Mike Davis on Distance

[golfer07840]

How would changing the ball make the game easier for the average player? Are courses going to shorten when the ball is rolled back?

 

in some cases yes, i think they would. we have a 540yd par 4 box that i don't believe we'd maintain anymore for example. but as of right now, it's not long enough. i'm on our greens committee, and i had a 60 year old last night ask if there was a way to move the SILVER tees back on a hole.

 

a dialed back ball, i believe, would make the game easier in this way....i've been over this 6 times, but i understand not reading through the whole thread.

 

- you need ~110mph of swing speed to fully compress a modern ball. if you roll it back, it primarily impacts people with these speeds, and the average 80-90mph swinger doesn't really lose anything.

 

- if i'm now hitting say, a 4i instead of a 6i into a par 4, with the exact same green its obviously much harder to keep that ball on the green. universally, if better/elite players are hitting 2-3 more club into each green, i believe the condition of the greens themselves would need to soften.

 

- if the greens soften, that makes the game EASIER for the average player because they're still hitting roughly the same distance as they were before, but now can more easily hold their long iron/hybrid approach shots, and can get closer to the pin with their chips and pitches because it's not a concrete runway rolling a 10 or higher.

 

Is this 60 year old member tearing the course apart with routine 65s from the current silver tees? If so, I would suggest he join the champions tour.

 

A 540 yard par 4 isn't long enough? I'm skeptical....

 

how the BLEEP is a 540 yard par FOUR not long enough???!! Is Dustin Johnson part of this mythical club?

[tnord]

the inability of some individuals to look beyond themselves is disheartening.

[evgolfer]

I'm not interested in bifurcation. One ball, one set of rules -- that is golf.

[North Butte]

I can only opine on what I myself see and feel. I have zero interest in playing a golf ball that goes shorter than a B330 or a Wilson Duo or whatever goes today. And I have zero problem with seeing how far Dustin Johnson (or even Zach Johnson for that matter) hit the ball. Nor is my course (or any other course in my area) spending money to lengthen.

 

If some club keeps adding another 400 yards every few years, it's because they've got money to spend and that's what they want to spend it on. I suspect if the PGA Tour bifurcated their ball or even if (not ever going to happen) the ball we all played were rolled back to pre-Y2K specs those same clubs are going to spend money on either lengthening or toughening or otherwise modifying their courses because that's what golf clubs with money tend to do.

 

And a shorter ball isn't going to have any effect on new courses being built because (aside from a few high-$$$ resorts and rich-guy getaways) there are no new courses being built. And wont' be for the forseeable future.

 

So from my personal point of view, this is all a solution in search of a problem.

[tnord]

put quite bluntly, if you don't see a problem with how far the ball is going as an issue, you're not looking deep enough into how it impacts the game and the business of golf.

[Doyle Hargraves]

put quite bluntly, if you don't see a problem with how far the ball is going as an issue, you're not looking deep enough into how it impacts the game and the business of golf.

 

Not following you. I'm trying to understand.

 

How does the distance of the current ball adversely impact the game and the business of golf?

 

I don't agree that a delusional member complaining that a 540 yard par 4 isn't long enough constitutes an adverse affect on the game. I will need more that.

[gphin305]

Another agree, technology has made a huge difference for average golfer. Yes, you might see people with latest drivers and ProVs, but so what if they can't get past 200? Just think what their distance would be without the latest and greatest. I'm in mid-60s,been playing since a teenager, and also hitting ball ball just as far (driver and irons) as 20-25 years ago and scoring similar. Took my 15 year (?) TM 580 tour head model driver out the other day and was a good 10-15 yards shorter than my current FlyZ+. And think about what the fans want to see in person or on TV.....300+ yard bombs or 3 metal lay ups? Easy fix to those naysayers is narrower fairways, tough pin placements, and higher rough when the pros play. Biggest problem with today's amateurs is playing wrong tee boxes. With modern courses having 4-5-6 tee boxes I still frequently see the casual amateur who can't hit the ball 200 yards off the tee playing 6500 yard tee boxes.

