The primary anti-roll back the ball argument

1246789

Comments

  • BlackDiamondPar5BlackDiamondPar5 Members Posts: 5,306 ✭✭
    edited Jun 13, 2018 #92
    DFS PFD wrote:


    "If a guy hits a ball 240 yards now and can reach the greens in regulation, a 20% reduction would put him below 200 yards, and he might not be able to. If he hit's it 220, it's even less after a 20% reduction. If he can reach 75% of the greens in regulation now, from the forward tees, now suddenly he cant. Are you going to say that is ok, because he doesnt deserve to hit greens in regulation anyway?"



    I didn't even mention the rollback. Take a moment to read what you're replying to instead of automatically inserting 20% in every response.


    Sure he can, just move up a set of tees... Courses would probably build more Forward tees if needed. Most people play too far back anyway. (disclaimer - I oppose a rollback of the ball unless it's Pro tours only)
  • Sean2Sean2 #TheWRX (Callaway Trip) Members Posts: 30,826 ✭✭

    DFS PFD wrote:


    "If a guy hits a ball 240 yards now and can reach the greens in regulation, a 20% reduction would put him below 200 yards, and he might not be able to. If he hit's it 220, it's even less after a 20% reduction. If he can reach 75% of the greens in regulation now, from the forward tees, now suddenly he cant. Are you going to say that is ok, because he doesnt deserve to hit greens in regulation anyway?"



    I didn't even mention the rollback. Take a moment to read what you're replying to instead of automatically inserting 20% in every response.


    Sure he can, just move up a set of tees... Courses would probably build more Forward tees if needed. Most people play too far back anyway. (disclaimer - I oppose a rollback of the ball unless it's Pro tours only)




    Yeah, but if the ball is rolled back, and golfers move up a set of tees, most will probably still be too far back. :-)
    [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Callaway Rogue[/font]
    [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Callaway GBB Epic 16º/20º/24º[/font]
    [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Callaway Steelhead XR 25º[/font]
    [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Callaway Apex CF16 6-AW [/font]
    [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Callaway MD3/MD-PM 54º/58º[/font]
    [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Callaway "O" Works #7[/font]
  • BlackDiamondPar5BlackDiamondPar5 Members Posts: 5,306 ✭✭
    Sean2 wrote:


    DFS PFD wrote:


    "If a guy hits a ball 240 yards now and can reach the greens in regulation, a 20% reduction would put him below 200 yards, and he might not be able to. If he hit's it 220, it's even less after a 20% reduction. If he can reach 75% of the greens in regulation now, from the forward tees, now suddenly he cant. Are you going to say that is ok, because he doesnt deserve to hit greens in regulation anyway?"



    I didn't even mention the rollback. Take a moment to read what you're replying to instead of automatically inserting 20% in every response.


    Sure he can, just move up a set of tees... Courses would probably build more Forward tees if needed. Most people play too far back anyway. (disclaimer - I oppose a rollback of the ball unless it's Pro tours only)




    Yeah, but if the ball is rolled back, and golfers move up a set of tees, most will probably still be too far back. :-)


    Right but the net effect will probably be zero. At least equipment manufactures will have to find some other new shinny lure other than distance. If you go by equipment marketing, every year provides more distance, so really if that were true the average drive should be about 600 yards by now image/smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />
  • Sean2Sean2 #TheWRX (Callaway Trip) Members Posts: 30,826 ✭✭

    Sean2 wrote:


    DFS PFD wrote:


    "If a guy hits a ball 240 yards now and can reach the greens in regulation, a 20% reduction would put him below 200 yards, and he might not be able to. If he hit's it 220, it's even less after a 20% reduction. If he can reach 75% of the greens in regulation now, from the forward tees, now suddenly he cant. Are you going to say that is ok, because he doesnt deserve to hit greens in regulation anyway?"



    I didn't even mention the rollback. Take a moment to read what you're replying to instead of automatically inserting 20% in every response.


