Rants and Raves...

[scomac2002]

The Tour doesn't give a damn how long it takes to play. The longer it takes these guys to play a round the longer that paying patrons will be on the course and the more money they're likely to spend which benefits the Tour. It's no different than baseball. The only way that anything gets done is if people quit coming and quit watching! If it hits them in the pocketbook, then things will change.

[SteveNZ]

Shot penalties are the only thing that will work with these guys.

 

With an attitude like this, even penalty shots may not be enough. Unbelievable.

 

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2018/1/30/jb-holmes-i-dont-understand-what-the-big-hoopla-is-all-about.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

[TimV]

Holmes is shocked that people are calling him out on his B.S.!!! ...

 

http://www.golfchannel.com/video/holmes-shocked-reaction-his-delay-torrey/?cid=Email_WednesdayNL_20180131

[TimV]

Third letter down "Another perspective from south Florida" is mine...

 

http://www.morningread.com/features/cdfce972-f0ba-43c2-9026-6c304ab5c49b

[McGee72]

Third letter down "Another perspective from south Florida" is mine...

 

http://www.morningread.com/features/cdfce972-f0ba-43c2-9026-6c304ab5c49b

 

I hate slow play as much as the next guy but I also don’t like speed golf... you mention playing in under 3 hours and that is uncomfortably fast. (Unless you’re a single) 4hr round give or take is perfect IMO. If raking 5 footers and running to the next tee to hit as fast as possible is fun golf then that’s cool but not for me.

[TimV]

Third letter down "Another perspective from south Florida" is mine...

 

http://www.morningre...26-6c304ab5c49b

 

I hate slow play as much as the next guy but I also don’t like speed golf... you mention playing in under 3 hours and that is uncomfortably fast. (Unless you’re a single) 4hr round give or take is perfect IMO. If raking 5 footers and running to the next tee to hit as fast as possible is fun golf then that’s cool but not for me.

 

I absolutely agree with you. I mention that a foursome CAN play in under 3 hours in South Florida in the summer. I don't recommend it but it can certainly be done. I've played many Championship rounds down here during the summer in right around 2 hours as a single. As a single I tend to hustle more and honestly can wear myself out and sometimes need to take a short break and slow myself down a little. I would prefer to play with others. For me anyway a perfect summer round would be a threesome or foursome playing in about 3 1/2 hours and I believe that's a good and fair pace for 'off season.' I hate seeing the guy that can't break 100 taking 10 practice swings before every shot and plumb bobbing every putt he misses. In my experience the more F'n around a golfer does the worse they tend to be. That's sure not advocating for raking 5 footers and running to the next tee because I simply won't do that either.

[Bigarch]

Third letter down "Another perspective from south Florida" is mine...

 

http://www.morningre...26-6c304ab5c49b

 

I hate slow play as much as the next guy but I also don’t like speed golf... you mention playing in under 3 hours and that is uncomfortably fast. (Unless you’re a single) 4hr round give or take is perfect IMO. If raking 5 footers and running to the next tee to hit as fast as possible is fun golf then that’s cool but not for me.

I agree. I've played with a group of guys for several years (about 20 of us) and we have always played right around 4 hours...a comfortable pace. In recent years, a few of them have retired and get to play everyday. It's turned into speed golf. They jump out of the cart and hit their ball and their feet never stop moving. They don't line up shots or even putts...never mark a ball, just lag it up there and scoop up 3 footers or continuously putt. These rabbits always have to play in the first group and zip around in 3 hours. And then they complain because the 4somes behind them take 3:45 to 4:10 to finish. Its ridiculous. I want to ask them..."what the hell is your hurry? I know you don't have anywhere to be." And it's not like you can settle the bets until everyone else gets in, so why hurry so damn much? Take your time and savor it just a bit.

[TimV]

Jack takes on the long ball...

 

http://www.golfchannel.com/article/golf-central-blog/nicklaus-eager-help-usga-rein-golf-ball-distance/?cid=Email_WednesdayNL_20180221

 

My take on this is force the Pros to play a deader ball and leave the rest of us alone.

Jack sees a bit of a twist on that.

[scomac2002]

It's pointless to close the gate when the horse has already left the barn.

 

It's setting up for another battle between golf and a manufacturer with Titleist staking out its position. If they can make a case that rolling back the ball will impede their business, then you get into another compensation case a la Ping and the groove rule. Golf can't likely afford to go there, in which case we are stuck with what we've got unless the powers that be see fit to bifurcate the rules. I don't see that happening either, so we end up with a lot of posturing and hollow words.

