Joanne Carner's 30 year old R-90 wedge= 'busted'

[BIG STU]

Stu - do you really believe that Titleist will go broke if the ball gets rolled back for the pros? People are still going to stick to their brand and even if it is rolled back for all, most people won’t even notice as they’re not playing at a level where it will make a difference. And even if it gets rolled back for pros only, in all likelihood people will do everything they can to get their hands on the ball the pros play anyway!

 

I think it’s beyond question that Augusta see distance as a problem. They wouldn’t be lengthening the 5th and spending millions to acquire property to lengthen what may be the finest hole in tournament golf (13th) if it wasn’t.

 

And you’re right - there is more to it than just the ball. It’s just that the ball is the quickest, most direct route to making any meaningful change.

In practicality you are more than likely correct most folks would probably not really notice the difference loss but even with the knowledge of a ball being rolled back would be enough to discourage them from buying them. I have always said that less than 3% of all who play the game are what I call serious players in other words keep a legitimate handicap strictly on the rules and go straight by the rules. But on the other hand some folks would go to extreme lengths to buy and play a ball marked "Tour Only" . Look at the lengths some go to get "Tour Issue" stuff on here and other Golf Sites. Like I told someone about a piece of "Tour Issue" equipment they bought if it was that good it would have been in someone's bag on the tour. We even had some guys down here selling DG "Tour Issue" shaft bands one time which BTW were as counterfeit as a $3 bill. That ticked me off so bad I did call True Temper on that and they already knew and had their people on it.

 

And yes distance is a factor at ANGC. Look how the game of golf was played when it was designed. There is a lot of pride and tradition there and the members (rightfully so) are worried about it being made out as an old outdated course. On that course especially distance alone has made it play entirely different than it was designed to be played. The Par 5s were ultimate risk reward in trying to hit a long iron in or a fairway wood and hold the green. Now days it is a mid iron or a high soft hybrid a no effort no brainer for todays players. I have been there in 3 different eras now and watched it being played and the difference of how it is being played now compared to the 70s is the difference between night and day

[Fellaheen51]

All I ask before the ball rollback is ample time to stock up on the soon to be illegal balls. At regular prices, before the hoarding begins. I'll buy 100 boxes, keep a reasonable lifetime supply and flip the remainder for a tidy ROI. "Hey buddy, looky here. Got some hot balls for 'ya. Can't find them anymore like these. Go far."

 

In the list of ignorant things the "governing" bodies have done, rolling back the ball would be monumentally stupid. As an argument, excessive distance negatively affecting the game is a problem voiced by no one in my golfing circle. Furthermore, any expectation that the ball companies would play nice with such a mandate is totally unrealistic. Complete non-compliance would be the result.

 

In honor of and showing my support for "Big Mama" and the controversy involving her choice of SW, placed the "Original R-90" in the bag for our couples shoot around on Friday eve. First time it's ever saw a course, in my hands. Surprisingly, it wasn't a half bad SW. The couple of swats I took with it. Must have been the brown shaft.

[Shallowface]

The reason I phrased it as I did (What can they do?) comes from a personal belief that if and when the USGA attempts to implement a roll back of the ball, the PGA Tour and the equipment manufacturers will choose to ignore it, which is entirely within their right. At that point, the PGA Tour will become the governing body of golf in the United States. Considering they already drive virtually all of the interest in the game and the sales of equipment, I think it's fair to say they've already become that governing body on a de facto basis.

 

The PGA Tour sees no problem with the current state of the game. Augusta National seems perfectly willing to make whatever changes it deems necessary to its classic venue. I don't know of a single recreational player who thinks he hits it too far. The consensus is either to leave things as they are, or if anything to let them evolve even further.

 

And so the question remains, what can the USGA do? The only authority they have over the PGA Tour, or your club championship, or your foursome, or you as an individual, is that which it is granted by the entity in question.

 

Given that those entities are satisfied with the status quo, the USGA can either do nothing and like it, or attempt to do something and be rendered irrelevant. I think I know what the choice will be.

 

The challenge will be in how they spin their decision to do nothing.

If you roll the ball back it is not going to work for the Manufacturers. There are billions upon billions of balls out there that meet today's standards. The ball companies would go broke because I would say 97% of the golfers out there would not buy them period. If distance is the issue at Augusta they run their own tournament with their own rules they could go back to persimmon woods for that tournament and a lower compression ball which is made standard today anyhow by all the manufacturers. Persimmon with a higher swing speed and a low compression ball will cut distance. Also everyone is screaming ball it ain't only the ball the shafts have advanced so far it ain't funny. Any of us on here that "hot rod" vintage clubs with modern shafts knows that. Agronomy also plays a huge part in the distance gains today and the way greens putt too. In reality it aint gonna happen but if you want to see Augusta play like Bobby Jones intended it to be played go back to a wound ball persimmon woods and steel shafted clubs.

 

The reason I always believed the ball was the biggest factor was not how far the drives were going, but how far the other clubs are going today.

