The Ball Goes Too Far

[jslane57]

I'm guessing the breakdown of opinions might go something like this (with obvious exceptions abounding):

 

Group 1: Low HCP, but was a scratch in the 70s and 80s = ball goes too far.

Group 2: Low HCP, but started playing within the last 20 years = ball is fine.

Group 3: Any handicap, but thinks he is (or was) better than he is (or was) = ball goes too far.

Group 4: Any handicap, and realizes he plays a different game than the best in the world = ball is fine.

 

Significant overlap with 1 and 3; 2 and 4.

You may be right here. But I think more of it comes from being a fan of the game. Regardless of HCP. Seeing classic courses being destroyed by today's slingers. I think group 1 is the only group who has truly seen the difference in their own games parallel the game they've watched on TV their whole lives...

[Shilgy]

That was a sarcastic comment at the people who say "The people love the long ball!". It's BS. No one watching golf on TV is watching because "I used to think golf was boring, but now that they are hitting it 350, I am amazed by it and don't miss a minute!". It's total nonsense.

 

And yes Brute Force is winning. Yeah you need other parts of your game to be good, but the winners are guys who are in the Top Half in driving distance. Jordan Spieth is probably the most perfectly rounded golfer in the world right now. But he can't show it every week because he's getting outdriven by half the field and playing 1-2 clubs behind every hole. Guys with much less talent than him but are 20-25 yards longer get the better of him too often.

Was there an era where long and straight-ish was not an advantage? All of the best players were long for the day.

[Slackattack]

Winning score this year at TPC River Highlands was -12. TPC Potomac Quicken Loans winning score was -7. RBC Heritage at Hilton Head was -13. None of these are insanely long courses, but they obviously held up pretty well. I know the fields weren't crazy deep, but these are still the best players in the world.

 

So how does this reconcile with the US Open at super-long Erin Hills giving up a score of -16. Well, that's the course set up for you. Give these guys wide-open, fast fairways and they are going to go low. This isn't anything new. The US Open has always protected par with tight fairways and thick rough. It was non-existent this year. There is no need to dial the ball back. We just need tighter fairways and thicker rough. You can do this at the US Open and every course on tour. Problem solved.

[bazinky]

That was a sarcastic comment at the people who say "The people love the long ball!". It's BS. No one watching golf on TV is watching because "I used to think golf was boring, but now that they are hitting it 350, I am amazed by it and don't miss a minute!". It's total nonsense.

 

And yes Brute Force is winning. Yeah you need other parts of your game to be good, but the winners are guys who are in the Top Half in driving distance. Jordan Spieth is probably the most perfectly rounded golfer in the world right now. But he can't show it every week because he's getting outdriven by half the field and playing 1-2 clubs behind every hole. Guys with much less talent than him but are 20-25 yards longer get the better of him too often.

 

Have winners ever not been near the top in driving distance in the history of golf?

 

How would rolling back the ball help someone in this regard? Anyone that has a distance disadvantage before the roll-back would still have one after the roll-back. Unless you artificially manipulate the ball to bring the rest of the field closer together, which seems contrary to the point of sporting competition altogether.

 

It's shades of the classic Vonnegut story "Harrison Bergeron".

[Shilgy]

I'm guessing the breakdown of opinions might go something like this (with obvious exceptions abounding):

 

Group 1: Low HCP, but was a scratch in the 70s and 80s = ball goes too far.

Group 2: Low HCP, but started playing within the last 20 years = ball is fine.

Group 3: Any handicap, but thinks he is (or was) better than he is (or was) = ball goes too far.

Group 4: Any handicap, and realizes he plays a different game than the best in the world = ball is fine.

 

Significant overlap with 1 and 3; 2 and 4.

You may be right here. But I think more of it comes from being a fan of the game. Regardless of HCP. Seeing classic courses being destroyed by today's slingers. I think group 1 is the only group who has truly seen the difference in their own games parallel the game they've watched on TV their whole lives...

