Rolling back the ball

[tnord]

i read it, both Jimmy Walker and Lucas Glover are employees of titleist, not exactly an unbiased objective view. they are speaking out against a 20% rollback of the ball "for the masses"

 

Jack is also in the "sub-divisions that feature golf courses" business. He also sells golf balls (not very well). He also benefited from supreme length over the field back in his day. Is he objective?

 

doesn't jack's firm stand to make more money from a longer golf ball through "restorations" of existing courses, and construction of new "championship" courses that better fit modern equipment? are you really going to take the position that the Golden Bear golf balls are relevant enough to stand to gain from a change in regulation?

 

it is absolutely fair to evaluation the position Jack's coming from, but i don't think these accusations are on point at all.

 

again, the USGA and R&A are the only ones motivated by the betterment of the game of golf.

[North Butte]

With all the ball companies out there making good products, each of them just DYING to get "name" Tour players, none of these guys would be "shilling" for a company who did something they didn't like. They'd simply switch to a different company when their contract is up.

[deadsolid...shank]

Anyone want to go play 9 after work?

 

 

But seriously, this is why I love this site. Wailing and gnashing of teeth for 43 pages. Bludgeoning each other's points post after post.

 

But I'd go walk 9 with 15th or tnord and listen to some cool stories and history of the courses they love so goddamn much. I love golf, after all. I'd rather do that than sit here and keep typing.

 

I'd walk 9 with Ashley Schaeffer because he seems like a funny a** guy and his commentary on that Shack podcast was terrific. I'm still pretty sure Walter Matthau is actually still alive and posting as North Butte.

 

Shalom.

 

I wouldn't. I don't like anybody. Especially myself, no one should have to play golf with me! :)

[tnord]

i read it, both Jimmy Walker and Lucas Glover are employees of titleist, not exactly an unbiased objective view. they are speaking out against a 20% rollback of the ball "for the masses"

 

Jack is also in the "sub-divisions that feature golf courses" business. He also sells golf balls (not very well). He also benefited from supreme length over the field back in his day. Is he objective?

 

The possibility of a rollback of distance directly impacts these guys. I cannot believe they would be pushing the company line if they were truly for it. What about James Hahn? He isn't a Titleist paid player.

 

yes he is.

 

https://www.titleist.com/tour/all-players?SearchTerm=James+Hahn&EquipmentType=&Tour=&OrderBy=rank

[rawdog]

Anyone want to go play 9 after work?

 

 

But seriously, this is why I love this site. Wailing and gnashing of teeth for 43 pages. Bludgeoning each other's points post after post.

 

But I'd go walk 9 with 15th or tnord and listen to some cool stories and history of the courses they love so goddamn much. I love golf, after all. I'd rather do that than sit here and keep typing.

 

I'd walk 9 with Ashley Schaeffer because he seems like a funny a** guy and his commentary on that Shack podcast was terrific. I'm still pretty sure Walter Matthau is actually still alive and posting as North Butte.

 

Shalom.

 

I wouldn't. I don't like anybody. Especially myself, no one should have to play golf with me! :)

 

Before you love others, you must learn to love yourself.

 

Be comfortable in your skin, Shank. Lose the pleats, but be comfortable in your skin.

 

 

 

 

Winter needs to end.

[North Butte]

Lose the pleats, but be comfortable in your skin.

 

Truly, words of wisdom we can all live by.

[radiman]

i read it, both Jimmy Walker and Lucas Glover are employees of titleist, not exactly an unbiased objective view. they are speaking out against a 20% rollback of the ball "for the masses"

 

Jack is also in the "sub-divisions that feature golf courses" business. He also sells golf balls (not very well). He also benefited from supreme length over the field back in his day. Is he objective?

 

The possibility of a rollback of distance directly impacts these guys. I cannot believe they would be pushing the company line if they were truly for it. What about James Hahn? He isn't a Titleist paid player.

 

yes he is.

 

https://www.titleist...r=&OrderBy=rank

 

Lol, ok, so he plays their ball. A lot of players do. That does not disqualify his opinion. Maybe it directly impacts his game and is thus qualified to form an opinion? Which, I would argue, should be taken into consideration more than yours, mine, or Geoff Shackelford's. They are the ones who would have to deal with the consequences. But, since he doesn't agree, he is either a sellout who is representing Titleist, or he just doesn't understand the situation (according to Shackelford).

 

All Tour players are playing with a modern ball made by companies that would possibly lose sales. Do none of their opinions matter unless they agree with a rollback?