    Sure he can, just move up a set of tees... Courses would probably build more Forward tees if needed. Most people play too far back anyway. (disclaimer - I oppose a rollback of the ball unless it's Pro tours only)




    Yeah, but if the ball is rolled back, and golfers move up a set of tees, most will probably still be too far back. :-)


    Right but the net effect will probably be zero. At least equipment manufactures will have to find some other new shinny lure other than distance. If you go by equipment marketing, every year provides more distance, so really if that were true the average drive should be about 600 yards by now image/smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />




    Well, some are now making 5-irons with 21º of loft and PW's with 41º...so yeah, you will hit the ball farther. :-)
    [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Callaway Rogue[/font]
    [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Callaway GBB Epic 16º/20º/24º[/font]
    [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Callaway Steelhead XR 25º[/font]
    [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Callaway Apex CF16 6-AW [/font]
    [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Callaway MD3/MD-PM 54º/58º[/font]
    [font=helvetica, arial, sans-serif]Callaway "O" Works #7[/font]
  • JaNelson38JaNelson38 Members Posts: 2,708 ✭✭
    For me, the argument against the ball rollback is simple: golf is still a wedge and putter game. At any level.



    Even the bombers dont win on Tour unless they putt well and their short games are on point.



    Big hitters come and go on the PGA Tour. The guys with the good putters and good short games always seem to stick around. This isnt a coincidence.
  • Ty_WebbTy_Webb New YorkMembers Posts: 2,988 ✭✭
    clevited wrote:
    ex0dus wrote:


    Rick Shiels did a video comparing todays Prov1 to a wound ball from the 90s. The new ball carried 11 yards farther with the driver, impressive but hardly a game changer.




    I have seen that video too, and if you take a look at his numbers and plug them into flightscope optimizer, they are only 6 yards different with the driver. I am not sure how his GCquad got 11 yards with only 3 mph difference in ball speed and nearly every other launch perameter the same. Basically, I think real life the distances would have been even closer just from my experience with many launch monitors and their algorithm differences.



    All and all, 11 yards isn't much, 6 yards is even less difference. The ball change from balata to prov is likely almost nil.




    I thought the issue with the modern ball is it goes much straighter. That means pros can go at it harder without worrying about losing too much control. That’s where the distance gain comes from. It doesn’t surprise me that launch monitor numbers give only a 6 yard difference. In the real world under tournament conditions that difference could be substantially higher.
    Ping G400 LST 9° Diamana white 63x
    Ping G410 LST 3 wood Diamana Thump
    Taylor Made UDI 2 iron Diamana Tensei white 90TX
    Titleist 714CB 3, 4
    Titleist 714MB 5-PW
    Ping Glide 2.0 Stealth 52 and 56 WS
    Scotty Cameron Newport 2
  • rangersgoalierangersgoalie Members Posts: 1,811 ✭✭
    NevinW wrote:


    I'm not sure I understand one of the primary argument that is used against the idea of rolling back the ball: That it hurts the recreational player who doesn't hit the ball far enough as it is. My question is: Let's say they made the golf ball go 5% shorter across the board. Why couldn't everyone play 6500 yard courses rather than 6900 yards. Nothing else would change. Everyone moves up a set of tees and the very back tees are eliminated. Shorter golf courses means quicker rounds, less fertilizer and expenses. Instead of hitting a 7 iron 160, one would hit it 152. How would this be catastrophic to the amateur game?




    Well, I'm a 56 year old golf pro,mane I've never seen anyone show up for a lesson happy to hit it shorter image/smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />



    Not to mention, haven't seen a huge number play the correct tees as of now!!
  • rangersgoalierangersgoalie Members Posts: 1,811 ✭✭
    15th Club wrote:

    wildcatden wrote:


    The fix is truly simple (especially for the PGA): Stop mowing fairways down to concrete-like surfaces, narrow the fairways, and grow the rough another inch or so.




    {Sigh.} Do you realize, that that "simple fix" is just a great big negative, for the quality of golf in the service of simply holding down scoring? I mean, the USGA has done it many times before. And they'd argue that they are trying to identify the best golfers and that narrowing fairways and growing rough puts an emphasis on accuracy and nerves and serves as a bit of a brake on distance as players try to hit narrowed fairways for fear of punitive rough.



    But that's old thinking, in my view. The new generation of history-minded golf course architects want to return to width; to give players options on the best lines and re-introduce course management and strategy. To open up as many lines, angles and choices as possible; to make hazards more strategic and less punitive.