[Matt J]

I really can't understand those of you that can listen to an expert speak and then naysay that you know golf course expenses better. Yes, billions with a B.

 

It's not just Pebble, Oakmont, and Congressional, it's also local tracks competing for regional qualifiers. Think about being responsible for a new design in this economy...

 

Do you stretch it out and try and get your regional and college tournaments, really bill yourself as a "championship course?" That's a lot of revenue and prestige for you naysayers.

 

Or, do you make a sensible decision and build a smaller course?

 

For those of you talking about the wedges, very dissimilar IMO. "Tournament balls" would not take over the ball market. Groove rule was largely smoke and mirrors and there are non-conformimg wedges on the market still. If you can't spin a conforming wedge you can't spin a wedge.

 

I agree that the groove rule was smoke and mirrors. The equipment was limited to stop the top 1% from spinning it out of the rough. Proximity to the hole out of the rough didn't increase.

 

Meanwhile, the rest of us are stuck with conforming grooves only.

 

Shouldn't we learn something from this when equipment changes are suggested in the future?

 

I still don't know how this negatively effected the average golfer? No one spins the ball out of the rough. Not with old grooves and not with new grooves. Play a different shot.

 

So, we have grooves with a slightly different design. So be it. The worst thing about that rule is that it increased the price of manufacturing in an industry that barely makes any money. An accurate study about the most cost effective way to create a fair groove pattern would have been entirely too logical. Instead we have grooves where the radius from the face into the groove is so exact that a lot of experts argue that the majority of clubs we play wouldn't truly conform even though they are "conforming."

 

Bifurcation simply makes sense. These guys are playing a different game. D1 college golf would be the obvious point to make the shift to a limited flight golf ball. National events and qualifiers, NCAA golf, WEB.com and the big boys. They have plenty of time to practice and realistically wouldn't find the need to shift back for a club tournament. I think Johnny Miller makes the point in his Feherty interview that the diameter could simply be increased a little. Pretty logical.

[Matt J]

put quite bluntly, if you don't see a problem with how far the ball is going as an issue, you're not looking deep enough into how it impacts the game and the business of golf.

 

Not following you. I'm trying to understand.

 

How does the distance of the current ball adversely impact the game and the business of golf?

 

I don't agree that a delusional member complaining that a 540 yard par 4 isn't long enough constitutes an adverse affect on the game. I will need more that.

 

Maintaining 20% more course increases overhead, slow play decreases revenue due to less tee times and more people leaving the game, and pieces of property are stretched to their limit to add deeper tee boxes resulting in longer walks and sometimes dangerous locations too close to other holes.

 

What part aren't you following? Not being a smart Word not allowed just curious if many of you doubt the logic? These are facts. Not alternative facts. :)

[tnord]

put quite bluntly, if you don't see a problem with how far the ball is going as an issue, you're not looking deep enough into how it impacts the game and the business of golf.

 

Not following you. I'm trying to understand.

 

How does the distance of the current ball adversely impact the game and the business of golf?

 

I don't agree that a delusional member complaining that a 540 yard par 4 isn't long enough constitutes an adverse affect on the game. I will need more that.

 

it's been covered fifty times already in this thread, its been publicized in print, tv, internet, etc.

 

i'm not delusional....i've stood there and watched the big 12 championship, NCAA championship, and hopefully will get a loop for the trans-miss this year, where players are blowing it past a bunker 340yds from the tee. the original championship tee and a prevailing wind results in a hole that was designed as a driver/fairway or long iron play as driver/wedge because they just fly the corner.

 

i watched an oklahoma kid go iron/wedge to a 450yd par 4. he went iron/~7i to a 530yd par 5.

 

and it's NOT just the elite of the elite....the better club members do the same thing. just because it doesn't happen in your corner of the golf world doesn't mean it doesn't happen at all.

[Gnomesteel]

Stop trying to protect par. Par is an arbitrary number. It doesn't matter if people are even par or 20 under it. Conditions and course setup dictate the relation to par. They all play the same course. I for one like to witness greatness. And I can't stand watching the US open watching bogey after bogey. If I wanna see a 72-80 posted I'll go watch my golf group play.