[North Butte]

...none of their opinions matter unless they agree with a rollback?

 

I'm guessing THIS is the real point.

[bladehunter]

do you guys have any authorities on the subject that supports your position you can point me to? or are you just going to make fun of people that actually care about this stuff?

 

Golf is a game. PGA Tour golf is entertainment. All of the customers are "authorities" on the subject, not just the lowest handicapped customers or golfers with the most golf skill or course designers. The only credential needed is to be a fan of PGA Tour golf. My opinion is just as valid as Jack's opinion.

 

But here is another view you might want to listen to;

 

http://www.golfchann...ers-pulse-game/

 

i read it, both Jimmy Walker and Lucas Glover are employees of titleist, not exactly an unbiased objective view. they are speaking out against a 20% rollback of the ball "for the masses"

 

1) that won't happen because "the masses" don't compress the ball as it is. the modern equipment hasn't helped them gain distance, changing it won't hurt them either. i would argue that it will actually help them via higher spin.

2) i would not support a 20% shorter ball for the guy that can't hit it 200 either.

 

 

exactly my take... shills... for sure..both struggling and in no position to have any other opinion... It maybe their true opinion but its no accident that the ones against it are all titleist at this point and any who even hint at being for a rollback are mostly independent of a 14 club and ball contract

You have Titleist in your bag. no you don't get paid to I am guessing but does that disqualify you as well. Surely if Titleist is in your bag you feel they are best for you and would not wish them harmed. :)

 

Not a titleist ball. Lol.

[bladehunter]

i read it, both Jimmy Walker and Lucas Glover are employees of titleist, not exactly an unbiased objective view. they are speaking out against a 20% rollback of the ball "for the masses"

 

Jack is also in the "sub-divisions that feature golf courses" business. He also sells golf balls (not very well). He also benefited from supreme length over the field back in his day. Is he objective?

 

The possibility of a rollback of distance directly impacts these guys. I cannot believe they would be pushing the company line if they were truly for it. What about James Hahn? He isn't a Titleist paid player.

 

yes he is.

 

https://www.titleist...r=&OrderBy=rank

 

Lol, ok, so he plays their ball. A lot of players do. That does not disqualify his opinion. Maybe it directly impacts his game and is thus qualified to form an opinion? Which, I would argue, should be taken into consideration more than yours, mine, or Geoff Shackelford's. They are the ones who would have to deal with the consequences. But, since he doesn't agree, he is either a sellout who is representing Titleist, or he just doesn't understand the situation (according to Shackelford).

 

All Tour players are playing with a modern ball made by companies that would possibly lose sales. Do none of their opinions matter unless they agree with a rollback?

 

Bridgestone is pro roll back. Which is why titleist lost their minds.

[radiman]

 

 

Bridgestone is pro roll back. Which is why titleist lost their minds.

 

I was aware that they were working with the USGA at some level. I think Titleist probably saw that as an opportunity for Bridgestone to become a leader in the new "rolled back" golf balls. I wasn't aware on their stance as a company. So, if it is beyond them working with the USGA, I haven't seen it. Not saying it isn't true. I am curious on their viewpoint however.

[North Butte]

There is no industry I can think of where a leading company would be pleased to have a competitor "working with" the agency that regulates that industry, to come up with a rewrite of the entire regulatory framework.

[nobogeys59]

In 2006 the Ohio Golf Association was going to have a tournament with all competitors using the same distance regulated ball. How did that go?

[tnord]

i read it, both Jimmy Walker and Lucas Glover are employees of titleist, not exactly an unbiased objective view. they are speaking out against a 20% rollback of the ball "for the masses"

 

Jack is also in the "sub-divisions that feature golf courses" business. He also sells golf balls (not very well). He also benefited from supreme length over the field back in his day. Is he objective?

 

The possibility of a rollback of distance directly impacts these guys. I cannot believe they would be pushing the company line if they were truly for it. What about James Hahn? He isn't a Titleist paid player.

 

yes he is.

 

https://www.titleist...r=&OrderBy=rank

 

Lol, ok, so he plays their ball. A lot of players do. That does not disqualify his opinion. Maybe it directly impacts his game and is thus qualified to form an opinion? Which, I would argue, should be taken into consideration more than yours, mine, or Geoff Shackelford's. They are the ones who would have to deal with the consequences. But, since he doesn't agree, he is either a sellout who is representing Titleist, or he just doesn't understand the situation (according to Shackelford).