 

When Tom Kite brought the 60 degree wedge to prominence in the early 80s, it was a 70 yard club. Now it is a 100 yard club for most of the pros, and it is still a blade clubhead with a steel shaft and 35.5 inches give or take. That 30 yard difference is entirely the ball.

 

The driving iron has made a comeback. Now, I know that the faces are thinner and the shafts may be slightly longer and lighter, but it is still a 40 inch club with 16 or 18 degrees of loft. When Ping had a lot of 1 irons in tour bags back in the 80s, 240 yards was considered pretty normal. Now guys are reaching 300 yard Par 4s with an iron. I believe that is nearly entirely the ball.

 

When I see 250 yard par 3s reached with a 5 iron (regardless of how that has been jacked over the years). When I see the 16th at Firestone, which for years was unreachable at 625 yards and is now 660 plus and has been reached in recent times with a middle iron. When I see Lexi Thompson, who is without question a very tall and very strong female golfer but a female nonetheless, reach a 179 yard par 3 with a 9 iron and that was backing it up to the pin. When I hear TV commentators make comments along the lines of "there always used to be a handful of guys who hit it farther than everyone else but now I see guys who hit it a very long way and I can't figure out how they do it."

 

That's due to the ball.

 

People point at driving distance stats and show there hasn't been all that much change. Unless it has changed, driving distance stats are two holes per day, and could well be holes where a lot of fairway woods or irons are being hit from the tee. Those stats are irrelevant to this discussion.

 

It's not diet or fitness, because we haven't seen these gains in other sports. Does anyone think diet and fitness hasn't been improved in baseball? Yet once they got the juice out of the game home runs have reverted back to the numbers most have come to expect. If the baseball had experienced the changes the golf ball has, MLB would look like beer league softball. And just try coming to the taxpayers who fund ballparks with the argument that "due to bigger and stronger athletes, we need the money to build a new yard." Laughable.

 

All that said, I don't believe anything will change because the organization in charge of the change has been rendered irrelevant. The USGA is still the governing body because it has been allowed to be. And they are permitted to tweak rules in ways that don't affect the professional game, such as the groove rule (no problem replacing everyone's clubs, even to the point of taking old models and milling conforming grooves as they did for Bubba Watson). Or not allowing flat sides on swing grips which rendered millions of Wilson clubs non-conforming years ago, but again meant nothing to the professional game. Or their little annual event that has gotten so ridiculous in recent years that many of the pros would probably skip it if it weren't a major. Makes it look like they still mean something.

 

As I wrote previously, they institute a roll back at their own peril. No one is going to accept it, and I would doubt that those that run the USGA, full of themselves as they are, would want to be rendered completely irrelevant. They could choose to play their events with Gutta Percha, but the rest of the golf world would go right on as it is today.

 

What I look forward to is watching Mike Davis squirm as he spins his decision to do nothing, although it may not be all that tough since very few want any change.

[Shallowface]

The reason I phrased it as I did (What can they do?) comes from a personal belief that if and when the USGA attempts to implement a roll back of the ball, the PGA Tour and the equipment manufacturers will choose to ignore it, which is entirely within their right. At that point, the PGA Tour will become the governing body of golf in the United States. Considering they already drive virtually all of the interest in the game and the sales of equipment, I think it's fair to say they've already become that governing body on a de facto basis.

 

The PGA Tour sees no problem with the current state of the game. Augusta National seems perfectly willing to make whatever changes it deems necessary to its classic venue. I don't know of a single recreational player who thinks he hits it too far. The consensus is either to leave things as they are, or if anything to let them evolve even further.

 

And so the question remains, what can the USGA do? The only authority they have over the PGA Tour, or your club championship, or your foursome, or you as an individual, is that which it is granted by the entity in question.

 

Given that those entities are satisfied with the status quo, the USGA can either do nothing and like it, or attempt to do something and be rendered irrelevant. I think I know what the choice will be.

 

The challenge will be in how they spin their decision to do nothing.

 

 

There's no need to roll back the ball again. It's been done twice, maybe at least three times. That's more than enough.

 

Did you enjoy the emoticons in my earlier post? Those were for you. :lol:

[BIG STU]

All I ask before the ball rollback is ample time to stock up on the soon to be illegal balls. At regular prices, before the hoarding begins. I'll buy 100 boxes, keep a reasonable lifetime supply and flip the remainder for a tidy ROI. "Hey buddy, looky here. Got some hot balls for 'ya. Can't find them anymore like these. Go far."

 

In the list of ignorant things the "governing" bodies have done, rolling back the ball would be monumentally stupid. As an argument, excessive distance negatively affecting the game is a problem voiced by no one in my golfing circle. Furthermore, any expectation that the ball companies would play nice with such a mandate is totally unrealistic. Complete non-compliance would be the result.

 

In honor of and showing my support for "Big Mama" and the controversy involving her choice of SW, placed the "Original R-90" in the bag for our couples shoot around on Friday eve. First time it's ever saw a course, in my hands. Surprisingly, it wasn't a half bad SW. The couple of swats I took with it. Must have been the brown shaft.