I think I recall, well not really as I am not that old, that the same was said when steel replaced hickory. The first Opens were played at less than 6000 yards.

[gators78]

The ball is a problem and eventually the economics will catch up to the game.

 

The fastest growing thing in golf right now is a driving range that stops at about 220 yards.

[Sean2]

I'm not saying there haven't been improvements to the ball because there obviously have. But what you are talking about are a combination of not only improvements in the ball but also club technology and modern agronomy. Those fairways are like freshly oiled bowling lanes.

 

I agree. I read somewhere that tournament officials will have the fairways cut and rolled so the ball gets maximum bounce and roll (apparently this is good for TV). According to Trackman, the average carry distance on Tour is 275 yards.

 

I remember watching a rain soaked event earlier this year, and most of the drives were in the 270 to 285 yard range.

[bervin]

...i could be wrong but...didn't DJ blast a drive over 400 or so...and he still didn't win?

 

i'll say this (it's incredibly simple, doesn't need debate):

 

- The game of golf is a gentleman's game that is through no fault of its own, whether considered positive or negative, on a path of never ending breakthrough. Due to the very nature of the game, a nature in which it cannot be won or beaten, there will always be a desire for better. You can institute rules, you can make changes but there is one thing you cannot change -- and that is Man's ego, which will continuously strive to get better and better - whether through equipment, physical advancements, or things we cannot forecast as of yet.

 

 

truth is, you can restrict whatever the heck you want -- someone will ALWAYS find a way to get better in spite of it, OR you'll restrict it to a point where it is no longer a game of sport -- and it will die.

 

 

Yep... And, Rory put on probably one of the greatest driving performances of all time over the course of a 4 day event... AND lost by 9 shots. Hell ZJ was like 60 yards behind him every hole and how'd that work out again? Anyone who doesn't believe that strokes gained putting and approach are WAY more valuable than distance are delusional. Its a silly debate and I am not sure OP was really looking for an insightful discussion anyway.

 

None of that dynamic would have to change if you took 10% off the top for each shot. It could all play out the same, just on a slightly small scale.

 

Then why change it at all? Your points validates there is no benefit to changing the ball other than the argument from the "old guard" that people would rather watch guys hit driver, 6 iron than driver, wedge. It's silly.

[Dr. Block]

I'm guessing the breakdown of opinions might go something like this (with obvious exceptions abounding):

 

Group 1: Low HCP, but was a scratch in the 70s and 80s = ball goes too far.

Group 2: Low HCP, but started playing within the last 20 years = ball is fine.

Group 3: Any handicap, but thinks he is (or was) better than he is (or was) = ball goes too far.

Group 4: Any handicap, and realizes he plays a different game than the best in the world = ball is fine.

 

Significant overlap with 1 and 3; 2 and 4.

 

I started in the last 30 years, and I played the Titleist Professional during my competitive stretch. I remember my dad taking me to the Western Open at Dubsdread, and I remember watching the pro's suffer immensely from the rough when they missed the fairway. I also remember the cast of characters, their interesting swings, and their shot making skills back then. If the Titleist Professional was still available today in new and fresh form, that would be the ball I'd play. I loved the game during those years, much more about finesse and shot making. What group does that put me in? The weirdly antiquated group? or the understanding just how good golf used to be and could be again group?

 

Just a little side note: I keep a few ancient beat up Titleist professionals in my bag still, and I will throw them down for comparisons sake on those touch short iron/wedge shots that need to be flighted. And even being as old as they are, there is no comparison. They make for a different level of control over the golf ball that just doesnt exist anymore. Even the regular Pro V might as well be a DT Solo.

[Dr. Block]

Winning score this year at TPC River Highlands was -12. TPC Potomac Quicken Loans winning score was -7. RBC Heritage at Hilton Head was -13. None of these are insanely long courses, but they obviously held up pretty well. I know the fields weren't crazy deep, but these are still the best players in the world.