 

All Tour players are playing with a modern ball made by companies that would possibly lose sales. Do none of their opinions matter unless they agree with a rollback?

 

it kinda does though, because they're financially motivated, by titleist, to tow the company line. is it any coincidence that all of the tour pros that have been outspoken against a change in regs have been titleist staffers?

 

in JW's instagram post, he mentions the 20% rollback for average golfers. i don't think ANYBODY, even the pro rollback guys are supportive of that. obviously the USGA needs to conduct testing on iron byron with whatever the new ball spec is at swing speeds between like 60-140 to understand what's going to happen. i don't think even the USGA would be comfortable with a rollback if the guy swinging 70mph lost 20yards.

 

the anti-rollback crowd is all worked up about something that isn't even the objective.

[tnord]

Bridgestone is pro roll back. Which is why titleist lost their minds.

 

I was aware that they were working with the USGA at some level. I think Titleist probably saw that as an opportunity for Bridgestone to become a leader in the new "rolled back" golf balls. I wasn't aware on their stance as a company. So, if it is beyond them working with the USGA, I haven't seen it. Not saying it isn't true. I am curious on their viewpoint however.

 

i'm sure titleist was afforded the opportunity to cooperate, but given their confrontational history around this issue, they declined. at least i hope the USGA extended the invite to them to cooperate (along with TM, Callaway, Bstone, Snell, etc), but if they didn't i'd understand.

[radiman]

it kinda does though, because they're financially motivated, by titleist, to tow the company line. is it any coincidence that all of the tour pros that have been outspoken against a change in regs have been titleist staffers?

 

in JW's instagram post, he mentions the 20% rollback for average golfers. i don't think ANYBODY, even the pro rollback guys are supportive of that. obviously the USGA needs to conduct testing on iron byron with whatever the new ball spec is at swing speeds between like 60-140 to understand what's going to happen. i don't think even the USGA would be comfortable with a rollback if the guy swinging 70mph lost 20yards.

 

the anti-rollback crowd is all worked up about something that isn't even the objective.

 

Do you think James Hahn's golf ball contract is pulling in a large $$ amount for him? If push came to shove, I would imagine he could move on to any other manufacturer. I don't think Titleist sent a memo out to their staffers at any level asking them to go out into the media and push their agenda.

 

Players like him are making way more money on the course than they are in endorsements from golf ball only contracts. This would have an affect on his on course performance, I don't understand how that isn't taken into consideration. These younger players have never had to play with persimmon and balata. They grew up on the ProV1. It's all they know. Is it surprising that they would be against reducing distance to pre-modern golf era numbers?

 

Edit: I realize that last statement doesn't apply to every tour player, Lucas Glover and Jimmy Walker for instance.

[North Butte]

When Tiger Woods gets paid by Bridgestone to tout their golf balls, he is taking a principled stand to support a company who is pursuing his dream of what a golf ball should be.

 

When Jimmy Walker gets paid by Titleist to keep playing the ball he played even before he got paid, he's just a corporate shill selling out his own beliefs grubbing for dollars.

 

Got it.

[radiman]

When Tiger Woods gets paid by Bridgestone to tout their golf balls, he is taking a principled stand to support a company who is pursuing his dream of what a golf ball should be.

 

When Jimmy Walker gets paid by Titleist to keep playing the ball he played even before he got paid, he's just a corporate shill selling out his own beliefs grubbing for dollars.

 

Got it.

 

Don't forget the Tiger Bridgestone video pointing out the fact that he out drove the ProV1 player. I personally like it, but in that regard doesn't he disqualify his opinion as well?

[tnord]

it kinda does though, because they're financially motivated, by titleist, to tow the company line. is it any coincidence that all of the tour pros that have been outspoken against a change in regs have been titleist staffers?

 

in JW's instagram post, he mentions the 20% rollback for average golfers. i don't think ANYBODY, even the pro rollback guys are supportive of that. obviously the USGA needs to conduct testing on iron byron with whatever the new ball spec is at swing speeds between like 60-140 to understand what's going to happen. i don't think even the USGA would be comfortable with a rollback if the guy swinging 70mph lost 20yards.

 

the anti-rollback crowd is all worked up about something that isn't even the objective.

 

Do you think James Hahn's golf ball contract is pulling in a large $$ amount for him? If push came to shove, I would imagine he could move on to any other manufacturer. I don't think Titleist sent a memo out to their staffers at any level asking them to go out into the media and push their agenda.