That R-90 is a well balanced wedge--- I carried one for years until I wore it out and then Discovered Cleveland 588s. Now days it has a little too much bounce for me out of the fairway but is great out of a trap. If Wilson had any marketing genius they would reissue it again and call it the Jo Anne Special or Big Momma Special. That would throw sand in the craw of the USGA and maybe give her a little more money to enjoy the twilight years of her life. To further piss the USGA off it could be made with conforming grooves. Let the USGA try to pull some crap on that one. If Wilson needed money for legal funds I am sure there are enough USGA haters that we could start a Go Fund Me Page---- Personally If that came to be I would pledge 2 grand on that myself

[Shallowface]

The reason I phrased it as I did (What can they do?) comes from a personal belief that if and when the USGA attempts to implement a roll back of the ball, the PGA Tour and the equipment manufacturers will choose to ignore it, which is entirely within their right. At that point, the PGA Tour will become the governing body of golf in the United States. Considering they already drive virtually all of the interest in the game and the sales of equipment, I think it's fair to say they've already become that governing body on a de facto basis.

 

The PGA Tour sees no problem with the current state of the game. Augusta National seems perfectly willing to make whatever changes it deems necessary to its classic venue. I don't know of a single recreational player who thinks he hits it too far. The consensus is either to leave things as they are, or if anything to let them evolve even further.

 

And so the question remains, what can the USGA do? The only authority they have over the PGA Tour, or your club championship, or your foursome, or you as an individual, is that which it is granted by the entity in question.

 

Given that those entities are satisfied with the status quo, the USGA can either do nothing and like it, or attempt to do something and be rendered irrelevant. I think I know what the choice will be.

 

The challenge will be in how they spin their decision to do nothing.

 

 

There's no need to roll back the ball again. It's been done twice, maybe at least three times. That's more than enough.

 

They don't need to make the golf courses longer and no need to change the golf balls. All they need is to change the condition of the golf course, make it tighter, more risk/reward chances,

 

They could do that, but the PGA Tour won't, at least to any great degree.

 

They are in the sports entertainment business, and when you are on a tee at a tournament, and folks have been standing there waiting for someone (Bubba, DJ, etc.) for a very long time, and they get there and pull out an iron, there is an audible groan, and all of those folks who bought those tickets have just suffered a disappointment they won't soon forget. You can even hear the groan on TV from time to time.

 

The Tour will almost always decide that protecting par is much less important than giving people what they really want, and that is a chance to be entertained by a really long drive.

[wkuo3]

The reason I phrased it as I did (What can they do?) comes from a personal belief that if and when the USGA attempts to implement a roll back of the ball, the PGA Tour and the equipment manufacturers will choose to ignore it, which is entirely within their right. At that point, the PGA Tour will become the governing body of golf in the United States. Considering they already drive virtually all of the interest in the game and the sales of equipment, I think it's fair to say they've already become that governing body on a de facto basis.

 

The PGA Tour sees no problem with the current state of the game. Augusta National seems perfectly willing to make whatever changes it deems necessary to its classic venue. I don't know of a single recreational player who thinks he hits it too far. The consensus is either to leave things as they are, or if anything to let them evolve even further.

 

And so the question remains, what can the USGA do? The only authority they have over the PGA Tour, or your club championship, or your foursome, or you as an individual, is that which it is granted by the entity in question.

 

Given that those entities are satisfied with the status quo, the USGA can either do nothing and like it, or attempt to do something and be rendered irrelevant. I think I know what the choice will be.

 

The challenge will be in how they spin their decision to do nothing.

 

 

There's no need to roll back the ball again. It's been done twice, maybe at least three times. That's more than enough.

 

They don't need to make the golf courses longer and no need to change the golf balls. All they need is to change the condition of the golf course, make it tighter, more risk/reward chances,

 

They could do that, but the PGA Tour won't, at least to any great degree.

 

They are in the sports entertainment business, and when you are on a tee at a tournament, and folks have been standing there waiting for someone (Bubba, DJ, etc.) for a very long time, and they get there and pull out an iron, there is an audible groan, and all of those folks who bought those tickets have just suffered a disappointment they won't soon forget. You can even hear the groan on TV from time to time.

 

The Tour will almost always decide that protecting par is much less important than giving people what they really want, and that is a chance to be entertained by a really long drive.

 

True ! Almost everything is backed by financial reasons and the number on the "bottom line".

This is not unique in the golf and entertainment sports alone. Everyday life , the important stuff which our life depend on all have the same syndrome.

 

The "expectation" from the supporting segment will dictate the numbers on the bottom line, where did the expectation come from ? The doing of the instigator, by hyping it with showmanship performance..... to grow the game......one should expect the fruit from the seeding one planted.

So if the tournament will be fewer and with smaller purse without these expectation, there should be no ticket sale for the events anyway, like it used to be. IN fact we had been over paying the athletes for a long time. They should be paid well for their effort but they'll also need to return to a normal life after their stint with the sports.

It cost too much to entertain a bored mind.