 

So how does this reconcile with the US Open at super-long Erin Hills giving up a score of -16. Well, that's the course set up for you. Give these guys wide-open, fast fairways and they are going to go low. This isn't anything new. The US Open has always protected par with tight fairways and thick rough. It was non-existent this year. There is no need to dial the ball back. We just need tighter fairways and thicker rough. You can do this at the US Open and every course on tour. Problem solved.

 

Excellent post! put a premium on driving accuracy again and you'd see the whole game change

[Jasonic]

No more shot clock on basketball sounds good too

[Shilgy]

I'm not saying there haven't been improvements to the ball because there obviously have. But what you are talking about are a combination of not only improvements in the ball but also club technology and modern agronomy. Those fairways are like freshly oiled bowling lanes.

 

I agree. I read somewhere that tournament officials will have the fairways cut and rolled so the ball gets maximum bounce and roll (apparently this is good for TV). According to Trackman, the average carry distance on Tour is 275 yards.

 

I remember watching a rain soaked event earlier this year, and most of the drives were in the 270 to 285 yard range.

The average carry appears to be 280. The average drive is 291.7. I am thinking that's not the roll to blame.

http://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.02409.html

http://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.101.html

[Ashley Schaeffer]

I'm guessing the breakdown of opinions might go something like this (with obvious exceptions abounding):

 

Group 1: Low HCP, but was a scratch in the 70s and 80s = ball goes too far.

Group 2: Low HCP, but started playing within the last 20 years = ball is fine.

Group 3: Any handicap, but thinks he is (or was) better than he is (or was) = ball goes too far.

Group 4: Any handicap, and realizes he plays a different game than the best in the world = ball is fine.

 

Significant overlap with 1 and 3; 2 and 4.

 

I started in the last 30 years, and I played the Titleist Professional during my competitive stretch. I remember my dad taking me to the Western Open at Dubsdread, and I remember watching the pro's suffer immensely from the rough when they missed the fairway. I also remember the cast of characters, their interesting swings, and their shot making skills back then. If the Titleist Professional was still available today in new and fresh form, that would be the ball I'd play. I loved the game during those years, much more about finesse and shot making. What group does that put me in? The weirdly antiquated group? or the understanding just how good golf used to be and could be again group?

 

Just a little side note: I keep a few ancient beat up Titleist professionals in my bag still, and I will throw them down for comparisons sake on those touch short iron/wedge shots that need to be flighted. And even being as old as they are, there is no comparison. They make for a different level of control over the golf ball that just doesnt exist anymore. Even the regular Pro V might as well be a DT Solo.

 

Not sure what group I'd put you in. Does the ball go too far?

[hardcaliber]

...i could be wrong but...didn't DJ blast a drive over 400 or so...and he still didn't win?

 

i'll say this (it's incredibly simple, doesn't need debate):

 

- The game of golf is a gentleman's game that is through no fault of its own, whether considered positive or negative, on a path of never ending breakthrough. Due to the very nature of the game, a nature in which it cannot be won or beaten, there will always be a desire for better. You can institute rules, you can make changes but there is one thing you cannot change -- and that is Man's ego, which will continuously strive to get better and better - whether through equipment, physical advancements, or things we cannot forecast as of yet.

 

 

truth is, you can restrict whatever the heck you want -- someone will ALWAYS find a way to get better in spite of it, OR you'll restrict it to a point where it is no longer a game of sport -- and it will die.

 

 

Yep... And, Rory put on probably one of the greatest driving performances of all time over the course of a 4 day event... AND lost by 9 shots. Hell ZJ was like 60 yards behind him every hole and how'd that work out again? Anyone who doesn't believe that strokes gained putting and approach are WAY more valuable than distance are delusional. Its a silly debate and I am not sure OP was really looking for an insightful discussion anyway.

 

None of that dynamic would have to change if you took 10% off the top for each shot. It could all play out the same, just on a slightly small scale.

 

Then why change it at all? Your points validates there is no benefit to changing the ball other than the argument from the "old guard" that people would rather watch guys hit driver, 6 iron than driver, wedge. It's silly.