 

And if you wanna shrink the game real fast. Take 20 yards off the golf ball. Nothing would infuriate golfers more than having just spent 500$ on a driver and have to watch his 250 yard drive now go 230. That ship has sailed. Golf is hard enough as it is.

 

Dial back technology. We all just witnessed Nike exit hard goods. It would be the single biggest decline for any manufacturer. Hmm i can hear Jim Nantz now. "The all new pro-v1. Sure it's shorter than last years. But you are great and you don't need that 10 yards anyway!"

 

Well said.

[Lodestone]

The game is already bifurcated, and can be further bifurcated by growing grass and making the fairways narrower where the bombers land, and by making bunkers much more difficult and penalizing to play out of, instead of a save haven to avoid tall grass, WHILE THE COURSE IS BEING USED FOR THE EXPERT TOURNAMENTS BUT NOT FOR DAY IN AND DAY OUT PLAY. (Do I need to repeat that?? NOT for day in day out play)...

 

No need to make developing players shift equipment as a punishment for improving to expert level. Silly nonsense.

 

Fact is, the pro tours don't want to make the courses more difficult than they are, or they would. If the USGA or the R&A want to set up their courses their way for their tournaments, they can.

[Ashley Schaeffer]

I don't any HELP hitting it shorter, thanks.

 

HAHA! How dare you not accept your messiah!

[tnord]

:facepalm:

 

i knew it'd get to this point. but i tried.

[North Butte]

I'm not in the golf business but I suspect that industries problems go a lot deeper than how far the ball flies.

 

I'm just a dues-paying member of a course that plays the same length as it did before the ProV1 was invented. We have built a couple of way-back tees that we only mow down once a year or so for tournaments. But the course I play is no longer than it would have been if we were still hitting Titleist Professional and DT Wound.

 

My guess would be playing our course is indeed easier today than it would have been 40 years ago using persimmon drivers, skinny little irons, heavy shafts and a ball that wasn't quite round after a hole or two. Sounds like an improvement to me, not a problem.

[Ashley Schaeffer]

:facepalm:

 

i knew it'd get to this point. but i tried.

 

Hey, man, don't worry. You can't always get everyone on board. Thank you so, so very much for trying to help us all. Maybe tell those who think they hit it too far around your course to leave the driver in the trunk. I'd probably also walk down the range and give everyone swing tips to help some more.

[gphin305]

put quite bluntly, if you don't see a problem with how far the ball is going as an issue, you're not looking deep enough into how it impacts the game and the business of golf.

 

Not following you. I'm trying to understand.

 

How does the distance of the current ball adversely impact the game and the business of golf?

 

I don't agree that a delusional member complaining that a 540 yard par 4 isn't long enough constitutes an adverse affect on the game. I will need more that.

 

it's been covered fifty times already in this thread, its been publicized in print, tv, internet, etc.

 

i'm not delusional....i've stood there and watched the big 12 championship, NCAA championship, and hopefully will get a loop for the trans-miss this year, where players are blowing it past a bunker 340yds from the tee. the original championship tee and a prevailing wind results in a hole that was designed as a driver/fairway or long iron play as driver/wedge because they just fly the corner.

 

i watched an oklahoma kid go iron/wedge to a 450yd par 4. he went iron/~7i to a 530yd par 5.

 

and it's NOT just the elite of the elite....the better club members do the same thing. just because it doesn't happen in your corner of the golf world doesn't mean it doesn't happen at all.

Problem is you are still talking about the 1%. To those of us typical amateurs, new to the game or been playing 40 years, golf is a very difficult game to be good at.....so whether it's distance improvement or just easier to hit clubs....the 99% of golfers who manufacturers rely on for sales will go the manufacturer who provides these benefits. Same with other products.....consumers buy the ones that perform better. Most of the courses around my area have wasted space and wasted costs......black 7000 yard tee boxes that get used maybe once a year for a tournament. Like the other posted mentioned.....make a 6500-6700 yard course....require people to play from correct tee box....and you'll have a winner. To those few courses who hold pro tournaments.....make the risk reward a little tougher.

