Rolling back the ball

[North Butte]

So everything pre 2003 has no meaning. Is this an attempt by the ruling bodies to claim that they fixed the problem in 2003 and all is ok becuse of them.

 

Using 2003 as a base line is a joke.

 

So, what year as a baseline would not be a joke? 1885? 1910? 1940?

 

So you are saying that 8,500 yard golf courses should be the norm?

 

I'm saying if the Tour wasn't playing 8,500 yard golf courses in 2003 then they are not required to play 8,500 yard golf courses today.

 

And I'm saying if you think USGA is going to retroactively disallow the balls now that they could have outlawed with a stroke a pen in 2002 then you are out of luck.

[FlaBoy239]

my son is just starting golf lessons and the first thing they're teaching them is grip, stance, and SWING HARD. that's all that matters.

 

Which is exactly what Nicklaus said we should do 40 years ago. This is nothing new.

 

i really don't give two craps if the ball is 100% responsible for distance gains, 50% or 5%. it's the easiest and most comprehensive way to address the problem and wally uhlein can go F himself.

 

OK, if there actually was a problem to fix.

 

 

can we all agree that there has been a dramatic increase in distance in the last 30 years? if you can't acknowledge basic facts then go back to watching fox.

you guys that can't stand to lose 5yds off your finely tuned 20hdcp, at what distance does something need to be done? or are you ok with people hitting it 400yds or more?

 

Yes, I'm OK with whatever distance they hit it. Last time I checked, the tournament winner was the one with the lowest total score, not the longest drives.

 

BTW, if you would quit watching CNN you would know that PGA Tour driving distance has stabilized over the past 15 years.

Faldo has been a proponent for teaching children to hit the ball as hard as they can for a long time.

[Shilgy]

Jack takes off his sweater and with a mighty swat drives his tee shot to the back of the green on #18 at St Andrews. What a marvelous shot!!!!

 

Arnie drives the green at #1 at Cherry Hills to propel himself to a comeback US Open win! What a mighty blow.

 

Oh my gosh DJ hit one 320. Roll it back-roll it back!!!

[tnord]

you're mischaracterizing the argument for a reduction in distance on purpose, and you know it.

[Shilgy]

 

Faldo has been a proponent for teaching children to hit the ball as hard as they can for a long time.

Arnie and Jack were taught the same way. Learn to hit it hard and we'll worry about straight later.

 

 

[BrysonNoChamblee]

Special Report:

 

Mike Davis has also recommended the NBA adopt a strictly Chuck Taylor shoe policy to bring back the center to the game and decrease fast break dunks, leather helmets for the NFL to make guys scared of collisions therefore reducing CTE, and that drinking be a mandatory part of golf to bring player conditioning back to 1967 standards. More to come...

[Shilgy]

you're mischaracterizing the argument for a reduction in distance on purpose, and you know it.

And those saying we need 8500 yard courses are not?

 

Point is though the great long shots have long been celebrated but now that they are longer it's truly the bane of our existence to some.

[gvogel]

I think that something should have been done 15 years ago. You can't do anything about it now. Just let it be.

 

USGA says they are coming out with something. Was listening to Hank Haney this morning and they said they were going to recommend different colored balls and tees or something for amatuers. Stupid idea at this point.

 

Having read the release and everything else I can this morning, I conclude once again that Hank Haney has no idea what he is talking about. The only area in which he succeeds is self promotion.

[farmer]

you're mischaracterizing the argument for a reduction in distance on purpose, and you know it.

The NCAA did not overwhelm PD in 2014. As a +hdcp, do you beat it up? How many members do you know who bemoan the relative lack of length at PD?

[gvogel]

you're mischaracterizing the argument for a reduction in distance on purpose, and you know it.

And those saying we need 8500 yard courses are not?

 

Point is though the great long shots have long been celebrated but now that they are longer it's truly the bane of our existence to some.

 

By the way, that was Barney Adams' conclusion. I simply happen to concur.

[Roadking2003]

my son is just starting golf lessons and the first thing they're teaching them is grip, stance, and SWING HARD. that's all that matters.

 

Which is exactly what Nicklaus said we should do 40 years ago. This is nothing new.

 

i really don't give two craps if the ball is 100% responsible for distance gains, 50% or 5%. it's the easiest and most comprehensive way to address the problem and wally uhlein can go F himself.

 

OK, if there actually was a problem to fix.