 

There are lots of potential solutions for the professional game that no one seems to want to do because the players all p*ss and moan about how unfair this or that condition is. Narrow fairways with penal rough, greens that aren't receptive, shave a few strokes off par on borderline holes, plant a few trees to force target golf. It's not that hard, but someone has the idea that bomb and gouge sells so they set-up for that result. IOW the PGA doesn't really care what's good for golf as a sport, they're far more concerned about what's good for them!

[Bad9]

IOW the PGA doesn't really care what's good for golf as a sport, they're far more concerned about what's good for them!

 

And that's absolutely fine. The ruling bodies just need to stop reacting to what a few hundred elite professionals are doing when crafting the rules for the other 99.999% of us. If the pros have gotten to the point of some courses being obsolete for them then that's ok. Its happened to hundreds of courses in the past as players skill and ability got better.

[SteveNZ]

 

There are lots of potential solutions for the professional game that no one seems to want to do because the players all p*ss and moan about how unfair this or that condition is. Narrow fairways with penal rough, greens that aren't receptive, shave a few strokes off par on borderline holes, plant a few trees to force target golf. It's not that hard, but someone has the idea that bomb and gouge sells so they set-up for that result. IOW the PGA doesn't really care what's good for golf as a sport, they're far more concerned about what's good for them!

 

I don't think this is the answer. All that will then happen is that you're forcing every player in the field to hit down the same narrow corridor, with no creativity or strategy required. And if they do miss the fairway, the only option open to them is to hack out with a 60 deg. (Hey - sounds like the US Open!) Who wants to watch that? I sure don't - that would almost be worse than the bomb & goudge we get just about every week on the tour on those (by and large) crappy, cookie-cutter courses.

 

It's worth noting that three of the best courses in the world - maybe THE three best - St Andrews, Augusta and Royal Melbourne, all have wide fairways and little to no rough, but they are now defenceless against the modern equipment. Alistair McKenzie would go absolutely postal if he were to come back and hear the suggestion that we narrow the fairways and grow the rough at any of those courses.

 

St Andrews is already using OB, and the Eden course for tee boxes to lengthen holes on the Old Course, and Augusta is buying up surrounding land to do the same - it's crazy. Which really only leaves the equipment. And, yes, a rollback would be a seismic change for Titleist - but does anyone really believe that they won't continue to be the #1 ball in golf? Sure, they won't be able to brag about being the longest (no one will), but you can't tell me they won't continue to dominate the ball market just because the ball is going 20% less further.

[HoldenCornfield]

I think its a bit of an oversimplification to say its just the ball. The ball is a significant factor, yes, but so are super long, light shafts and over-sized, trampoline faces.

 

They need to address ALL of the equipment factors, if you ask me, in order to bring the game back into historical standards. In my opinion, there needs to something like this:

 

-maximum headsize of 250cc

-maximum clubface COR of 0.78

-minimum shaft weight of, say, 90 grams (or minimum total clubweight of at least 350 grams)

-maximum club length of 44" (although this would take care of itself if the 3 above were instituted)

 

and then, of course, address the COR of the ball to get it back to pre- Pro V1 norms.

 

If they did this then the pros would have their plate full at 7000 yards and all of the classic courses would then be relevant again.

 

The way things are set up now the equipment is no longer a limiting factor so the course conditions have to fill this role, which is very expensive to create and maintain.

 

And by the way, I'm really only endorsing these changes for the pro tour. You could leave the present standards for the rest of us, I don't really care. Most of the serious recreational golfers are going to follow what they see on TV, anyway. And since high handicappers and seniors can't really take full advantage of the current distance advantages of modern specs they can benefit from the playability of things like light shafts and hot faces.

[scomac2002]

I think its a bit of an oversimplification to say its just the ball. The ball is a significant factor, yes, but so are super long, light shafts and over-sized, trampoline faces.

 

They need to address ALL of the equipment factors, if you ask me, in order to bring the game back into historical standards. In my opinion, there needs to something like this:

 

-maximum headsize of 250cc

-maximum clubface COR of 0.78

-minimum shaft weight of, say, 90 grams (or minimum total clubweight of at least 350 grams)

-maximum club length of 44" (although this would take care of itself if the 3 above were instituted)

 

and then, of course, address the COR of the ball to get it back to pre- Pro V1 norms.

 

If they did this then the pros would have their plate full at 7000 yards and all of the classic courses would then be relevant again.

 

The way things are set up now the equipment is no longer a limiting factor so the course conditions have to fill this role, which is very expensive to create and maintain.

 

And by the way, I'm really only endorsing these changes for the pro tour. You could leave the present standards for the rest of us, I don't really care. Most of the serious recreational golfers are going to follow what they see on TV, anyway. And since high handicappers and seniors can't really take full advantage of the current distance advantages of modern specs they can benefit from the playability of things like light shafts and hot faces.