 

For economic reasons, as several other posters have mentioned. Doesn't really change who wins or how they win on Tour. It could still be driver wedge if you like, but each shot would be a bit shorter.

 

I guess two different point are being made here. There is a group arguing over what playing style they would prefer to see on tour. There is another group primarily discussing what would be good for the game at large. I'm in the latter group. Maybe I should be posting in the general golf talk forum instead.

[nix]

I don't know of anyone who watches golf because of driver distance. People are certainly impressed by it, but nobody is tuning in for that. They're tuning in for the game of golf, which includes drives, wedges, irons, putting, strategy, competition and visuals.

 

I'd love to see some new courses open to pga play and I'd love for golf to evolve into a game with wide fairways with strategy instead of tiny fairways and target golf. Courses take their cues from the major courses and from players. Players in turn take their cue from the pro game. People are told that they should prefer long, hard courses with narrow fairways. But that's just not as fun as other golf.

 

If the pros were to get closer to that game, then it would become the game that people would more typically play.

[North Butte]

If you roll the ball back then every course becomes longer and harder.

[playa]

I'm not saying there haven't been improvements to the ball because there obviously have. But what you are talking about are a combination of not only improvements in the ball but also club technology and modern agronomy. Those fairways are like freshly oiled bowling lanes.

 

ABSOLUTELY. I have the same ss as most of those guys (114-120), and I average around 285-290 with my driver. In large part because I get very little roll. Some balls I hit 290 on the courses I play would go 330 on theirs.

 

It's the courses, not the ball. Dialing down the ball would be awful for the game...

I play a very short course (5,900 par 69) but we have a slope of 131. We have kikuyu fairways and plenty of water to keep them nice and lush. I would estimate I am at least 15 yards shorter than other courses with cooch fairways. Kikuyu is also very easy to grow (rough is very gnarly) and is bright green all year round so a win win for clubs and tv networks. It's not quite as nice to hit off but if kept short is perfectly ok.

Only downside is it will play even more into the hands of long hitters as carry distance is a premium. Bombers would be more dominant but old man par would be protected.

[jslane57]

If you roll the ball back then every course becomes longer and harder.

BINGO! Maybe 9000 yard courses won't need to be built.

[playa]

I'm not saying there haven't been improvements to the ball because there obviously have. But what you are talking about are a combination of not only improvements in the ball but also club technology and modern agronomy. Those fairways are like freshly oiled bowling lanes.

 

I agree. I read somewhere that tournament officials will have the fairways cut and rolled so the ball gets maximum bounce and roll (apparently this is good for TV). According to Trackman, the average carry distance on Tour is 275 yards.

 

I remember watching a rain soaked event earlier this year, and most of the drives were in the 270 to 285 yard range.

The average carry appears to be 280. The average drive is 291.7. I am thinking that's not the roll to blame.

http://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.02409.html

http://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.101.html

That's the average, but we see 330 yard drives every other group on some courses. And remember it's average length of tee shot, not driver length. Some of those averages are based on long irons.

[North Butte]

If you roll the ball back then every course becomes longer and harder.

BINGO! Maybe 9000 yard courses won't need to be built.

 

They don't need to be built now as far as I'm concerned.

[disco111]

At some point, we will reach an impasse, which IMO we are at already. The driver has been addressed (shaft length and cor value). The only thing left is the ball and in truth, they can't and should not allow it to go any further. It's very much a catch 22. Courses can't afford to keep attempting to add length, bunkers, and whatever else maintenance wise to offset distance and on the other hand, now the OEM's and technology become stalemated. But IMO, stopping the technology where it's at, becomes favorable for both courses and the general playing public. At least some stabilization for maintenance cost and players greens should occur and in general, that would / should be good for the game.

[Ashley Schaeffer]

If you roll the ball back then every course becomes longer and harder.

BINGO! Maybe 9000 yard courses won't need to be built.

 

They don't need to be built now as far as I'm concerned.

 

But, but, but, if they aren't built, then scoring records will be shattered, and my 74.2 scoring average on a regional mini tour in 1984 will feel worse for ME.