 

Players like him are making way more money on the course than they are in endorsements from golf ball only contracts. This would have an affect on his on course performance, I don't understand how that isn't taken into consideration. These younger players have never had to play with persimmon and balata. They grew up on the ProV1. It's all they know. Is it surprising that they would be against reducing distance to pre-modern golf era numbers?

 

Edit: I realize that last statement doesn't apply to every tour player, Lucas Glover and Jimmy Walker for instance.

 

1) i think James Hahn, and and all golfers around his place in world rankings/tour standing will take most sponsorship opportunities that come their way (how many logos can people fit on their shirt/hat/bag anymore?

2) again, bifurcation has already happened. there's what, a dozen versions of the pro-v in play on tour? Kevin Na just posted about his tour only version proV that got him 6 more yards or whatever (but the PGA Tour official stance is that no one is getting longer!!!!!)? tiger played essentially a b-stone version of the one-tour D * with a swoosh painted on it. sergio played the "b-head" versions of whatever taylormade iron of the day. the bottom line being that the manufacturers will make you whatever version of equipment you want, as long as their brand is on it.

[Bye]

I am surprised some of the other OEM's are not calling for a roll back. There must come a point where driver sales are going to dip as players keep hold of there 1/2/3+ year old drivers because they are as good as the new ones.

 

Some sort of roll back of the tour style ball might allow for the restrictions on the drivers to be relaxed.

[radiman]

it kinda does though, because they're financially motivated, by titleist, to tow the company line. is it any coincidence that all of the tour pros that have been outspoken against a change in regs have been titleist staffers?

 

in JW's instagram post, he mentions the 20% rollback for average golfers. i don't think ANYBODY, even the pro rollback guys are supportive of that. obviously the USGA needs to conduct testing on iron byron with whatever the new ball spec is at swing speeds between like 60-140 to understand what's going to happen. i don't think even the USGA would be comfortable with a rollback if the guy swinging 70mph lost 20yards.

 

the anti-rollback crowd is all worked up about something that isn't even the objective.

 

Do you think James Hahn's golf ball contract is pulling in a large $$ amount for him? If push came to shove, I would imagine he could move on to any other manufacturer. I don't think Titleist sent a memo out to their staffers at any level asking them to go out into the media and push their agenda.

 

Players like him are making way more money on the course than they are in endorsements from golf ball only contracts. This would have an affect on his on course performance, I don't understand how that isn't taken into consideration. These younger players have never had to play with persimmon and balata. They grew up on the ProV1. It's all they know. Is it surprising that they would be against reducing distance to pre-modern golf era numbers?

 

Edit: I realize that last statement doesn't apply to every tour player, Lucas Glover and Jimmy Walker for instance.

 

1) i think James Hahn, and and all golfers around his place in world rankings/tour standing will take most sponsorship opportunities that come their way (how many logos can people fit on their shirt/hat/bag anymore?

2) again, bifurcation has already happened. there's what, a dozen versions of the pro-v in play on tour? tiger played essentially a b-stone version of the one-tour D * with a swoosh painted on it. sergio played the "b-head" versions of whatever taylormade iron of the day. the bottom line being that the manufacturers will make you whatever version of equipment you want, as long as their brand is on it.

 

That's not a different set of rules though. That is differently spec'd equipment that is within the same rule set we abide by. They just so happen to not be available to us. If you got ahold of their spec'd golf balls, you could play them in any USGA sanctioned event you like.

[tnord]

some of you are a marketing agencies dream.

[deadsolid...shank]

I am surprised some of the other OEM's are not calling for a roll back. There must come a point where driver sales are going to dip as players keep hold of there 1/2/3+ year old drivers because they are as good as the new ones.

 

Some sort of roll back of the tour style ball might allow for the restrictions on the drivers to be relaxed.

 

Do you think people will slow down on buying new drivers Bye? I think most people know that a new club isn’t going to transform them instantly, but they still keep trying. It will be interesting to see.

[North Butte]

it kinda does though, because they're financially motivated, by titleist, to tow the company line. is it any coincidence that all of the tour pros that have been outspoken against a change in regs have been titleist staffers?

 

in JW's instagram post, he mentions the 20% rollback for average golfers. i don't think ANYBODY, even the pro rollback guys are supportive of that. obviously the USGA needs to conduct testing on iron byron with whatever the new ball spec is at swing speeds between like 60-140 to understand what's going to happen. i don't think even the USGA would be comfortable with a rollback if the guy swinging 70mph lost 20yards.