    Also known as Easier For high level golfers
  • rangersgoalierangersgoalie Members Posts: 1,811 ✭✭

    DFS PFD wrote:


    "If a guy hits a ball 240 yards now and can reach the greens in regulation, a 20% reduction would put him below 200 yards, and he might not be able to. If he hit's it 220, it's even less after a 20% reduction. If he can reach 75% of the greens in regulation now, from the forward tees, now suddenly he cant. Are you going to say that is ok, because he doesnt deserve to hit greens in regulation anyway?"



    I didn't even mention the rollback. Take a moment to read what you're replying to instead of automatically inserting 20% in every response.


    Sure he can, just move up a set of tees... Courses would probably build more Forward tees if needed. Most people play too far back anyway. (disclaimer - I oppose a rollback of the ball unless it's Pro tours only)




    So, want tour pros and manufactures to change everything....and make golf customers move up, or build shorter tees.....

    As in many fixes, create more problems with a fix.........



    Devils advocate btw.....I understand some kind of roll back, but some who do think it's simple, and won't have any negative impacts
  • Ashley SchaefferAshley Schaeffer Members Posts: 2,111 ✭✭
    bigred90gt wrote:





    With all due respect, I don't think that's what we were discussing. I think (hope) we were discussing the type of player that we all know who doesn't hit it far enough to hit a lot of GIRs. My mother has won her club championship three years in a row, and I don't think I've ever seen her hit it over 200 yards. One-putt pars for days. I think the comments were more about the fact that those players (and, indeed, no player) has a "right" to hit a GIR. My view is that we shouldn't make it harder for those, or any, amateur golfers.




    If a guy hits a ball 240 yards now and can reach the greens in regulation, a 20% reduction would put him below 200 yards, and he might not be able to. If he hit's it 220, it's even less after a 20% reduction. If he can reach 75% of the greens in regulation now, from the forward tees, now suddenly he cant. Are you going to say that is ok, because he doesnt deserve to hit greens in regulation anyway?




    Definitely not. I've only said that hitting GIRs isn't a right for all players, but that players who struggle to hit GIRs shouldn't be further hindered in their attempts to do so by the USGA. I think we are all on the same side.
    8.5* TS3 - Evenflow White T-1100
    15* M2 2017
    18* M2 2017
    4-PW Mizuno JPX850F
    SM7 50*, 54*, 60*
    SC Newport Two
  • DFS PFDDFS PFD Members Posts: 959 ✭✭


    DFS PFD wrote:


    "If a guy hits a ball 240 yards now and can reach the greens in regulation, a 20% reduction would put him below 200 yards, and he might not be able to. If he hit's it 220, it's even less after a 20% reduction. If he can reach 75% of the greens in regulation now, from the forward tees, now suddenly he cant. Are you going to say that is ok, because he doesnt deserve to hit greens in regulation anyway?"



    I didn't even mention the rollback. Take a moment to read what you're replying to instead of automatically inserting 20% in every response.


    Sure he can, just move up a set of tees... Courses would probably build more Forward tees if needed. Most people play too far back anyway. (disclaimer - I oppose a rollback of the ball unless it's Pro tours only)




    So, want tour pros and manufactures to change everything....and make golf customers move up, or build shorter tees.....

    As in many fixes, create more problems with a fix.........



    Devils advocate btw.....I understand some kind of roll back, but some who do think it's simple, and won't have any negative impacts


    I don't think there's anything simple about it. I personally wouldn't look forward to it, at all, but I do think it will become necessary with water shortages and real-estate prices for golf to remain somewhat affordable in the future.
    Epic Flash SZ 9* TD  HZRDUS Smoke Hulk 6.5TX 60g 
    M2 Tour 15* Kuro Kage DC 70TX
    790 UDI Tensei Pro White 100TX
    4-PW Apex Pro 19 DG X7's
    50* MG Raw Tour issue S400
    55* MG Raw Tour issue S400
    60* Hi-Toe Tour Issue S400
    TOULON Garage Atlanta
  • North TexasNorth Texas Members Posts: 4,268 ✭✭
    edited Jun 13, 2018 #103
    Amazing that people really think that there would ever be a 20-25% rollback! NOT HAPPENING!