[Shallowface]

This is why the groove rule is such a travesty. This club in question is truly one of the most historic clubs in the history of the game, it has been used to win many tour events around the world for over 40 years. It has been in the bag of one of the greatest female players of all time for over 30 years, Nicklaus used one for a while, as did many of the other greats, it is now illegal to use in a USGA event? THIS IS RIDICULOUS.

 

The groove rule is the dumbest thing the USGA ever did. That and letting driver tech get out of control, especially since it really only benefits the long hitters and makes them exponentially longer while the average guy picked up very little. The pros are a very small percentage of who plays the game, why don't we think about the masses?

I agree with you 110%--- And I will tell you something else--- I can spin the modern conforming wedges with a modern ball maybe better than I could a R-90 with a balata ball.

 

For sure you can. Even with the fabled Ping Eye2 square groove you probably can;t spin it better than the new grooves. The only real difference MIGHT be certain lies out of very light rough. Which 99% of the players of the game would gain no advantage.

 

The USGA should have banned the Ping grooves BEFORE they hit the market and none of this would have ever been an issue. Instead they like to retroactively ban things people have been using for years. (except the modern springy faced driver.)

Well on the Ping groove thing-- Karsten was a genius in his own right he was light years ahead of the times period. No one gave grooves a second thought before he came up with them. The only type of grooves before then that caused any controversy were the dot face or punch faced grooves. But prior to Karsten no one knew anything about boxed grooves etc. If I remember correctly in the 60s 70s and 80s the only "tech" (to borrow a racing term) was the width itself. The USGA tried to ban the square grooves when he came out with them. Karsten promptly sued them under Federal product laws. I can remember him stating that he would continue to battle it out in court until he broke the USGA money wise. The USGA had to bow out then. He got a Federal injunction making them legal. In other words the USGA could not screw with him. After he passed evidently the USGA appealed to his son to get the injunction quashed for "the betterment of the game". His son went before the courts and got the injunction quashed. I can not figure for the life of me how the USGA "got to him" surely it could not be money.

 

I'm remembering that just a little differently.

 

The issue was when the grooves first came out, they were chewing up the ball, so Karsten fixed that by adding a bit of radius at the edges of the grooves to soften them. At that point, they way the USGA measured things, they said there were not three groove widths of grooveless clubface between each groove, which was the rule in place at that time. Karsten believed the USGA's measuring methodology was not consistent with engineering principles, or something to that effect.

 

Didn't Karsten redesign the groove (which became the Eye 2 Plus) in exchange for grandfathering the original Eye 2 (actually the second version of the Eye 2 because the first had V grooves), essentially letting the USGA off the hook "for the good of the game?"

 

But Karsten did show the USGA would cave under a legal threat, and that changed everything for them as the governing body (along with the R&A) of the game.

 

I will never understand why John Solheim let them off the hook, other than the possibility that too many folks were still playing the Eye 2 and Ping needed to sell some new gear. Same reason as why they chrome plate heads today. So they'll look worn sooner, unlike the Eye 2 which was virtually indestructible.

 

I don't think Karsten had much use for chrome plating.

[Shallowface]

Stu - do you really believe that Titleist will go broke if the ball gets rolled back for the pros? People are still going to stick to their brand and even if it is rolled back for all, most people won’t even notice as they’re not playing at a level where it will make a difference. And even if it gets rolled back for pros only, in all likelihood people will do everything they can to get their hands on the ball the pros play anyway!

 

I think it’s beyond question that Augusta see distance as a problem. They wouldn’t be lengthening the 5th and spending millions to acquire property to lengthen what may be the finest hole in tournament golf (13th) if it wasn’t.

 

And you’re right - there is more to it than just the ball. It’s just that the ball is the quickest, most direct route to making any meaningful change.

In practicality you are more than likely correct most folks would probably not really notice the difference loss but even with the knowledge of a ball being rolled back would be enough to discourage them from buying them. I have always said that less than 3% of all who play the game are what I call serious players in other words keep a legitimate handicap strictly on the rules and go straight by the rules. But on the other hand some folks would go to extreme lengths to buy and play a ball marked "Tour Only" . Look at the lengths some go to get "Tour Issue" stuff on here and other Golf Sites. Like I told someone about a piece of "Tour Issue" equipment they bought if it was that good it would have been in someone's bag on the tour. We even had some guys down here selling DG "Tour Issue" shaft bands one time which BTW were as counterfeit as a $3 bill. That ticked me off so bad I did call True Temper on that and they already knew and had their people on it.

 

And yes distance is a factor at ANGC. Look how the game of golf was played when it was designed. There is a lot of pride and tradition there and the members (rightfully so) are worried about it being made out as an old outdated course. On that course especially distance alone has made it play entirely different than it was designed to be played. The Par 5s were ultimate risk reward in trying to hit a long iron in or a fairway wood and hold the green. Now days it is a mid iron or a high soft hybrid a no effort no brainer for todays players. I have been there in 3 different eras now and watched it being played and the difference of how it is being played now compared to the 70s is the difference between night and day

 

Of course distance is a factor at Augusta, but when Hootie Johnson was chairman they discussed the idea of a Masters Tournament ball as opposed to altering the course. We haven't heard that talk since Hootie retired, and Augusta now chooses to do what so many other venues have done and lengthen the course where possible. If Augusta, with all of their influence and resources, considers the issues with the ball a lost cause, it truly is a lost cause.