 

Regards,

Group 1.

[spooky]

Most people hate the idea of the game being made harder than it is and love hitting the ball further than their ability should allow. I suppose that's only natural. It's not the only sport where technology has resulted in power becoming more important than finesse.

 

I seem to remember that there was concern expressed many years ago about moving to the gutta percha ball, on the basis that the ball going further would mean rounds of golf taking longer. Obviously they hadn't got a clue what they were talking about...

 

The further the ball goes the more expensive the game gets, which isn't a good thing.

 

It's not going to happen, as the genie is out of the bottle, but rolling the ball back to one that spins more would be good for the game but not for some egos. Hitting the old balls flat out and keeping them in the fairway was quite an accomplishment.

 

I'm fairly certain Nicklaus was saying this in the late eighties or early nineties - I agreed with him then and he's still right in my opinion.

[wobgon]

I always get deeply involved in these threads because I feel very strongly that modern equipment is ruining many great courses and keeping them from playing anything like they were designed to play.....I am not going to get into it again. I will only say that when many guys in their sixties now hit the ball farther than they did in their twenties, thirties and forties, the equipment is allowing the ball to go to far.

[caniac6]

This might be a valid point for the pros, but I have never played with anyone that said," Gosh, I wish I didn't hit the ball so far".

[jslane57]

This might be a valid point for the pros, but I have never played with anyone that said," Gosh, I wish I didn't hit the ball so far".

Youre playing with the wrong folks. My whole group will talk about how hard certain courses were back in the day. How this hole used to be driver/7-iron. And now, 30 years older it is 3-wood/wedge. How hard it was simply to hold this green, now we have to be careful not to spin it off the front. The game has changed...

[Sean2]

If you roll the ball back then every course becomes longer and harder.

BINGO! Maybe 9000 yard courses won't need to be built.

 

Harbour Town would be considered short by today's standards, yet it still presents quite a challenge for the professional golfer. Other under 7,000 yard courses include, Pebble, the Traveler's, and the CIMB Classic. The Farmers is just a hair over 7000 (north course). There are other examples as well. Courses don't need to be made longer. You can also take a "bomb and gouge" course and make it so the "gouging" isn't very pleasant.

[slprince67]

They will never roll the ball back... Change the number of clubs they can carry from 14 to 9 or 10. This will put an emphasis on shot making. The strategy on what clubs to carry would be awesome to watch.

[jslane57]

If you roll the ball back then every course becomes longer and harder.

BINGO! Maybe 9000 yard courses won't need to be built.

 

Harbour Town would be considered short by today's standards, yet it still presents quite a challenge for the professional golfer. Other under 7,000 yard courses include, Pebble, the Traveler's, and the CIMB Classic. The Farmers is just a hair over 7000 (north course). There are other examples as well. Courses don't need to be made longer. You can also take a "bomb and gouge" course and make it so the "gouging" isn't very pleasant.

While there is truth to this, when was Harbor Town built? 1967. What equipment was in play when Harbor Town was created? Did the developers of Harbor Town envision today's equipment being used on it? Harbor Town would not be built today...

[Sean2]

If you roll the ball back then every course becomes longer and harder.

BINGO! Maybe 9000 yard courses won't need to be built.

 

Harbour Town would be considered short by today's standards, yet it still presents quite a challenge for the professional golfer. Other under 7,000 yard courses include, Pebble, the Traveler's, and the CIMB Classic. The Farmers is just a hair over 7000 (north course). There are other examples as well. Courses don't need to be made longer. You can also take a "bomb and gouge" course and make it so the "gouging" isn't very pleasant.

While there is truth to this, when was Harbor Town built? 1967. What equipment was in play when Harbor Town was created? Did the developers of Harbor Town envision today's equipment being used on it? Harbor Town would not be built today...

 

Even if they didn't envision it, Harbour Town is still a true test of golf for the PGA Tour professional.

 

Everyone thought that Merion would be way too short, especially for a major. +1 was the winning score.