USGA DISTANCE INSIGHT

[bogiii]

They need to do something, they do not get penalized for missing a fairway, long hitters or short hitters. I think it would make golf more exciting. Course management is non existent, it basically bombs away for most courses. One of my favorite tournaments to watch is the Arnold Palmer Invitational because players are forced to make decisions and make golf shots after they miss a fairway!

[storm319]

Given that the players use the same equipment as other tournaments and the fact that Bay Hill is average length compared to other PGA Tour hosts, the course design/conditions seem to be the main variables. Rolling back equipment slightly won't change the way the elite players approach the game from tee to green as they will continue to bomb and gauge the difference being that the bomb will be slightly shorter.

[mahonie]

For those that think all of the distance gain is down to athleticism:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=D5V9-rX7T4w

[storm319]

First, Crossfield is far from elite. No one should be surprised by that outcome given the fact that he was using a driver that he was uncomfortable with. With some practice time, even someone at his skill level would be able to reduce that gap (pros would be able to reduce that gap even further).

Next, those balls are at least 40 years old and wound ball tension starts to loosen within a couple of years off the production line so not a fair comparison. The ball speed difference would have been far less if those were brand new off the line.

The most interesting finding there was the difference in spin only being 300 RPMs. Not as drastic as the pro rollback crowd has been claiming and a lot of that has to do with how different the players are delivering the club today. That difference in spin is not going to make any difference to players on the PGA Tour (easily reduced based on a slight change in AoA).

[mahonie]

Firstly, Crossfield’s is far more elite than you or I. Secondly, the old driver was one Crossfield ‘never missed a fairway with.’ Thirdly, if the ball speed had deteriorated so had the spin so one nullifies the other.

Regardless of your arguments it is indisputable that the 460cc driver and ProV1 have had a far more significant impact on distance gained than improvements in athleticism. It should also be recognised that the improvement in the athletic ability of golfers is directly attributable to the fact that it is much easier to swing the modern driver faster and still make reasonable contact just because the face is so much bigger.

[storm319]

How does this make it indisputable that equipment had a bigger impact? Where is the data isolating the correlation of each variable? Without that it is still disputable.

[mahonie]

The data is obvious if you open your eyes...and it is a fools argument about isolating the variables...never going to happen.

If you never played older equipment I suppose it is possible that you would think that being more athletic would add 20 or 30 yards to a drive and you may be right. With the older equipment, athleticism only went so far...you could swing at 130mph but you wouldn’t keep the ball on the planet consistently...that is indisputable.

Nothing will be the same when we get to play again anyway :-(..#staysafeoutthere ?

[gvogel]

I agree with this reasoning. The big driver head, higher COR, and lower spinning ball made it easier to swing all out. And bigger, more athletic golfers took advantage.

[storm319]

The data shows larger than normal but still minor gains on the elite tours during a period of major change for elite golf. Isolating any single variable's impact on those gains are impossible so it is also impossible to say that any single variable unarguably had a larger impact than another. If you believe that equipment had a larger impact, that is your opinion, but that does not make it an inarguable fact.

I just had a conversation about this with a coworker that was a nationally ranked amateur during the big shift in the late 90s. Two PGA Tour players that are ranked within the top 100 of the OWGR are members at his club (both are around the tour average in driving distance). One of them mentioned that he was testing a driver length that was 1.5" longer than what he has played for years in an attempt to pick up more yardage. He emphasized the importance of each yard of increase for players on tour that are not at the top of driving distance and due to the fact that most of the players are so closely bunched together. The big driver for this is that tour data shows a greater correlation between distance and scoring average than driving accuracy (this has more to do with the course setup than anything).

Ultimately any rollback of equipment without changing course conditions will not change the way that the elite approach the game because the numbers will still point to the "bomb and gauge" approach as being the most efficient way get the ball in the hole given the current playing conditions.

[Lincoln_Arcadia]

He’s supposedly a better player than me, but my ball speeds are measurably higher than either of them if we can compare my launch monitor readings against theirs. I swing 107 on average both right and left handed swings.

The balls are 40 years old, and possibly not kept well. My own Balata were purchased by me and used by me in the past. I kept them in my garage in an area where the temperatures were not too far from a nominal of 15C to 37C. That’s why I chose that area to store all my golf equipment.

What I found is that there’s very little difference in distance between my 100s and a modern ProV1 when I played with them recently against my daughter using my old persimmons with my opposite hand. Had I used my M2 possibly no difference? This was to even things up with her. If there were 100 yards difference, I would not have played 1:1 against her 93mph swing speed. I think we were on par for driving distance while she played the ladies tees and myself the standard men’s playing tees that were generally 10-20 yards behind the ladies tees with a 10mph swing speed difference. So, it was 10-20 yards that I had observed. This is in stark contrast to the 100 yards he supposedly measured?

When you do a one off comparison like this, you can obtain any sort of results and skew the opinions of whomever you are “proving something”?

The benefit if modern equipment just does not amount to 100 yards per hole. That’s simply ridiculous.

Modern players can mostly swing 120+. Those that can’t are deemed “short”.

[QuigleyDU]

Crossfield is not what I would call elite. He shots right around par with driver distanced in the 260 carry area and a very dodgy short game. There are lots of members here that would roast him in any format.