    And this is coming from someone who, prior to reading all the different threads on this site about this, thought the USGA let both the ball and the driver size get away from them. And I have read absolutely nothing in all these threads that has changed my mind.



    I really believe they are looking at and considering addressing the "problem" in a way that most of us are NOT thinking about and that will surprise a lot of people. But what that is, I don't know.
  • Ashley SchaefferAshley Schaeffer Members Posts: 2,111 ✭✭


    Amazing that people really think that there would ever be a 20-25% rollback! NOT HAPPENING!



    And this is coming from someone who, prior to reading all the different threads on this site about this, thought the USGA let both the ball and the driver size get away from them. And I have read absolutely nothing in all these threads that has changed my mind.



    I really believe they are looking at and considering addressing the "problem" in a way that most of us are NOT thinking about and that will surprise a lot of people. But what that is, I don't know.




    Agreed. But I might add that there is no rollback of the ball coming, no matter what Jack Nicklaus says from his Lay-Z-Boy. There comes a time to put even the best cows out to pasture. He's been a fine steward. Time to graze.
    8.5* TS3 - Evenflow White T-1100
    15* M2 2017
    18* M2 2017
    4-PW Mizuno JPX850F
    SM7 50*, 54*, 60*
    SC Newport Two
  • gvogelgvogel Members Posts: 7,470 ✭✭

    15th Club wrote:



    [background=transparent]Most guys are bigger, stronger and all have new methods of training to optimize distance that simply wasn't around 20 years ago.[/background]




    As we have discussed more times than I can recount, I am not sure that I accept the notion that Fred Couples' or Tiger Woods' current length, compared to 20 years ago, has anything to do with physical fitness.



    But even if it were, I'd argue strongly that since nobody would dream of regulating fitness, the thing to do is to regulate one of the most inconsequential things which is the golf ball.



    If you think I am saying that the golf ball has to take the blame for (presumed) improved athleticism, you have it exactly right. That is not punishing any or all of the athletes. It is protecting the golf course.


    The number of tour players with swing speeds of >120 doubled from 2007 to 2017. Average PGA tour club head speed increased by 9mph from 1980 to 2016...this data can't be overlooked when it comes to distance increases.


    Lovely statistic.



    In 1980, drivers were wood head on a steel shaft. They were a lot heavier, and driver length was typically 43". Now you have graphite and titanium, so clubs are lighter, and can be played at 45-1/2". I would assume anyone would gain club head speed changing from wood/steel to titanium/graphite.
    Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing-glove.  P.G. Wodehouse
  • North TexasNorth Texas Members Posts: 4,268 ✭✭



    Amazing that people really think that there would ever be a 20-25% rollback! NOT HAPPENING!



    And this is coming from someone who, prior to reading all the different threads on this site about this, thought the USGA let both the ball and the driver size get away from them. And I have read absolutely nothing in all these threads that has changed my mind.



    I really believe they are looking at and considering addressing the "problem" in a way that most of us are NOT thinking about and that will surprise a lot of people. But what that is, I don't know.




    Agreed. But I might add that there is no rollback of the ball coming, no matter what Jack Nicklaus says from his Lay-Z-Boy. There comes a time to put even the best cows out to pasture. He's been a fine steward. Time to graze.




    Agree on the rollback. Don't see it happening. Not even 5%.



    But we'll disagree on Jack. He's earned and deserves continued respect. Whether you agree with him or not. And I don't always agree with him.
  • clevitedclevited Don't think you are, know you are. Members Posts: 1,008 ✭✭
    gvogel wrote:


    15th Club wrote:



    [background=transparent]Most guys are bigger, stronger and all have new methods of training to optimize distance that simply wasn't around 20 years ago.[/background]




    As we have discussed more times than I can recount, I am not sure that I accept the notion that Fred Couples' or Tiger Woods' current length, compared to 20 years ago, has anything to do with physical fitness.



    But even if it were, I'd argue strongly that since nobody would dream of regulating fitness, the thing to do is to regulate one of the most inconsequential things which is the golf ball.



