Hogan irons in play for amateur allowed

[HoldenCornfield]

[quote name='NRJyzr' timestamp='1401283837' post='9381139']

Jack Nicklaus was very good at playing golf, one of the best to ever play the game.

That doesn't mean he's knowledgeable about the physics involved.

It's not the "good at hitting" that determines their ability to instruct, it's the knowledge about the "why" that determines their ability to instruct.
[/quote]

Jack was also one of, if not THE sharpest people to ever play golf. I'd have to see an awful lot of empirical evidence before I disagree with him.

When you say they've already rolled back the initial velocity limits, I have to wonder:
1) Relative to what? The balata covered wound ball or the 1st Generation Pro V1 that was already flying a mile? To me this is like saying the USGA has already rolled back the COR to 0.83 since it was at one time going to allow 0.86. The relevant standard, imo, should be the 0.78-0.79 that the game had become accustomed to from the 1930s into the early 1990's.
2) Is this a speed test? Or a distance test? Because I'm under the assumption that advances in dimple technology and aerodynamics have aided ball makers in maximizing carry distance at a given ball speed; in other words there's more to distance these days than just initial velocity.

[Caddie4JT]

I would like to add several points to this discussion. The OP asked if certain clubs were legal for play in regards to the USGA groove rule of 2010. When you go to the USGA database for grooves there are way more clubs listed as ATR, or additional testing required. If part of OEM club development involves submitting a sample to the USGA for approval, why then does the USGA not know if the clubs meet their standard? They should be able to review their own test data and know if the grooves are "x" or "y", right? If not then what information did they use to determine the legality of the clubs originally?
Regarding Jack Nicklaus' knowledge of physics and how it applies to the golf ball, don't know the man so can't say what he knows or doesn't know. Using the same logic posted earlier, I would say that there are more than a few guys at Louisville Slugger or Rawlings that know how to make a quality bat or glove but have no concept of how to use one effectively.
There are sayings I have heard for years regarding teachers and lessons. One is, "those that can't play teach". I know several really good players who can't communicate their swing ideas effectively. I know several good teachers who communicate ideas really well and help their students improve but can't play dead in a western movie. One of the best players in our state told me " never take a lesson from somebody you can beat" and I can see the logic in that and would agree. If someone has competed and been successful at the highest level wants to offer up their experience, I'm going to listen and hope I have enough understanding to follow their advice.

[SadTrombone]

1) You can download a form straight from the USGA, box up your clubs, and send them in to be tested. When I contacted them (was ready to ship my 681s in), they said testing would take a day or so, then return ship. At most, you're out the cost of shipping and you'll know if YOUR clubs conform.

2) That's what the database is about. It's about information. It is not meant to be ruling. The fine print even tells you that if a club is listed "YES" to conforming to the rules, but you show up at an event and they test your clubs and find that they are NOT conforming, then they are not conforming. Doesn't matter what the database says.

3) I'd love to see us go back to the days of the Professional 90, 975D, and 200 series Vokeys/Cleveland 588s. I miss that soft feel. I have a few of those balls in a bag and every now and then I'll pull one out and putt for a while. You really can't even feel it compared to the Pro V1s/modern balls. I miss that and the sound of metal spikes on asphalt.

 

[NRJyzr]

The ODS, Overall Distance Standard. The USGA distance testing protocol applied to golf balls.

The ODS began to be used in 1976. All golfballs were tested with the same conditions, a club swung at 109 mph. The limit on distance was 280 yards, but there was a tolerance allowed to 296 yds.

A few years ago, they ramped up the swingspeed to 120 mph, and increased the distance limit to account for the greater swingspeed. When they increased the limit, they scrapped the tolerance, and the increase was not proportionate to the swingspeed; the new limit is slightly shorter than a proportionate increase would be.

If one wishes to extrapolate from this...

If there is an enormous gap between the wound balls of olde and the modern balls, it means the balls of olde were nowhere near the ODS limit.

Various ball tests I've seen in 2000/2001, involving newer solid core balls, older wound balls such as Titleist Professional, Titleist Tour Balata, Hogan Balata, Maxfli Revolution, Strata Tour Pro, Pro V1, etc, showed there is no such enormous gap between the "new" balls and the older, wound balls. Corroborated by the driving distance stats on the PGA Tour between 1999 and 2002. Or 2001, if you prefer. (The increase in the driving stats is a bit less than 6 yds)

Or maybe corroborated by DL3 able to carry a Tour Balata over 300 yds with a persimmon.