 

I have that exact set of clubs that you outline sitting in my golf closet right now in the form of a set of BB War bird woods with RCH 90 shafts and a set of Eye 2 clones with Precision FM 5.5 shafts. Here's the kicker: If I only play those clubs I will shoot the exact same set of scores (or within a stroke or two) that I do with my modern set in my sig.!

 

Now, if I can do that as a 12ish capper, what the heck is a pro going to do with those clubs? Perhaps all this advancement in club technology is just a sham and serves only one purpose: To sell more clubs! Numbers don't lie, except they aren't measuring the one that really counts; that which is on your scorecard!

 

:beruo:

[TimV]

Really sick of our girl Lexi getting F'd over on Tour. This is complete bullxxxx!...

 

http://www.golfchannel.com/video/thompson-involved-rules-controversy-thailand/?cid=Email_MondayNL_20180226

[SteveNZ]

Really sick of our girl Lexi getting F'd over on Tour. This is complete bullxxxx!...

 

http://www.golfchannel.com/video/thompson-involved-rules-controversy-thailand/?cid=Email_MondayNL_20180226

 

Guess the moral of the story is to acquaint yourself with the local rules...

[TimV]

I guess it's too bad her name isn't Tiger Woods. Then the rules get flexible...

 

http://www.golfchann...tigers-boulder/

[SteveNZ]

Not sure the two situations are comparable. I’m pretty surprised that a professional golfer would just go ahead and move a sign without getting advice from a rules official first.

 

Edit: for clarity, it doesn’t seem quite right to me that Tiger and co were able to move that boulder but it was allowable under the rules of golf.

[rex235]

I guess it's too bad her name isn't Tiger Woods. Then the rules get flexible...

 

 

http://www.golfchann...tigers-boulder/

 

 

 

 

Tim-

 

"....He's not allowed to move that stake...."

 

_Ken Venturi (RIP), CBS Golf Analyst on describing the Rule of removing an OB stake on TV, seconds before player Chip Beck pulls the stake out of the ground.

Violating the OB Rule, and being assessed a two stroke penalty in some PGA Tour Event where Beck was close to the lead, if not leading.

 

Everybody on TV watched it....

 

.Really. Lexi and her caddie can ask for an Official Ruling. Shes played around the world, should know Local Tournament Rules supersede R&A Rules.

 

This is the case where the local rule involving Relief from Temporary Immovable Obstructions was in effect- It's the HONDA Tournament after all- even in Thailand.

 

(That HONDA sign, and all the rest of those advertising signs were there for TV coverage- Lexi was entitled to Relief from that point, no closer to the hole, and both she and her caddie should have known that, instead of pulling down the sign (with help) of the Title Corporate Sponsor of the Tournament...)

 

By the way- Did any one of those guys who moved that boulder send their future hernia bills to Tiger?

[birly-shirly]

Really sick of our girl Lexi getting F'd over on Tour. This is complete bullxxxx!...

 

http://www.golfchann...ndayNL_20180226

 

Guess the moral of the story is to acquaint yourself with the local rules...

 

Agree. You have a professional golfer and a professional caddy, who between the two of them should be able to at least ask for a ruling. That doesn't stop me feeling a little sad to see someone being penalised for playing the course as it was designed and the ball as it lies.

[Jiggered]

Agree. You have a professional golfer and a professional caddy, who between the two of them should be able to at least ask for a ruling. That doesn't stop me feeling a little sad to see someone being penalised for playing the course as it was designed and the ball as it lies.

 

True, Honda will be very happy though with all the extra air time that they're advertising board has received.....

[SteveNZ]

Really sick of our girl Lexi getting F'd over on Tour. This is complete bullxxxx!...

 

http://www.golfchann...ndayNL_20180226

 

Guess the moral of the story is to acquaint yourself with the local rules...

 

Agree. You have a professional golfer and a professional caddy, who between the two of them should be able to at least ask for a ruling. That doesn't stop me feeling a little sad to see someone being penalised for playing the course as it was designed and the ball as it lies.

 

And she would have more motivation than most to make sure she was all over the rules...

[TimV]

Interesting view and one I hadn't considered on 'the distance issue.'

 

http://www.morningread.com/features/2810c0c3-fb6a-403c-9583-1662e6fadb80

 

I see the point and guess that leaves us with toughening the courses by growing the trees, inclining and deepening the bunkers, and roughening the rough regardless off the Playing Pros whining. Don't think they can continue to drive it 320+ and play on a Billiard Table.

[SteveNZ]

Why the assumption that the ball would be rolled back for everyone? Surely the best solution is to roll it back for the pros and leave it as is for the rest of us. Not sure how this is going to stop the manufacturers from making money either.

[oldschoolrocker]

Honestly, I don’t care what the pros do. Bothers me not if they were to move the “tournament tees” to 8000 yards. I play the tees I play.