 

The new (and incredibly beautiful) practice range at Augusta was built because the players were starting to bomb Washington Road from the old one.

[NRJyzr]

The new (and incredibly beautiful) practice range at Augusta was built because the players were starting to bomb Washington Road from the old one.

 

Davis Love III was doing that with persimmon and balata

[Shallowface]

The new (and incredibly beautiful) practice range at Augusta was built because the players were starting to bomb Washington Road from the old one.

 

Davis Love III was doing that with persimmon and balata

 

I've heard it said Davis was one of the first if not the first to figure out the magic combo of high launch/low spin, and somehow he did it with persimmon and balata.

 

But when it got to the point that nearly everyone could fly that screen, they had to make a change. An "irons only" practice range wasn't going to work at Augusta.

[BIG STU]

This is why the groove rule is such a travesty. This club in question is truly one of the most historic clubs in the history of the game, it has been used to win many tour events around the world for over 40 years. It has been in the bag of one of the greatest female players of all time for over 30 years, Nicklaus used one for a while, as did many of the other greats, it is now illegal to use in a USGA event? THIS IS RIDICULOUS.

 

The groove rule is the dumbest thing the USGA ever did. That and letting driver tech get out of control, especially since it really only benefits the long hitters and makes them exponentially longer while the average guy picked up very little. The pros are a very small percentage of who plays the game, why don't we think about the masses?

I agree with you 110%--- And I will tell you something else--- I can spin the modern conforming wedges with a modern ball maybe better than I could a R-90 with a balata ball.

 

For sure you can. Even with the fabled Ping Eye2 square groove you probably can;t spin it better than the new grooves. The only real difference MIGHT be certain lies out of very light rough. Which 99% of the players of the game would gain no advantage.

 

The USGA should have banned the Ping grooves BEFORE they hit the market and none of this would have ever been an issue. Instead they like to retroactively ban things people have been using for years. (except the modern springy faced driver.)

Well on the Ping groove thing-- Karsten was a genius in his own right he was light years ahead of the times period. No one gave grooves a second thought before he came up with them. The only type of grooves before then that caused any controversy were the dot face or punch faced grooves. But prior to Karsten no one knew anything about boxed grooves etc. If I remember correctly in the 60s 70s and 80s the only "tech" (to borrow a racing term) was the width itself. The USGA tried to ban the square grooves when he came out with them. Karsten promptly sued them under Federal product laws. I can remember him stating that he would continue to battle it out in court until he broke the USGA money wise. The USGA had to bow out then. He got a Federal injunction making them legal. In other words the USGA could not screw with him. After he passed evidently the USGA appealed to his son to get the injunction quashed for "the betterment of the game". His son went before the courts and got the injunction quashed. I can not figure for the life of me how the USGA "got to him" surely it could not be money.

 

I'm remembering that just a little differently.

 

The issue was when the grooves first came out, they were chewing up the ball, so Karsten fixed that by adding a bit of radius at the edges of the grooves to soften them. At that point, they way the USGA measured things, they said there were not three groove widths of grooveless clubface between each groove, which was the rule in place at that time. Karsten believed the USGA's measuring methodology was not consistent with engineering principles, or something to that effect.

 

Didn't Karsten redesign the groove (which became the Eye 2 Plus) in exchange for grandfathering the original Eye 2 (actually the second version of the Eye 2 because the first had V grooves), essentially letting the USGA off the hook "for the good of the game?"

 

But Karsten did show the USGA would cave under a legal threat, and that changed everything for them as the governing body (along with the R&A) of the game.

 

I will never understand why John Solheim let them off the hook, other than the possibility that too many folks were still playing the Eye 2 and Ping needed to sell some new gear. Same reason as why they chrome plate heads today. So they'll look worn sooner, unlike the Eye 2 which was virtually indestructible.

 

I don't think Karsten had much use for chrome plating.

Karsten was smart enough to know chrome plating added to the cost and effected his bottom line

[NRJyzr]

The new (and incredibly beautiful) practice range at Augusta was built because the players were starting to bomb Washington Road from the old one.

 

Davis Love III was doing that with persimmon and balata

 

I've heard it said Davis was one of the first if not the first to figure out the magic combo of high launch/low spin, and somehow he did it with persimmon and balata.

 

But when it got to the point that nearly everyone could fly that screen, they had to make a change. An "irons only" practice range wasn't going to work at Augusta.

 

 

It wasn't because DL3 "figured out the magic combo," he was that long because he had that much more swingspeed than anyone else not named John Daly. Cobra claimed Daly could swing at 140mph, I would guess he was bombing the nets as well.

 

You seem to really want to blame the ball, but you're ignoring everything that shows it *isn't* the ball. Like Love, Daly, Tiger carrying bunkers at 300 with a Professional... and my favorite, in the 95 Masters video posted here http://www.golfwrx.c.../#entry17205590 Couples going for the 8th in two from 260+ with an iron, and getting there.