[Wknd_Warrior]

how come everyone seems to think the ball is responsible? My iron distances have changed very little in 20 years, but I assumed I ws getting something on the driver with teh new ball.

[Wknd_Warrior]

[quote name='birly-shirly' timestamp='1401282274' post='9380961']
[quote name='Wknd_Warrior' timestamp='1401238486' post='9378097']
There might be a lot of truth in what you say, but the underlying problem with the distance off of the tee these days is

[b]1) the desparity between the shorter and longer hitters has dramatically increased[/b]
2) it's completely changed the nature of the game, I would suspect more so than in any other period of change the game has gone through.


When many players routinely carry the ball over 300 it's time to do something to preserve the balance of the game. 500 yard par 4s with one player hitting a 9i in and the other a 4i just isn't golf, progress smogress, it's about balance and a test of a complete skill set. IMO it's what makes the game unique, challenging and fun.


And as courses get longer the walking time increases as well.
[/quote]

I agree with a lot of this - but I thought that statement (1) could at least be tested.

In 1980, according to the PGA Tour stats, 170 players drove the ball an average of between 240 and 270. In 2013 (taking the most recent full year of data), there were 170 players driving the ball between 275 and 305. In each year, there were a handful of players hitting the ball a handful of yards outside of this spread - but at first glance, it doesn't look as if the gap between the haves and the have-nots has widened in recent years. But neither, as some have argued elsewhere, does the gap appear to have narrowed.
[/quote]

Stats are difficult to analyse. For one the pros might be tightlier packed than AMs, so you don't get the 7i vs 4i thing as bad, but let's even say all we care about is the tour.

To compete now the pros have to hit it long, you simply don't see the shorter hitters anymore, or nearly as often, so as the game becomes more of a long drive contest, the grouping doesn't look much worse, but the nature of the common player has changed.

Or, on tour, as the course designers try to fend off the bombers, and the short hitters have fitters extracting every last yard off of their driver there is a compression effect.

As an observation, I've certainly seen some very very wide gaps between drives on tv in recent history, and happening quote often, regardless of overal stats.

[BIG STU]

[quote name='NRJyzr' timestamp='1401283837' post='9381139']
[quote name='spezza11' timestamp='1401280720' post='9380801']
The best all time said 15 years ago that the ball flys to far! it is too hot!
if they don't take seriously what Jack has to say about where the game is going they are very ignorant to not even consider it!
[/quote]

Jack Nicklaus was very good at playing golf, one of the best to ever play the game.

That doesn't mean he's knowledgeable about the physics involved.

Baseball analogy time:

Yogi Berra was a good hitter. He wasn't particularly good at instructing others how to hit, because he didn't really know why he was good at hitting.

Tony Gwynn was a good hitter. He is good at instructing others how to hit, because he does know why he was good at hitting.

It's not the "good at hitting" that determines their ability to instruct, it's the knowledge about the "why" that determines their ability to instruct.
[/quote] I have to agree with all you said on the instructing part. Not tooting my own horn but at one time I was a decent player and not too bad now for my age. With that being said I have had people over the years ask me to give them lessons and I will not do it even though I had my class A card for a while. i have never been a student of the golf swing and never will be. In my own swing I have quite a few "fundemental" flaws. I sometimes lay off at the top but I redirect the club on the downswing I do not know how or when I do it but I do it. I can't teach that. I also used to fight a bad rope hook so I developed an anti hook swing with my left side open and the club face open 2* or so at impact. I hit a baby trap cut with an iron. I will tell you one thing I can break a Medicus club 3 to 5 times on one swing trust me I have witnesses. I have developed my game around my flaws which goes against every thing my Dad taught (he was a class A instructor). I guess everyone is different I know several instructors that in my opinion are great teachers but as someone else said "could not play dead in a western movie". I know some instructors that are great instructors as well as great players. To each his own I guess

[Tin Whistle]

[quote name='BIG STU' timestamp='1401279948' post='9380713']
[quote name='Ol_Pardner' timestamp='1401044411' post='9364759']
I think the USGA online "Guide" to the "Groove Rule" is as useless as "t**** on a Nun!" They should just grow a pair, set a cutoff date [for club model year, not the 'pair' it took them so long to grow,] and be done with it!
[/quote]They will if they find out there is money involved for them. From what I am seeing they are desperite for members they even set me a new membership offering for $10 in the mail the other day after I dropped my membership 4 years ago after 20+ years as a member and sent them a little curt letter. They are in cahoots with all the major club manfacturers
[/quote]

U$GA announced 1 new member last year - FOX