 

the anti-rollback crowd is all worked up about something that isn't even the objective.

 

Do you think James Hahn's golf ball contract is pulling in a large $$ amount for him? If push came to shove, I would imagine he could move on to any other manufacturer. I don't think Titleist sent a memo out to their staffers at any level asking them to go out into the media and push their agenda.

 

Players like him are making way more money on the course than they are in endorsements from golf ball only contracts. This would have an affect on his on course performance, I don't understand how that isn't taken into consideration. These younger players have never had to play with persimmon and balata. They grew up on the ProV1. It's all they know. Is it surprising that they would be against reducing distance to pre-modern golf era numbers?

 

Edit: I realize that last statement doesn't apply to every tour player, Lucas Glover and Jimmy Walker for instance.

 

1) i think James Hahn, and and all golfers around his place in world rankings/tour standing will take most sponsorship opportunities that come their way (how many logos can people fit on their shirt/hat/bag anymore?

2) again, bifurcation has already happened. there's what, a dozen versions of the pro-v in play on tour? Kevin Na just posted about his tour only version proV that got him 6 more yards or whatever (but the PGA Tour official stance is that no one is getting longer!!!!!)? tiger played essentially a b-stone version of the one-tour D * with a swoosh painted on it. sergio played the "b-head" versions of whatever taylormade iron of the day. the bottom line being that the manufacturers will make you whatever version of equipment you want, as long as their brand is on it.

 

Ah yes, the old "Tour players get hotter equipment than amateurs" wheeze. Been hearing that one for ages.

[tnord]

that discussion has been going on as long as i've been on this board.

 

person; "COR is maxed, equipment can't help me."

mfg; "jailbreak rocketballz tour F3 is longer, higher, and straighter!!!!"

person: "shut up and take my money!!!!!"

[North Butte]

They've been marketing newer and better clubs to golfers longer than any of us have been ALIVE much less on GolfWRX.

[radiman]

some of you are a marketing agencies dream.

 

Lol, a marketing agencies dream? I just know for a fact that those balls have different characteristics. They aren't juiced and don't have some sort of magical effect on a players swing. I know enough to realize that the equipment played by a lot of players on tour isn't the same as what I can buy off the rack.

[Bye]

I am surprised some of the other OEM's are not calling for a roll back. There must come a point where driver sales are going to dip as players keep hold of there 1/2/3+ year old drivers because they are as good as the new ones.

 

Some sort of roll back of the tour style ball might allow for the restrictions on the drivers to be relaxed.

 

Do you think people will slow down on buying new drivers Bye? I think most people know that a new club isn’t going to transform them instantly, but they still keep trying. It will be interesting to see.

 

Honestly I don't know. I have seen people buy new gear when the numbers and performance are no better, but a driver is a big investment now. For some there must come a point where there has to be an improvement to warrant spending that much. Maybe not.

 

But then who doesn't want the latest shiny new thing.

 

Just a thought, probably a wasted one.

[tnord]

some of you are a marketing agencies dream.

 

Lol, a marketing agencies dream? I just know for a fact that those balls have different characteristics. They aren't juiced and don't have some sort of magical effect on a players swing. I know enough to realize that the equipment played by a lot of players on tour isn't the same as what I can buy off the rack.

 

but you insist on the regulations being the same so that you can "feel" like you're playing anything resembling the same game.

[radiman]

I am surprised some of the other OEM's are not calling for a roll back. There must come a point where driver sales are going to dip as players keep hold of there 1/2/3+ year old drivers because they are as good as the new ones.

 

Some sort of roll back of the tour style ball might allow for the restrictions on the drivers to be relaxed.

 

Do you think people will slow down on buying new drivers Bye? I think most people know that a new club isn’t going to transform them instantly, but they still keep trying. It will be interesting to see.

 

Honestly I don't know. I have seen people buy new gear when the numbers and performance are no better, but a driver is a big investment now. For some there must come a point where there has to be an improvement to warrant spending that much. Maybe not.

 

But then who doesn't want the latest shiny new thing.

 

Just a thought, probably a wasted one.

 

I think it's part of the overall golf hobby for a lot of members here. When I purchase a driver, I am not expecting more ball speed. But, I do try them to see if there is different playing characteristics. If it's more forgiving, or if it gives me better launch conditions. I don't know too many people in the real world that cycle through equipment like the members here.