[Lincoln_Arcadia]

Likely so, but his swing and equipment are highly optimized to allow his 103 swing speed carry 260.

He’s more of an outlier because of those optimizations.

[smashdn]

It's not the ball.

"...it comes with a new high-speed core this is also larger and designed to generate higher ball speeds, especially off the driver and with higher swing speeds. The ball has a XXXX XXXXXXX system, with a soft inner and firmer outer also made to bolster ball speed. A thinner urethane cover is included to help that as well, while also optimising spin and enhancing feel. And this model is also endowed with a new aerodynamic pattern to reduce drag, for longer distance and more consistent trajectory."

[storm319]

Qualitative marketing is as useless as the point you are trying to make. Words like "higher" "lower" "faster" "slower" "softer" "firmer" are pointless without being quantified in comparison to a benchmark and the OEMs benefit from this ambiguity because the average consumer is willing to accept it.

[farmer]

Storm, in reference to your earlier post, I doubt the accuracy of the spin numbers. A ball that old has windings that have seriously degraded, so the ball as a whole does not respond as it did when it was new and lively. Unless Titleist or someone still has the tools to make new wound balls, any comparison is invalid.

[Ashley Schaeffer]

Tune in next week when we will see if an unaltered 40-year-old basketball bounces as well as the one I just bought from DSG.

[storm319]

I agree that an apples to apples comparison is impossible given the fact that it has been 25ish years since a wound balata ball was produced, although I would be willing to bet that the degradation had a greater impact on balls speed than spin.

[Lincoln_Arcadia]

Sure, why not?

Taylormade has improved distance by 20 yards per new release since pre 2000. Equipment must be a problem according to the advertisements. Haha.

[smashdn]

The ball companies also certainly cannot make a ball that doesn't go as far with higher swing speeds or spin more off the driver. (I've seen several posts in these debates claiming the ball manufacturers can't neuter the ball for high speed players.)

[Ashley Schaeffer]

Did you see that TXG video where Matt hits the DuoSoft+? Wild stuff. He hit it further than a ProV1 with the wedge and 7-iron, and then just overcompressed the **** out of it with the driver. I know we all like to say long players would still have the same (or a greater) advantage with a nerfed ball, but ball like this DuoSoft+ would definitely be a way for the RBs to take away the advantage of a high-speed player. I'll edit and add the video if I can find it.

 

NVM, it was on the front page of GolfWRX: http://www.golfwrx.com/594596/txg-soft-is-long-wilson-duo-soft-golf-ball-review/

[storm319]

I have no doubt that it is possible to create a core formulation that decreases in efficiency as impact force increases, however the doubt is focused on whether it is possible to design a ball that will result in a sizable decrease in ball speed at the higher end of the spectrum with zero impact at the lower end. This already exists to an extent with lower compression balls being less efficient at extremely high speeds, but that does not seem sufficient for those calling for a rollback (MyGolf$py robotic test found a deviation of nearly 5 mph ball speed and over 15 yards of carry distance between two balls that were 28 compression points apart with their 115 mph CHS setup, both of these balls fall within the same USGA limits).

Ultimately the goal of restoring the optics of the professional golf of the past is unattainable with the current money that is at stake on the PGA Tour. It is simply more efficient to hit the ball as long as possible and play 2nd shots from shorter distances aiming for the center of the green regardless of pin placement and an equipment rollback is not going to change that fact (it may actually increase the pro's emphasis on distance).

[Lincoln_Arcadia]

Any real data showing what it actually does for a shorter player? Because, you know, that faster swingers can more readily emulate slower swingers than the other way around?

This kind of proves faster CHS correlates to longer distances.

I don’t think shorter hitters are going to find that magic ball.

 

[Ashley Schaeffer]

Yeah. Well, Matt tried to chip some drives out there at 94-95 CHS, and it was pretty much the same as the ProV1. His full speed driver was neutered by the nerf ball. That seems like what some people want.

"Game is too easy now. Doesn't fit the courses. The cost. The environment. Seminole can't host the Masters anymore. Indian Canyon is now too short for the U.S. Open that surely would've come its way. Most of all, we gotta make sure these youngsters don't hit it further than I remember my childhood heroes hitting it, or else."

[smashdn]

Find what magic ball?

[Lincoln_Arcadia]

Haha, my thoughts exactly!

[QuigleyDU]

It is interesting. I just listened to a pod cast featuring Tommy Heardon of Nicklaus design. He stated that on their renovations jobs. The majority of their work is adding forward shorter tees. “We are doing things to make the course more playable”.

 

I am not sure Jack would like that statement public.

[Lincoln_Arcadia]

Well it only goes to show that the real issue truly is distance, but just not enough of it. All this modern equipment must have shortened the average amateur distance LOL.

[gvogel]

hello all you anti-rollback guys,

You don't have to worry for awhile. The Covid-19 pandemic has put the Distance Insight studies in a holding pattern.

Besides, most of you don't have to worry about anything, the way that I see it. The local rule will only be used for certain situations - LIKE THE MASTERS!

[ThinkingPlus]

Well it would help ANGC pickup another Masters sponsor. Hasbro

[Lincoln_Arcadia]

The use of the word “roll back” implies that equipment made at the time the COR restrictions were created were horribly different than current technology. I’m not convinced this is the case?