 

 

can we all agree that there has been a dramatic increase in distance in the last 30 years? if you can't acknowledge basic facts then go back to watching fox.

you guys that can't stand to lose 5yds off your finely tuned 20hdcp, at what distance does something need to be done? or are you ok with people hitting it 400yds or more?

 

Yes, I'm OK with whatever distance they hit it. Last time I checked, the tournament winner was the one with the lowest total score, not the longest drives.

 

BTW, if you would quit watching CNN you would know that PGA Tour driving distance has stabilized over the past 15 years.

 

In 2002, there was one player who averaged 300 yards off the tee (John Daly) and the guy in 100th place average 280. In 2017, there were 43 players who averaged 300 yards and the guy in 100th place average 292. How is that stabilized?

 

I didn't say 2002. Start with 2003.

[Roadking2003]

So everything pre 2003 has no meaning. Is this an attempt by the ruling bodies to claim that they fixed the problem in 2003 and all is ok becuse of them.

 

Using 2003 as a base line is a joke.

 

So, what year as a baseline would not be a joke? 1885? 1910? 1940?

 

So you are saying that 8,500 yard golf courses should be the norm?

 

So you are saying that 5500 yard golf courses should be the norm?

[Roadking2003]

Jack takes off his sweater as with a mighty swat drives his tee shot to the back of the green on #18 at St Andrews. What a marvelous shot!!!!

 

Arnie drives the green at #1 at Cherry Hills to propel himself to a comeback US Open win! What a mighty blow.

 

Oh my gosh DJ hit one 320. Roll it back-roll it back!!!

 

Perfect!

[Roadking2003]

Special Report:

 

Mike Davis has also recommended the NBA adopt a strictly Chuck Taylor shoe policy to bring back the center to the game and decrease fast break dunks, leather helmets for the NFL to make guys scared of collisions therefore reducing CTE, and that drinking be a mandatory part of golf to bring player conditioning back to 1967 standards. More to come...

 

followed by raising the basket to 14 feet so players today will play like they did 50 years ago.

[gvogel]

Jack takes off his sweater as with a mighty swat drives his tee shot to the back of the green on #18 at St Andrews. What a marvelous shot!!!!

 

Arnie drives the green at #1 at Cherry Hills to propel himself to a comeback US Open win! What a mighty blow.

 

Oh my gosh DJ hit one 320. Roll it back-roll it back!!!

 

You can't use the home hole at St Andrews in any cogent argument. That hole evolved around 150 years ago. IT is quirky, and every player who plays it agrees with that, but they like it that way nonetheless.

 

Most would agree that the long, uphill par 4 that came into existence in the early part of the last century is more the usual than not. Except now that hole is drive wedge.

[Shilgy]

Jack takes off his sweater as with a mighty swat drives his tee shot to the back of the green on #18 at St Andrews. What a marvelous shot!!!!

 

Arnie drives the green at #1 at Cherry Hills to propel himself to a comeback US Open win! What a mighty blow.

 

Oh my gosh DJ hit one 320. Roll it back-roll it back!!!

 

You can't use the home hole at St Andrews in any cogent argument. That hole evolved around 150 years ago. IT is quirky, and every player who plays it agrees with that, but they like it that way nonetheless.

 

Most would agree that the long, uphill par 4 that came into existence in the early part of the last century is more the usual than not. Except now that hole is drive wedge.

And the greens are firmer and faster and the pins are harder. It's all a balance which is why scoring has not changed. The only thing changed is the number of the club on approach shots.

 

It's really not an easier game but the methods and strategies have changed.

 

#embracethechange :)

 

 

[Roadking2003]

you're mischaracterizing the argument for a reduction in distance on purpose, and you know it.

The NCAA did not overwhelm PD in 2014. As a +hdcp, do you beat it up? How many members do you know who bemoan the relative lack of length at PD?

 

The Big 12 played their tournament at PD last year. The winner, Texas, averaged 73.0 (par 70) and they only count the four lowest out of five. Last place averaged 78.19.

 

The medalist was seven over par for the week.

 

That's not exactly overpowering the course in my book.

[Roadking2003]

Jack takes off his sweater as with a mighty swat drives his tee shot to the back of the green on #18 at St Andrews. What a marvelous shot!!!!

 

Arnie drives the green at #1 at Cherry Hills to propel himself to a comeback US Open win! What a mighty blow.

 

Oh my gosh DJ hit one 320. Roll it back-roll it back!!!