[golfer07840]

put quite bluntly, if you don't see a problem with how far the ball is going as an issue, you're not looking deep enough into how it impacts the game and the business of golf.

 

Not following you. I'm trying to understand.

 

How does the distance of the current ball adversely impact the game and the business of golf?

 

I don't agree that a delusional member complaining that a 540 yard par 4 isn't long enough constitutes an adverse affect on the game. I will need more that.

 

Maintaining 20% more course increases overhead, slow play decreases revenue due to less tee times and more people leaving the game, and pieces of property are stretched to their limit to add deeper tee boxes resulting in longer walks and sometimes dangerous locations too close to other holes.

 

What part aren't you following? Not being a smart Word not allowed just curious if many of you doubt the logic? These are facts. Not alternative facts. :)

 

nowhere near me here in very populated NJ, with a ton of courses around, is this happening. In fact, the newest course that was built locally to me was 4 years ago, and it measures 7,091 yards from the tips (75.6/137) not much longer than the old Great Gorge Course (formerly the Playboy Club) that was built in 1971.

 

I think you're reaching here a bit.

[tnord]

:facepalm:

 

i knew it'd get to this point. but i tried.

 

Hey, man, don't worry. You can't always get everyone on board. Thank you so, so very much for trying to help us all. Maybe tell those who think they hit it too far around your course to leave the driver in the trunk. I'd probably also walk down the range and give everyone swing tips to help some more.

 

what you and others are not processing is that i'm trying to help you and every single golfer out there with faster pace, cheaper green fees, and an easier game.

 

but whatever....call me an elitist if you want.

[Shilgy]

:facepalm:

 

i knew it'd get to this point. but i tried.

 

Hey, man, don't worry. You can't always get everyone on board. Thank you so, so very much for trying to help us all. Maybe tell those who think they hit it too far around your course to leave the driver in the trunk. I'd probably also walk down the range and give everyone swing tips to help some more.

 

what you seem incapable of processing is that i'm trying to help you and every single golfer out there with faster pace, cheaper green fees, and an easier game.

 

but whatever....call me an elitist if you want.

Just maybe some that "seem incapable of processing" just disagree with your premise? When you state things as absolute truths but then also post that "we have a 540yd par 4 box that i don't believe we'd maintain anymore for example. but as of right now, it's not long enough. "

 

why would you first say you would not want to maintain a tee box but then also state that it's not long enough. Statements like that lead the rest to face palm.

[b.helts]

:facepalm:

 

i knew it'd get to this point. but i tried.

 

Hey, man, don't worry. You can't always get everyone on board. Thank you so, so very much for trying to help us all. Maybe tell those who think they hit it too far around your course to leave the driver in the trunk. I'd probably also walk down the range and give everyone swing tips to help some more.

 

what you seem incapable of processing is that i'm trying to help you and every single golfer out there with faster pace, cheaper green fees, and an easier game.

 

but whatever....call me an elitist if you want.

Just maybe some that "seem incapable of processing" just disagree with your premise? When you state things as absolute truths but then also post that "we have a 540yd par 4 box that i don't believe we'd maintain anymore for example. but as of right now, it's not long enough. "

 

why would you first say you would not want to maintain a tee box but then also state that it's not long enough. Statements like that lead the rest to face palm.

 

I can see both sides of this issue but the seemingly purposeful ignoring or misunderstanding of some of tnord's posts is remarkable.

 

It's plainly clear that tnord is saying that IF the ball was rolled back, they would stop maintaining the 540 yard tee box. As it stands now, with the current ball, that tee box plays as only a short-medium length par 4 for the players that play that tee box in the tournaments hosted there.

[gvogel]

:facepalm:

 

i knew it'd get to this point. but i tried.

 

Hey, man, don't worry. You can't always get everyone on board. Thank you so, so very much for trying to help us all. Maybe tell those who think they hit it too far around your course to leave the driver in the trunk. I'd probably also walk down the range and give everyone swing tips to help some more.

 

what you and others are not processing is that i'm trying to help you and every single golfer out there with faster pace, cheaper green fees, and an easier game.

 

but whatever....call me an elitist if you want.