All sports have evolved, for the good, the bad, or indifference, golf just falls in the discussion because the average Joe has too big an ego and not enough common sense that his starry eyed self thinks he should be able to perform with those at the pinnacle of the game.

It would be a Herculean task to consider asking a private manufacturing firm to go against a known profitable marketing and sales strategy for “ the good of the game.”

We all know if the industry wasn’t profitable we wouldn’t have access to the amount of equipment, or, the number of courses we enjoy.

They’ve seen Paree, how you gonna keep em down on the farm?

[HoldenCornfield]

This seems like a good place to post this link since we're ranting and raving about modern golf clubs/balls and the distances they go. Here's a best ball challenge match from the 1960's with Palmer & Player against Nicklaus & Mike Souchak. John from ABS offers his commentary over the video:

 

 

Here's a link to some good discussion about the video:

http://www.advancedballstriking.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=221&t=4648&st=0&sk=t&sd=a

 

 

If you want to watch the original without commentary, here you go:

 

 

 

Interesting that full, flushed drives were only going 240-250 yards unless it was downhill. And fun to see long irons being played into par 4's and then par 5's that are true three-shotters.

[hnryclay]

Which should tell all of us something, if you play a course similar to mine which was built in 1899, and redesigned in the late 60's and again in the 90's and can reach a par 5 in two, or a long par 4 (400+ yards) in 2 and you are not a scratch handicap (I am a 15) then maybe something is up with the equipment. I'm not saying it should be fixed for amateurs but maybe it should for the pros. We already have unbelievably long courses that are nearly un-walkable to accommodate the driving power these players have, a ball that is rolled back just for the pro ranks makes sense to me. I don't think this matters for 95% of the golfing public, but I don't see the profit or the point in continuing to lengthen the tees for pro tournaments. I also think we will lose classic courses whose members just don't want to see any more construction to make their course "relevant" to the PGA tour when the members are just fine with how it currently plays. I personally do not like the new architecture that places length over every other consideration. It is boring, bring back tree lined fairways, and place a premium on shot making into smaller greens.

[TimV]

These will go the way of the Dodo Bird unless the PGA stops allowing their Playing Pros to get away with being a bunch of pussies. I'm bored stiff and tired of watching Bomb and Gouge and want to see a return of shot making! Never seen so much whining since I left 2nd Grade!...

 

https://www.golfadvisor.com/articles/narrow-golf-courses-17682.htm?utm_source=GA&utm_medium=Newsletter&utm_campaign=EmailMar2

 

PS...

Played a few weeks ago with a guy I meet on the 1st tee. On hole 13 (of course) I drove into trouble and put a bunker and trees between myself and the green. Hit a 3 iron that I got to work left to right and left it on the front apron. He screamed 'That's a Golf Shot!' Told me you don't see that any more. Made me feel both good and sad.

 

PSS...

Not saying the Pros can't work the ball. I'm saying they aren't forced to as often as they should be.

[Bad9]

PS...

Played a few weeks ago with a guy I meet on the 1st tee. On hole 13 (of course) I drove into trouble and put a bunker and trees between myself and the green. Hit a 3 iron that I got to work left to right and left it on the front apron. He screamed 'That's a Golf Shot!' Told me you don't see that any more. Made me feel both good and sad.

 

PSS...

Not saying the Pros can't work the ball. I'm saying they aren't forced to as often as they should be.

 

But there's a gazillion threads on here that say the modern ball can't be worked :rofl:

[BIG STU]

PS...

Played a few weeks ago with a guy I meet on the 1st tee. On hole 13 (of course) I drove into trouble and put a bunker and trees between myself and the green. Hit a 3 iron that I got to work left to right and left it on the front apron. He screamed 'That's a Golf Shot!' Told me you don't see that any more. Made me feel both good and sad.

 

PSS...

Not saying the Pros can't work the ball. I'm saying they aren't forced to as often as they should be.

 

But there's a gazillion threads on here that say the modern ball can't be worked :rofl:

Yep I know I read them all the time. I can work most softer balls with the blades just fine. Now a few mainly the Bridgestone E series especially the E-5 and E-6 I can not work due to the tricked up dimples. The best ball for me that I can work and I love those balls are the Master Grip C-5. I also like the Vice and Snell balls for that reason. I also liked the Bridgestone Treo Soft which they do not make any more. The Srixon Soft feel I like it too but I have durability problems with it from my wedges and short irons. Pro Vs I can take or leave.

[oldschoolrocker]

Agree with Stu that some of the balls I like and seem to work well have issues with durability. Cheese grater syndrome. Right now I am testing out the QSTAR tours, mainly because I like the feel of them off the putter and greenside. Seem to feel less clicky than some others and have a good amount of spin off the wedges.