 

You can't use the home hole at St Andrews in any cogent argument. That hole evolved around 150 years ago. IT is quirky, and every player who plays it agrees with that, but they like it that way nonetheless.

 

Most would agree that the long, uphill par 4 that came into existence in the early part of the last century is more the usual than not. Except now that hole is drive wedge.

 

The point is that almost everybody says #18 at St Andrews is a great finishing hole. But in Mexico, some complain that hitting driver/wedge means it's time to roll back the ball.

 

Pathetic.

[bladehunter]

https://www.instagra.../p/Bf8YeHqnQ08/

 

Yep. Same basic, slow trend that's been going on for decades has continued from 2003-2017. Surprise, surprise.

 

So now the rollbackers will want to shift the argument away from the Tour players and instead claim huge upward distance trends for amateur players for whom, conveniently, there is no data available to refute those beliefs.

 

 

Why is it automatically that this slow upward trend is OnLY attributed to fitness ? Why can’t it be from ball and Driver plus trackman ? And if it is why would we expect it to stop in 2018? That’s the real question. The true answer is that there are those of us who want it to stop and those who want it to go on. Those who want it to go on are hiding behind the “ everything is maxed “ argument yet from the other corner of their mouth posting steady increase data from 2003 to 2017. Which is it ? Maxed or not ?

 

 

Not a personal attack on you. Just in general.

[bladehunter]

exactly...we need a basic account for who is on board with the idea that all players hit the ball farther today ( relative to age) than they did say in 1985-1997..... If you dont agree with that no wonder you are against it . If you do agree with that at least we can move onto the rest of the debate which is ......Is more distance good or bad for the game going forward...because the ball and driver manufacturers arent finished bending the current rules. Distance is still growing... it isnt maxed at the current rules....

 

What rules are the ball and driver manufacturers bending?

 

And the debate isn't about distance in 2018 compared to 1985 or 1955 or 1905 or 1885. It's about the fact that distance has stabilized over the past 15 years.

 

Where do you pull this arbitrary 15 years from ?

[15th Club]

Jack takes off his sweater and with a mighty swat drives his tee shot to the back of the green on #18 at St Andrews. What a marvelous shot!!!!

 

Arnie drives the green at #1 at Cherry Hills to propel himself to a comeback US Open win! What a mighty blow.

 

Oh my gosh DJ hit one 320. Roll it back-roll it back!!!

 

Note well, readers; this post proves the opposite of what the author intended. The Palmer tee shot on the first hole at Cherry Hills and, a bit less so, the Nicklaus tee shot on the eighteenth of T.O.C/72nd of the Open, were rare shots. They could be rare shots, and unusual, gutsy plays, because the equipment and the golf courses were so delicately paired/coordinated with each other. The equipment was just barely good enough to allow shots like that, but not so good that everybody could do it.

 

That is the simple point in this entire debate. Getting the extremely fragile balance set right, between the golf courses and the equipment.

 

In 2003, the USGA and the R&A very cautiously warned the golfing world that any further increases in distance would be undesirable. And since then, it is now beyond dispute, the PGA Tour and the rest of elite golf are seeing increases in distances. The golfing world has been on notice, for the last 15 years. I knew that we would come to this. Geoff Shackelford knew we would come to this. Almost every big name in golf, from former major champions to administrators to architects, knew we would come to this. And here we are.

 

I remind everybody of what Geoff Shackelford wrote about the game we love: that in no other sport, are the venues at which the game is played as important to the game, and as fragile, as golf.

[gvogel]

Jack takes off his sweater as with a mighty swat drives his tee shot to the back of the green on #18 at St Andrews. What a marvelous shot!!!!

 

Arnie drives the green at #1 at Cherry Hills to propel himself to a comeback US Open win! What a mighty blow.

 

Oh my gosh DJ hit one 320. Roll it back-roll it back!!!

 

You can't use the home hole at St Andrews in any cogent argument. That hole evolved around 150 years ago. IT is quirky, and every player who plays it agrees with that, but they like it that way nonetheless.

 

Most would agree that the long, uphill par 4 that came into existence in the early part of the last century is more the usual than not. Except now that hole is drive wedge.

 

The point is that almost everybody says #18 at St Andrews is a great finishing hole. But in Mexico, some complain that hitting driver/wedge means it's time to roll back the ball.

 

Pathetic.