    If you think I am saying that the golf ball has to take the blame for (presumed) improved athleticism, you have it exactly right. That is not punishing any or all of the athletes. It is protecting the golf course.


    The number of tour players with swing speeds of >120 doubled from 2007 to 2017. Average PGA tour club head speed increased by 9mph from 1980 to 2016...this data can't be overlooked when it comes to distance increases.


    Lovely statistic.



    In 1980, drivers were wood head on a steel shaft. They were a lot heavier, and driver length was typically 43". Now you have graphite and titanium, so clubs are lighter, and can be played at 45-1/2". I would assume anyone would gain club head speed changing from wood/steel to titanium/graphite.




    You would be surprised how length and weight effects speed. I don't think you can make any kind of blanket statement about that without thorough testing. The effects can be quite counter intuitive as I have discovered over the years.
  • BlackDiamondPar5BlackDiamondPar5 Members Posts: 5,306 ✭✭
    edited Jun 13, 2018 #108
    clevited wrote:

    gvogel wrote:


    15th Club wrote:



    [background=transparent]Most guys are bigger, stronger and all have new methods of training to optimize distance that simply wasn't around 20 years ago.[/background]




    As we have discussed more times than I can recount, I am not sure that I accept the notion that Fred Couples' or Tiger Woods' current length, compared to 20 years ago, has anything to do with physical fitness.



    But even if it were, I'd argue strongly that since nobody would dream of regulating fitness, the thing to do is to regulate one of the most inconsequential things which is the golf ball.



    If you think I am saying that the golf ball has to take the blame for (presumed) improved athleticism, you have it exactly right. That is not punishing any or all of the athletes. It is protecting the golf course.


    The number of tour players with swing speeds of >120 doubled from 2007 to 2017. Average PGA tour club head speed increased by 9mph from 1980 to 2016...this data can't be overlooked when it comes to distance increases.


    Lovely statistic.



    In 1980, drivers were wood head on a steel shaft. They were a lot heavier, and driver length was typically 43". Now you have graphite and titanium, so clubs are lighter, and can be played at 45-1/2". I would assume anyone would gain club head speed changing from wood/steel to titanium/graphite.




    You would be surprised how length and weight effects speed. I don't think you can make any kind of blanket statement about that without thorough testing. The effects can be quite counter intuitive as I have discovered over the years.


    But twice as many guys from 2007 to 2017 have swings speed over 120.

    Guys are generally bigger, stronger and better trained. Also technology has been used to optimize, loft, launch angle, shaft flex, kick points, spin rate etc.
  • tobiasjdtobiasjd Members Posts: 444 ✭✭
    I still say it all drills back to dispersion. As the misses get less severe, the more likely you are to push your speed. If anything over 80% puts you OB half the time, why bother with all the hours in the gym, when you can spend that time shot shaping.



    The ball is a big part of it but it’s not distance. They just don’t spin. It’s insane the amount of speed you can put thru impact and still have the ball react with a moderate amount of spin. There’s just no way you could pull that off “back in the day”.



    Cobra King LTD Black
    Titleist 910FD 15° 3w
    Titleist 917F2 18° 5w
    Callaway Apex 4h
    PING iBlade 5 - PW
    PING Glide 2.0 Stealth 52°, 56°, 60° SS
    Bettinardi BB1
  • Ashley SchaefferAshley Schaeffer Members Posts: 2,111 ✭✭




    Amazing that people really think that there would ever be a 20-25% rollback! NOT HAPPENING!



    And this is coming from someone who, prior to reading all the different threads on this site about this, thought the USGA let both the ball and the driver size get away from them. And I have read absolutely nothing in all these threads that has changed my mind.



    I really believe they are looking at and considering addressing the "problem" in a way that most of us are NOT thinking about and that will surprise a lot of people. But what that is, I don't know.




    Agreed. But I might add that there is no rollback of the ball coming, no matter what Jack Nicklaus says from his Lay-Z-Boy. There comes a time to put even the best cows out to pasture. He's been a fine steward. Time to graze.




    Agree on the rollback. Don't see it happening. Not even 5%.



    But we'll disagree on Jack. He's earned and deserves continued respect. Whether you agree with him or not. And I don't always agree with him.