 

tnord,

 

Thanks for backing me up.

 

In the last four years, I have played hickory golf. It is a fun game, despite the loss of 20 yards off the tee. One just has to play a shorter course - which takes less time, and is just as satisfying.

[Doyle Hargraves]

:facepalm:

 

i knew it'd get to this point. but i tried.

 

Hey, man, don't worry. You can't always get everyone on board. Thank you so, so very much for trying to help us all. Maybe tell those who think they hit it too far around your course to leave the driver in the trunk. I'd probably also walk down the range and give everyone swing tips to help some more.

 

what you seem incapable of processing is that i'm trying to help you and every single golfer out there with faster pace, cheaper green fees, and an easier game.

 

but whatever....call me an elitist if you want.

Just maybe some that "seem incapable of processing" just disagree with your premise? When you state things as absolute truths but then also post that "we have a 540yd par 4 box that i don't believe we'd maintain anymore for example. but as of right now, it's not long enough. "

 

why would you first say you would not want to maintain a tee box but then also state that it's not long enough. Statements like that lead the rest to face palm.

 

I can see both sides of this issue but the seemingly purposeful ignoring or misunderstanding of some of tnord's posts is remarkable.

 

It's plainly clear that tnord is saying that IF the ball was rolled back, they would stop maintaining the 540 yard tee box. As it stands now, with the current ball, that tee box plays as only a short-medium length par 4 for the players that play that tee box in the tournaments hosted there.

 

How much does it cost to maintain this 100 square foot tee box? I mean, they don't need to maintain any part of the course between that tee box and landing area 360 yards away, correct, due to the "hot ball" rendering the rest of the hole obsolete?

[Ashley Schaeffer]

:facepalm:

 

i knew it'd get to this point. but i tried.

 

Hey, man, don't worry. You can't always get everyone on board. Thank you so, so very much for trying to help us all. Maybe tell those who think they hit it too far around your course to leave the driver in the trunk. I'd probably also walk down the range and give everyone swing tips to help some more.

 

what you seem incapable of processing is that i'm trying to help you and every single golfer out there with faster pace, cheaper green fees, and an easier game.

 

but whatever....call me an elitist if you want.

Just maybe some that "seem incapable of processing" just disagree with your premise? When you state things as absolute truths but then also post that "we have a 540yd par 4 box that i don't believe we'd maintain anymore for example. but as of right now, it's not long enough. "

 

why would you first say you would not want to maintain a tee box but then also state that it's not long enough. Statements like that lead the rest to face palm.

 

I can see both sides of this issue but the seemingly purposeful ignoring or misunderstanding of some of tnord's posts is remarkable.

 

It's plainly clear that tnord is saying that IF the ball was rolled back, they would stop maintaining the 540 yard tee box. As it stands now, with the current ball, that tee box plays as only a short-medium length par 4 for the players that play that tee box in the tournaments hosted there.

 

WTF am I missing here!? Are people actually saying a 540 yard par four is "short-medium" length? That's longer than any par four I've ever played! Do you guys mean par five? I'm lost.

[sefus12]

put quite bluntly, if you don't see a problem with how far the ball is going as an issue, you're not looking deep enough into how it impacts the game and the business of golf.

 

Not following you. I'm trying to understand.

 

How does the distance of the current ball adversely impact the game and the business of golf?

 

I don't agree that a delusional member complaining that a 540 yard par 4 isn't long enough constitutes an adverse affect on the game. I will need more that.

 

it's been covered fifty times already in this thread, its been publicized in print, tv, internet, etc.

 

i'm not delusional....i've stood there and watched the big 12 championship, NCAA championship, and hopefully will get a loop for the trans-miss this year, where players are blowing it past a bunker 340yds from the tee. the original championship tee and a prevailing wind results in a hole that was designed as a driver/fairway or long iron play as driver/wedge because they just fly the corner.

 

i watched an oklahoma kid go iron/wedge to a 450yd par 4. he went iron/~7i to a 530yd par 5.

 

and it's NOT just the elite of the elite....the better club members do the same thing. just because it doesn't happen in your corner of the golf world doesn't mean it doesn't happen at all.