 

I don't think that 18 at St Andrews is a great finishing hole, but I will say that the Road Hole is a great penultimate hole. But let's see - 18: OB over the green, OB to the right of the green, and a big elevation change right in front of the green. Also, it is generally windy there, making the judgement of a pitch shot dicey. 18 at Chupultepec - none of the above.

[North Butte]

Balls of the type used on Tour did not change one iota and the driver clubs themselves changed only slightly from the early 50's through the late 80's. Yet driving distance on Tour drifting inexolerably upward over that entire period. If you smooth the graph it works out to maybe half a yard per year or thereabouts.

 

Since 2003 driving distance on Tour has drifted upward by about half a yard a year. It's a long term trend attributable to some combination of clubhead speed increase, improvements (if I may use that word) in agronomy and course setup and any other secular trends OTHER THAN THE EQUIPMENT that tend to happen on that very slow time scale.

 

The existence of that long-term secular trend and its similarity to the trend since 2003 suggests very strongly that the "ProV1 effect" was indeed a one-time jump in driving distance and that since the new golf ball standards and conformance testing were implemented there has in fact been little or no equipment-related or ball-related increase beyond what would happen absent such.

[North Butte]

Jack takes off his sweater and with a mighty swat drives his tee shot to the back of the green on #18 at St Andrews. What a marvelous shot!!!!

 

Arnie drives the green at #1 at Cherry Hills to propel himself to a comeback US Open win! What a mighty blow.

 

Oh my gosh DJ hit one 320. Roll it back-roll it back!!!

 

Note well, readers; this post proves the opposite of what the author intended. The Palmer tee shot on the first hole at Cherry Hills and, a bit less so, the Nicklaus tee shot on the eighteenth of T.O.C/72nd of the Open, were rare shots. They could be rare shots, and unusual, gutsy plays, because the equipment and the golf courses were so delicately paired/coordinated with each other. The equipment was just barely good enough to allow shots like that, but not so good that everybody could do it.

 

That is the simple point in this entire debate. Getting the extremely fragile balance set right, between the golf courses and the equipment.

 

In 2003, the USGA and the R&A very cautiously warned the golfing world that any further increases in distance would be undesirable. And since then, it is now beyond dispute, the PGA Tour and the rest of elite golf are seeing increases in distances. The golfing world has been on notice, for the last 15 years. I knew that we would come to this. Geoff Shackelford knew we would come to this. Almost every big name in golf, from former major champions to administrators to architects, knew we would come to this. And here we are.

 

I remind everybody of what Geoff Shackelford wrote about the game we love: that in no other sport, are the venues at which the game is played as important to the game, and as fragile, as golf.

 

Fragile? They've been holding Opens at St. Andrews for more than a century. The egos of certain golf fans and course owners are far more fragile than any golf course. Golf courses are very robust things indeed and are not damaged by seeing balls fly across them at different distances in various eras.

[tnord]

you're mischaracterizing the argument for a reduction in distance on purpose, and you know it.

And those saying we need 8500 yard courses are not?

 

Point is though the great long shots have long been celebrated but now that they are longer it's truly the bane of our existence to some.

 

that is completely disingenuous. there is becoming too much emphasis on long drives and wedge play, not much else matters. there is less emphasis on strategy, mid-long iron ability, and control. it's ever increasingly easy to smash it a mile, go find it, and wedge it on. the long drives of the past, like AP driving the first at cherry hills was celebrated because it was so far beyond the ability of the average player. now the same distance drive is expected from pretty much everyone. cherry hills number 1 was about 350yds, same as hole #1 at the WGC this week. i don't recall anyone not trying to drive that green, many with 3w, irons, and even "short hitters" like brian harmon were reaching.

 

i invite you to go play the senior tees as a 4index and see if you think it's the same test of skill.

[gvogel]

Jack takes off his sweater and with a mighty swat drives his tee shot to the back of the green on #18 at St Andrews. What a marvelous shot!!!!

 

Arnie drives the green at #1 at Cherry Hills to propel himself to a comeback US Open win! What a mighty blow.

 

Oh my gosh DJ hit one 320. Roll it back-roll it back!!!

 

Note well, readers; this post proves the opposite of what the author intended. The Palmer tee shot on the first hole at Cherry Hills and, a bit less so, the Nicklaus tee shot on the eighteenth of T.O.C/72nd of the Open, were rare shots. They could be rare shots, and unusual, gutsy plays, because the equipment and the golf courses were so delicately paired/coordinated with each other. The equipment was just barely good enough to allow shots like that, but not so good that everybody could do it.