    Agree to disagree. I've disliked him from the first time I laid eyes on him, and I will never respect him.
    8.5* TS3 - Evenflow White T-1100
    15* M2 2017
    18* M2 2017
    4-PW Mizuno JPX850F
    SM7 50*, 54*, 60*
    SC Newport Two
  • bigred90gtbigred90gt Lefty Boomers Posts: 4,358 ✭✭

    DFS PFD wrote:


    "If a guy hits a ball 240 yards now and can reach the greens in regulation, a 20% reduction would put him below 200 yards, and he might not be able to. If he hit's it 220, it's even less after a 20% reduction. If he can reach 75% of the greens in regulation now, from the forward tees, now suddenly he cant. Are you going to say that is ok, because he doesnt deserve to hit greens in regulation anyway?"



    I didn't even mention the rollback. Take a moment to read what you're replying to instead of automatically inserting 20% in every response.


    Sure he can, just move up a set of tees... Courses would probably build more Forward tees if needed. Most people play too far back anyway. (disclaimer - I oppose a rollback of the ball unless it's Pro tours only)




    How many courses do you think have the cash flow laying around to just up and build 18 new tee boxes at the drop of a hat? I’m not talking about big money private clubs, I’m talking about your average daily fee course that already struggles to even financially provide the Super with the tools and chemicals to even keep the course in good shape. It isn’t feasible to expect courses to all build new tees because someone thinks the pro’s and elite guys hit the ball too far.
  • North TexasNorth Texas Members Posts: 4,268 ✭✭





    Amazing that people really think that there would ever be a 20-25% rollback! NOT HAPPENING!



    And this is coming from someone who, prior to reading all the different threads on this site about this, thought the USGA let both the ball and the driver size get away from them. And I have read absolutely nothing in all these threads that has changed my mind.



    I really believe they are looking at and considering addressing the "problem" in a way that most of us are NOT thinking about and that will surprise a lot of people. But what that is, I don't know.




    Agreed. But I might add that there is no rollback of the ball coming, no matter what Jack Nicklaus says from his Lay-Z-Boy. There comes a time to put even the best cows out to pasture. He's been a fine steward. Time to graze.




    Agree on the rollback. Don't see it happening. Not even 5%.



    But we'll disagree on Jack. He's earned and deserves continued respect. Whether you agree with him or not. And I don't always agree with him.




    Agree to disagree. I've disliked him from the first time I laid eyes on him, and I will never respect him.




    Geez, not exactly open-minded, are you?
  • Nard_SNard_S Members Posts: 3,277 ✭✭
    tobiasjd wrote:


    I still say it all drills back to dispersion. As the misses get less severe, the more likely you are to push your speed. If anything over 80% puts you OB half the time, why bother with all the hours in the gym, when you can spend that time shot shaping.



    The ball is a big part of it but it’s not distance. They just don’t spin. It’s insane the amount of speed you can put thru impact and still have the ball react with a moderate amount of spin. There’s just no way you could pull that off “back in the day”.




    That is the discussion that needs to be made. Distance is not the issue on the Tour it is the rail like quality of ball flight that supplanted old ball characteristics. It's not all gain, there has been a loss too. Progress brings on new"good" but it can destroy old "good" too. Something to be said for shot making and spin control, two things that have been mitigated to some extent with modern tech. Thick rough and crusty greens do not make up for the hazard of wind and spin.
  • Ashley SchaefferAshley Schaeffer Members Posts: 2,111 ✭✭







    Agree to disagree. I've disliked him from the first time I laid eyes on him, and I will never respect him.




    Geez, not exactly open-minded, are you?




    What does that have to do with anything?

    I don't have to like or respect Jack Nicklaus.
    8.5* TS3 - Evenflow White T-1100
    15* M2 2017
    18* M2 2017
    4-PW Mizuno JPX850F
    SM7 50*, 54*, 60*
    SC Newport Two
  • carrier streetcarrier street Members Posts: 1,185 ✭✭
    wildcatden wrote:


    The fix is truly simple (especially for the PGA): Stop mowing fairways down to concrete-like surfaces, narrow the fairways, and grow the rough another inch or so.