 

The ODS has been around a long time. No one has found a way to make a ball that cheats the test.

[Shallowface]

The new (and incredibly beautiful) practice range at Augusta was built because the players were starting to bomb Washington Road from the old one.

 

Davis Love III was doing that with persimmon and balata

 

I've heard it said Davis was one of the first if not the first to figure out the magic combo of high launch/low spin, and somehow he did it with persimmon and balata.

 

But when it got to the point that nearly everyone could fly that screen, they had to make a change. An "irons only" practice range wasn't going to work at Augusta.

 

 

It wasn't because DL3 "figured out the magic combo," he was that long because he had that much more swingspeed than anyone else not named John Daly. Cobra claimed Daly could swing at 140mph, I would guess he was bombing the nets as well.

 

You seem to really want to blame the ball, but you're ignoring everything that shows it *isn't* the ball. Like Love, Daly, Tiger carrying bunkers at 300 with a Professional... and my favorite, in the 95 Masters video posted here http://www.golfwrx.c.../#entry17205590 Couples going for the 8th in two from 260+ with an iron, and getting there.

 

The ODS has been around a long time. No one has found a way to make a ball that cheats the test.

 

Nothing personal. We disagree.

[wkuo3]

The new (and incredibly beautiful) practice range at Augusta was built because the players were starting to bomb Washington Road from the old one.

 

Davis Love III was doing that with persimmon and balata

 

I've heard it said Davis was one of the first if not the first to figure out the magic combo of high launch/low spin, and somehow he did it with persimmon and balata.

 

But when it got to the point that nearly everyone could fly that screen, they had to make a change. An "irons only" practice range wasn't going to work at Augusta.

 

 

It wasn't because DL3 "figured out the magic combo," he was that long because he had that much more swingspeed than anyone else not named John Daly. Cobra claimed Daly could swing at 140mph, I would guess he was bombing the nets as well.

 

You seem to really want to blame the ball, but you're ignoring everything that shows it *isn't* the ball. Like Love, Daly, Tiger carrying bunkers at 300 with a Professional... and my favorite, in the 95 Masters video posted here http://www.golfwrx.c.../#entry17205590 Couples going for the 8th in two from 260+ with an iron, and getting there.

 

The ODS has been around a long time. No one has found a way to make a ball that cheats the test.

 

Nothing personal. We disagree.

 

We all have a part of the answer to the complete formula.

Some factor will play more part in certain cases but all of them are valid points.

[NRJyzr]

The new (and incredibly beautiful) practice range at Augusta was built because the players were starting to bomb Washington Road from the old one.

 

Davis Love III was doing that with persimmon and balata

 

I've heard it said Davis was one of the first if not the first to figure out the magic combo of high launch/low spin, and somehow he did it with persimmon and balata.

 

But when it got to the point that nearly everyone could fly that screen, they had to make a change. An "irons only" practice range wasn't going to work at Augusta.

 

 

It wasn't because DL3 "figured out the magic combo," he was that long because he had that much more swingspeed than anyone else not named John Daly. Cobra claimed Daly could swing at 140mph, I would guess he was bombing the nets as well.

 

You seem to really want to blame the ball, but you're ignoring everything that shows it *isn't* the ball. Like Love, Daly, Tiger carrying bunkers at 300 with a Professional... and my favorite, in the 95 Masters video posted here http://www.golfwrx.c.../#entry17205590 Couples going for the 8th in two from 260+ with an iron, and getting there.

 

The ODS has been around a long time. No one has found a way to make a ball that cheats the test.

 

Nothing personal. We disagree.

 

 

No worries, dude. I'm not taking it personally. :)

 

FWIW I am of the opinion that it's clubhead MOI that's put us where we are today. High MOI means balls fly straighter. If it flies straighter you can swing harder with less worry.

 

The balls aren't any hotter. None of the multilayer balls were, or are, as long as a distance ball, using either test. The switch to the new test speed of 120mph meant the ball was rolled back by their allowing fewer yards per mph, plus the switch from the generally accepted .78 COR head to a .83 clubhead with no increase in allowed distance being another reduction.

 

Some worried the new balls were somehow longer for the higher speeds, that was shown to not be the case.

 

I've wondered how things would be different if the Tour hadn't started "Tiger proofing" courses in the late 90s and early 21st century. IMHO it's a not insignificant player in getting us where we are.

[Shallowface]

 

No worries, dude. I'm not taking it personally. :)

 

FWIW I am of the opinion that it's clubhead MOI that's put us where we are today. High MOI means balls fly straighter. If it flies straighter you can swing harder with less worry.

 

The balls aren't any hotter. None of the multilayer balls were, or are, as long as a distance ball, using either test. The switch to the new test speed of 120mph meant the ball was rolled back by their allowing fewer yards per mph, plus the switch from the generally accepted .78 COR head to a .83 clubhead with no increase in allowed distance being another reduction.

 

Some worried the new balls were somehow longer for the higher speeds, that was shown to not be the case.