 

That is the simple point in this entire debate. Getting the extremely fragile balance set right, between the golf courses and the equipment.

 

In 2003, the USGA and the R&A very cautiously warned the golfing world that any further increases in distance would be undesirable. And since then, it is now beyond dispute, the PGA Tour and the rest of elite golf are seeing increases in distances. The golfing world has been on notice, for the last 15 years. I knew that we would come to this. Geoff Shackelford knew we would come to this. Almost every big name in golf, from former major champions to administrators to architects, knew we would come to this. And here we are.

 

I remind everybody of what Geoff Shackelford wrote about the game we love: that in no other sport, are the venues at which the game is played as important to the game, and as fragile, as golf.

 

excellent points.

 

The USGA and R&A said this back in 2013:

 

The R&A and the USGA believe, however, that any further significant increases in hitting distances at the highest level are undesirable. Whether these increases in distance emanate from advancing equipment technology, greater athleticism of players, improved player coaching, golf course conditioning or a combination of these or other factors, they will have the impact of seriously reducing the challenge of the game. The consequential lengthening or toughening of courses would be costly or impossible and would have a negative effect on increasingly important environmental and ecological issues. Pace of play would be slowed and playing costs would increase.

[North Butte]

there is becoming too much emphasis on long drives and wedge play, not much else matters.

 

Here's the thing. You see "too much" and I see "not too much at all". It's entirely a value judgement and, based on the entire history of televised golf entertainment, your own values are very much in a minority. Which of course is why you want USGA to force the issue with a complete retrenchment of their conforming-ball efforts.

[gvogel]

there is becoming too much emphasis on long drives and wedge play, not much else matters.

 

Here's the thing. You see "too much" and I see "not too much at all". It's entirely a value judgement and, based on the entire history of televised golf entertainment, your own values are very much in a minority. Which of course is why you want USGA to force the issue with a complete retrenchment of their conforming-ball efforts.

 

So on the other hand we can assume that you would be OK with a restatement of a par 4 hole to any hole less than 600 yards and a par 3 to any hole less than 270. Right? Let's call a spade a spade. You like the entertainment value of elite golfers hitting the long ball; you need to re-examine your definition of par.

[tnord]

you're mischaracterizing the argument for a reduction in distance on purpose, and you know it.

The NCAA did not overwhelm PD in 2014. As a +hdcp, do you beat it up? How many members do you know who bemoan the relative lack of length at PD?

 

i shoot what my index says i should shoot. score is irrelevant despite your desire to make it so, it's HOW you get to that score i take issue with.

 

there are two or three par 4s that have now become driveable that should not be.

there are four to six bunkers on the insides of doglegs that are no longer anything but a sightline.

 

on a "normal" day, here are the clubs i would approach the green with from the back tees;

 

1) 8/7

2) 9/8

3) 58deg

4) 8

5) 6/7

6) 58/54

7) 6 (par 5)

8) 8/7

9) 8/7

10) 8/7

11) 8/7

12) 54/50

13) 8/7

14) 58

15) 5 (longest par 3)

16) 9/8

17) par 5

18) 8/7

 

nothing longer than a 6i unless i hit a bad tee shot or the wind is howling.

 

what happens at PD isn't really relevant outside of how the game has changed across the board. hazards aren't hazards anymore. a host of par 4s are now driveable and par 5s reachable (slows down play). strategy has been deemphasized, long irons stay in the bag, and better players and weekend warriors can very seldom enjoy the same golf course.

[North Butte]

there is becoming too much emphasis on long drives and wedge play, not much else matters.

 

Here's the thing. You see "too much" and I see "not too much at all". It's entirely a value judgement and, based on the entire history of televised golf entertainment, your own values are very much in a minority. Which of course is why you want USGA to force the issue with a complete retrenchment of their conforming-ball efforts.

 

So on the other hand we can assume that you would be OK with a restatement of a par 4 hole to any hole less than 600 yards and a par 3 to any hole less than 270. Right? Let's call a spade a spade. You like the entertainment value of elite golfers hitting the long ball; you need to re-examine your definition of par.

 

To be clear, I do not care what the TV entertainers call a Par 4 or a Par 5 or a spade. They can, as far as I'm concerned, do things in the manner that best enables them to produce their product.

 

First of all, that's their prerogative. Secondly, outside of the Masters and Open I watch very little televised golf.