    This times a thousand. This is an issue with the longest 100 of the top 300 players on the planet. Take some run out of the fairways. Grow the rough a bit. Not crazy, but enough to make it a penalty that needs to be avoided. I would add to this make bunkers an actual hazard again. Make it so there is a better chance of the ball sitting down in a bit.
    M3
    910 FD
    P790 UDI 2 iron
    3-PW MP18 MB
    Vokey 54S and 60L
    Scotty TEI3 Newport
  • 15th Club15th Club Members Posts: 1,714 ✭✭





    Amazing that people really think that there would ever be a 20-25% rollback! NOT HAPPENING!



    And this is coming from someone who, prior to reading all the different threads on this site about this, thought the USGA let both the ball and the driver size get away from them. And I have read absolutely nothing in all these threads that has changed my mind.



    I really believe they are looking at and considering addressing the "problem" in a way that most of us are NOT thinking about and that will surprise a lot of people. But what that is, I don't know.




    Agreed. But I might add that there is no rollback of the ball coming, no matter what Jack Nicklaus says from his Lay-Z-Boy. There comes a time to put even the best cows out to pasture. He's been a fine steward. Time to graze.




    Agree on the rollback. Don't see it happening. Not even 5%.



    But we'll disagree on Jack. He's earned and deserves continued respect. Whether you agree with him or not. And I don't always agree with him.




    Agree to disagree. I've disliked him from the first time I laid eyes on him, and I will never respect him.








    Lulz. The GolfWRX membership distinguishing itself once again.
  • North ButteNorth Butte Members Posts: 10,140 ✭✭
    What kind of real golfers isn’t a Nicklaus fan and doesn’t own any of Shack’s books



    Next thing you know Ash will tell us he pays retail for ProV1’s. Oh the humanity!
    “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.” 
  • Ashley SchaefferAshley Schaeffer Members Posts: 2,111 ✭✭
    15th Club wrote:






    Amazing that people really think that there would ever be a 20-25% rollback! NOT HAPPENING!



    And this is coming from someone who, prior to reading all the different threads on this site about this, thought the USGA let both the ball and the driver size get away from them. And I have read absolutely nothing in all these threads that has changed my mind.



    I really believe they are looking at and considering addressing the "problem" in a way that most of us are NOT thinking about and that will surprise a lot of people. But what that is, I don't know.




    Agreed. But I might add that there is no rollback of the ball coming, no matter what Jack Nicklaus says from his Lay-Z-Boy. There comes a time to put even the best cows out to pasture. He's been a fine steward. Time to graze.




    Agree on the rollback. Don't see it happening. Not even 5%.



    But we'll disagree on Jack. He's earned and deserves continued respect. Whether you agree with him or not. And I don't always agree with him.




    Agree to disagree. I've disliked him from the first time I laid eyes on him, and I will never respect him.








    Lulz. The GolfWRX membership distinguishing itself once again.




    Care to elaborate on why you feel entitled to form my opinions?
    8.5* TS3 - Evenflow White T-1100
    15* M2 2017
    18* M2 2017
    4-PW Mizuno JPX850F
    SM7 50*, 54*, 60*
    SC Newport Two
  • 15th Club15th Club Members Posts: 1,714 ✭✭


    ...

    ...

    ...

    ...



    Care to elaborate on why you feel entitled to form my opinions?






    No.
  • clevitedclevited Don't think you are, know you are. Members Posts: 1,008 ✭✭




    Agree to disagree. I've disliked him from the first time I laid eyes on him, and I will never respect him.




    Geez, not exactly open-minded, are you?




    What does that have to do with anything?

    I don't have to like or respect Jack Nicklaus.




    For the record, I don't care for Jack either. Or Gary Player. Mostly because of their ramblings about the BALL or this or that needs to change. Lost any respect I may have once had for them.
  • Ashley SchaefferAshley Schaeffer Members Posts: 2,111 ✭✭
    15th Club wrote:



    ...

    ...

    ...

    ...



    Care to elaborate on why you feel entitled to form my opinions?






    No.




    Didn't think so.
    8.5* TS3 - Evenflow White T-1100
    15* M2 2017
    18* M2 2017
    4-PW Mizuno JPX850F
    SM7 50*, 54*, 60*
    SC Newport Two
Sign In or Register to comment.