 

I've wondered how things would be different if the Tour hadn't started "Tiger proofing" courses in the late 90s and early 21st century. IMHO it's a not insignificant player in getting us where we are.

 

To reconcile any test results with what I observe on a week to week basis requires a level of faith I simply do not possess.

[No_Catchy_Nickname]

 

I've wondered how things would be different if the Tour hadn't started "Tiger proofing" courses in the late 90s and early 21st century. IMHO it's a not insignificant player in getting us where we are.

 

Do you mean that lengthening the courses to "Tiger Proof" them led to more bombers? Because if you do, I agree that it is an overlooked player in the "are players hitting the ball too far?" debate. Lengthening courses helps people who hit the ball far, and longer courses makes people try to hit the ball further; those who are good at doing this are going to find some level of success.

[scomac2002]

It seems to me that a lot of tournament set-ups are designed to create a lot of roll-out in order to facilitate some of the eye-popping driving numbers. I was watching the champions tour last night and Vijay, who is still a long hitter was carrying his drives around 250 with about 30 yards or so of roll-out, so those numbers aren't in the area of ridiculous when taken in isolation. What I did notice was that everyone hits the ball dead straight these days at least when you're looking at the champions tour participants. It all comes down to making quality iron shots and putting in deciding who wins. Even the 170 yard 8 iron didn't seem so out of place.

 

From what I can tell distance is an non issue for 99% of active participants in the game. It's the 1% that populate the PGA tour who have the issue of being too long that are being exacerbated by tournament set-ups designed to put on a show. It's actually quite refreshing watching the champions tour and seeing guys playing cavity back irons, high lofted woods and hybrids as well as long putters all the while hitting the ball distances that have some semblance or reality when compared to our own skill sets. Things we should probably consider regardless of the pronouncements coming from the USGA.

[NRJyzr]

I've wondered how things would be different if the Tour hadn't started "Tiger proofing" courses in the late 90s and early 21st century. IMHO it's a not insignificant player in getting us where we are.

 

Do you mean that lengthening the courses to "Tiger Proof" them led to more bombers? Because if you do, I agree that it is an overlooked player in the "are players hitting the ball too far?" debate. Lengthening courses helps people who hit the ball far, and longer courses makes people try to hit the ball further; those who are good at doing this are going to find some level of success.

 

 

Exactly what I was getting at.

[wkuo3]

Anyone have the spec for the Wilson R-90 wedge ?

 

I know there are several version of the R-90. I believe mine from the early 70's has a 56° loft but have no idea of the bounce , sure felt like a 12°-14° to it.

[NRJyzr]

No worries, dude. I'm not taking it personally. :)

 

FWIW I am of the opinion that it's clubhead MOI that's put us where we are today. High MOI means balls fly straighter. If it flies straighter you can swing harder with less worry.

 

The balls aren't any hotter. None of the multilayer balls were, or are, as long as a distance ball, using either test. The switch to the new test speed of 120mph meant the ball was rolled back by their allowing fewer yards per mph, plus the switch from the generally accepted .78 COR head to a .83 clubhead with no increase in allowed distance being another reduction.

 

Some worried the new balls were somehow longer for the higher speeds, that was shown to not be the case.

 

I've wondered how things would be different if the Tour hadn't started "Tiger proofing" courses in the late 90s and early 21st century. IMHO it's a not insignificant player in getting us where we are.

 

To reconcile any test results with what I observe on a week to week basis requires a level of faith I simply do not possess.

 

 

There's no faith needed. You just need to pay attention to the other variables in the equation. Including the TV broadcasts giving incorrect information in order to sell distance.

 

TrackMan data is out there. The average PW is only flying 136 yds, the avg 5i is 194. Compare the lofts, that 5i is between a 3i and 4i of yore. In line with what a lot of guys were hitting 40 years ago.

[Tumbleweed_1968]

There's no faith needed. You just need to pay attention to the other variables in the equation. Including the TV broadcasts giving incorrect information in order to sell distance.

 

TrackMan data is out there. The average PW is only flying 136 yds, the avg 5i is 194. Compare the lofts, that 5i is between a 3i and 4i of yore. In line with what a lot of guys were hitting 40 years ago.

 

So are you saying that the golf media / industrial complex is lying to us just to sell equipment? :to_become_senile:

[NRJyzr]

There's no faith needed. You just need to pay attention to the other variables in the equation. Including the TV broadcasts giving incorrect information in order to sell distance.

 

TrackMan data is out there. The average PW is only flying 136 yds, the avg 5i is 194. Compare the lofts, that 5i is between a 3i and 4i of yore. In line with what a lot of guys were hitting 40 years ago.

 

So are you saying that the golf media / industrial complex is lying to us just to sell equipment? :to_become_senile:

 

 

Shocking!!!

[wkuo3]

Lying ? Heavens, no ! Not one could risk their own neck by blatantly not telling the truth.

 

Biased opinion, sometimes... maybe, a little here and there given the partial facts in any presentation could easily swing it one way or the other. By exclusion, by selective fields of focus...... not a new trick under the Sun. We have seen that every 4 years in another arena.