 

And just because you don't like people taking different routes/hitting different clubs into holes than you think they should it's a problem?

 

We once thought a 4-minute mile was impossible. Now college runners have topped that time. Times change. Training changes. Every sport has evolved as the abilities of the athletes have evolved. You are more than welcome to hate how far DJ can hit a driver, but tell me how the pro's hitting it far as objectively made the game worse?

 

I will admit that amateurs playing incorrect tees and taking longer to play a round is a huge problem. But that's their issue, not the pros'.

[b.helts]

How much does it cost to maintain this 100 square foot tee box? I mean, they don't need to maintain any part of the course between that tee box and landing area 360 yards away, correct, due to the "hot ball" rendering the rest of the hole obsolete?

 

This is a perfect example. Total non sequitur.

 

It is possible that your imaginative post parallels reality. It is possible that it does not. We really can't say and therefore any "conclusion" drawn is faulty.

[North Butte]

In some alternative-reality universe the game might have evolved around a ball that was two inches in diameter and weighed an ounce and half. Dustin Johnson would be hitting that ball around 220 yards with his driver and I wouldn't have a single club in my bag that could hit even 150. Full-size "championship" courses might be 4,500 yards. We'd probably all be playing golf in that universe and indeed the game might require less real estate and (slightly) less time to play.

 

The problem is path dependency. AKA you can't get there from here. What's the old saying, once they've seen the big city you can't keep them down on the farm? There is no constituency for seeing the game radically scaled back with promised of saving a few bucks on green fees or taking 20 minutes less time to play a round.

[b.helts]

WTF am I missing here!? Are people actually saying a 540 yard par four is "short-medium" length? That's longer than any par four I've ever played! Do you guys mean par five? I'm lost.

 

Your myopia is at least consistent. I said that it "plays" short. Surely you've played a 400 yard par four that plays long due to elevation or prevailing wind?

[Ashley Schaeffer]

put quite bluntly, if you don't see a problem with how far the ball is going as an issue, you're not looking deep enough into how it impacts the game and the business of golf.

 

Not following you. I'm trying to understand.

 

How does the distance of the current ball adversely impact the game and the business of golf?

 

I don't agree that a delusional member complaining that a 540 yard par 4 isn't long enough constitutes an adverse affect on the game. I will need more that.

 

it's been covered fifty times already in this thread, its been publicized in print, tv, internet, etc.

 

i'm not delusional....i've stood there and watched the big 12 championship, NCAA championship, and hopefully will get a loop for the trans-miss this year, where players are blowing it past a bunker 340yds from the tee. the original championship tee and a prevailing wind results in a hole that was designed as a driver/fairway or long iron play as driver/wedge because they just fly the corner.

 

i watched an oklahoma kid go iron/wedge to a 450yd par 4. he went iron/~7i to a 530yd par 5.

 

and it's NOT just the elite of the elite....the better club members do the same thing. just because it doesn't happen in your corner of the golf world doesn't mean it doesn't happen at all.

 

See, to me, it just seems like maybe you don't like to see your home course overpowered in a way you might not be able to. No offense intended, but it reminds me of when they did the first alley-oop in the movie Semi-Pro. "You can't just go flying through the air like that!"

[jslane57]

Any thread that gets to page 12 is in "facepalm" territory regardless of the side of the debate you choose. But that doesn't mean the points are lost. Far from it. Yes, less course equals less maintained. Less course equals shorter distance covered. Less course simply saves time and money. How do you make less course relevant? Have the equipment produce shorter shots. These are all very sensible solutions. The problem is money and ego isn't it. The manufactures want money, and distance sells. If you're looking at this game through a lens of longevity and relevance to years past, it is clear that the changes in the last couple decades have gone too far. If you only care about how far your drives go, you're happy. Surprisingly to me, many folks participating in an online forum about golf really are not into protecting the game at all, only bettering themselves in relation an unknown. The basketball references and such are not relevant as the ball didn't change, nor did the hoop height, but rather the athletes truly got bigger. You simply can't say that about golf as the equipment/technology has masked the athlete's abilities...