:



    it isnt nostalgia for me... i only started playing this game competitively in 2014.. i have no real memories of balata and persimmon.. i was around the game working at a course.. but didnt really play..




    Well, then I would assume, that you have seen things like that:



    [url="



    ...to come to the conclusion, that driving distance is very depending on the course conditions.





    Balls bouncing and running more than 50 yards, adding to the average driving distance.





    Or you may have read, that since 1980, the average driving speed on tour has increased from 104 mph to 113 mph in 2016. image/read.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':read:' />



    If you assume roughly 2.5 yards additional distance per mph, you get a distance gain from noticeably over 20 yards - solely based on the athletes capabilities to swing it faster...

    ...which is completely independent from the ball.




    Average swing speed is a massive massive deal .



    Now the courses are set up so you can’t compete at 104mph so the average will continue to rise due to player characteristics eg power dictating success on Tour



    Posted:
    Mizuno ST190G atmos 6s
    Mizuno MP18 2fh / PX 6.0
    Mizuno MP18 3-Pw/ PX 6.0
    Mizuno S18 5310+5812/PX 6.0
    Ping TR Anser 1966/ 34”

    Ball - pro v1x
    Grips - Crossline cord

    Lofts 18 , 21.5, 25, 29, 33, 37, 41, 45, 49, 53, 58
  • Roadking2003Roadking2003 Austin 6635WRX Points: 1,115Handicap: 8.7Members Posts: 6,635 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #389
    storm319 wrote:


    Sounds like nostalgia to me image/smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />



    I agree that most pro-rollback responses lack identification of what the perceived "problem" even is and seem to be based more on feeling than fact.




    Scores have stabilized so there is no reason to change the equipment rules. I do support the idea that courses should make wayward drives more penal. That would add an element of drama that has diminished.



    If you look at the PGA Tour stats, driving accuracy is almost totally meaningless (none of the top players are accurate off the tee). The easiest way to change that is with deeper rough and narrow fairways.
    Posted:
  • North ButteNorth Butte  11741WRX Points: 1,541Members Posts: 11,741 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  edited Dec 29, 2017 #390
    The top players are VERY accurate off the tee. They just hit it in the rough sometimes. “Fairways Hit” is a junk statistic. Keeping the ball in play consistently while driving it 300+ yards requires great directional control.



    P.S. Setting up a course to try to force a correlation between a junk statistic and scoring is a fool’s errand. It can’t possibly be accomplished without creating a pathologically warped version of the game.
    Posted:
    “1lb beefstak, with
    1pt bitter beer
    every 6 hours.
    1 ten-mile walk every morning.
    1 bed at 11 sharp every night.
    And don't stuff your head with things you don't understand.” 
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • Roadking2003Roadking2003 Austin 6635WRX Points: 1,115Handicap: 8.7Members Posts: 6,635 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #391


    The top players are VERY accurate off the tee. They just hit it in the rough sometimes. "Fairways Hit" is a junk statistic. Keeping the ball in play consistently while driving it 300+ yards requires great directional control.



    P.S. Setting up a course to try to force a correlation between a junk statistic and scoring is a fool's errand. It can't possibly be accomplished without creating a pathologically warped version of the game.




    So I guess we are down to semantics. "Very accurate" can be defined however you choose. So let me restate; None of the top players hit their tee ball in the fairway as often as almost every other player on tour.



    Driving accuracy rank;



    DJ; 143

    JT; 162

    JS; 101

    JD; 172

    RM: 161



    I agree that today "fairways hit" is a junk statistic. But it shouldn't be. The penalty for missing a fairway should be more severe than it is today.
    Posted:
19

Leave a Comment

Rich Text Editor. To edit a paragraph's style, hit tab to get to the paragraph menu. From there you will be able to pick one style. Nothing defaults to paragraph. An inline formatting menu will show up when you select text. Hit tab to get into that menu. Some elements, such as rich link embeds, images, loading indicators, and error messages may get inserted into the editor. You may navigate to these using the arrow keys inside of the editor and delete them with the delete or backspace key.