 

All in all, most the golf media were fairly honest regarding their equipment test, otherwise, the readers will come back and kick their arss really fast with today;s social media venue.

 

And opinion, there is no lack of them when comes to golf. There is the stick to the number crowd ( like they could solve the issues in golf swing using a formula ), like the artisan whom rely heavily on feel, but not eveyone has the gift of eye hand coordination.. It will certainly fuel any discussion group as ling as we approach it civil and open mind.

[baloo]

Fred Couples hits the ball well past what he did when he first came on tour. I don't think it's because of the gym.

 

You would think a guy in his 50s on the Champions tour would be shorter than as a rookie in his twenties.

 

Oh well. Doesn't matter too much, but I do find modern equipment and game somewhat boring.

[freddiec]

Would love to see the Masters have their own ball that goes 85-90 percent current distance . That might start something in the right direction. A Masters Ball.. , imagine what they would sell for in your pro shop.

[Shallowface]

No worries, dude. I'm not taking it personally. :)

 

FWIW I am of the opinion that it's clubhead MOI that's put us where we are today. High MOI means balls fly straighter. If it flies straighter you can swing harder with less worry.

 

The balls aren't any hotter. None of the multilayer balls were, or are, as long as a distance ball, using either test. The switch to the new test speed of 120mph meant the ball was rolled back by their allowing fewer yards per mph, plus the switch from the generally accepted .78 COR head to a .83 clubhead with no increase in allowed distance being another reduction.

 

Some worried the new balls were somehow longer for the higher speeds, that was shown to not be the case.

 

I've wondered how things would be different if the Tour hadn't started "Tiger proofing" courses in the late 90s and early 21st century. IMHO it's a not insignificant player in getting us where we are.

 

To reconcile any test results with what I observe on a week to week basis requires a level of faith I simply do not possess.

 

 

There's no faith needed. You just need to pay attention to the other variables in the equation. Including the TV broadcasts giving incorrect information in order to sell distance.

 

TrackMan data is out there. The average PW is only flying 136 yds, the avg 5i is 194. Compare the lofts, that 5i is between a 3i and 4i of yore. In line with what a lot of guys were hitting 40 years ago.

 

I looked at the Trackman Data.

 

If I divide driver yards by clubhead speed, i get a factor of 2.43.

 

I used to do a lot of component clubmaking, and with the old gear the factor we used to use was 2.46.

 

When the new balls and titanium drivers started becoming available, that number jumped to 2.7. In other words, for every one mph one increased their clubhead speed, one could expect a 2.7 yard gain given a proper strike. I've heard a number of people (mostly in ads) say 3 yards per 1 mph was the modern factor, but I think there is some rounding involved there.

 

Since they provide data during the broadcasts these days, I often will watch with a calculator in hand (I know, who does that?). The factor I get often times these days is in the 2.8 to 2.9 range.

 

The Trackman data is interesting, but for this discussion it's worthless.

 

When I watch the TV broadcasts, I hear an awful lot of lamenting from the commentators over that which they are seeing.

 

Frank Nobilo said that there has never been a bigger gap between the pro and the good amateur than there is today, and he didn't think that was a good thing.

 

Ian Baker-Finch said that there were always a handful of players who hit it a lot further than anyone else, and due to their physical gifts it was easy to see why. Now there are players who hit it a very long way and you can't tell where it comes from.

 

That is particularly true among the LPGA and Champions Tour players. When guys who are nearing 60 years of age are 40 yards longer than they were in their prime, that's the ball.

 

I'm not advocating a rollback. It's like putting toothpaste back into the tube. The failure was in not strictly adhering to the ODS of 1976 (I think that's the right date). The new balls slipped past the USGA because they were testing them with a wooden driver and those of us in this neck of the woods know that the modern balls don't perform well at all with a wooden driver. Once they realized their mistake, if they had attempted to correct it they would have been sued.

 

So instead, they pretend to still be on guard by doing things such as declaring millions of clubs non conforming due to grooves or banning a 79 year old woman's sand wedge or stopping yippers from anchoring putters.

 

Although I do think it would make a great game show stunt to have a contestant challenged with the task of threading a piece of Airport toilet paper between the hand and the shirt of the few guys who still use that method. There just wasn't a good way to hide the belly putters. The PGA Tour missed a perfect opportunity to say they were going to continue to allow anchoring and take the making of their rules in house.

 

I mean, what other major sports league allows someone else to make their rules (MLB? NFL? NBA? Nope, nope and nope)? Fact is, what might be good for the game at this point is for the PGA Tour to say that they are going to make their own rules and just turn it loose equipment wise. All of the manufacturers would follow suit, and even though the primary result would be that neighborhoods bordering golf courses would no longer be safe for children to play outside, it would generate a lot of fresh interest in equipment and in actually playing the game.

 

But before I go, let's be clear on one thing. I'm paying attention. ;)

[BarneyRubble]

this club is obviously one of the "original" R-90's which were repros from the 70' and '80's Perhaps it has a dot-punched face, instead of grooves...?

 

That's a good point. I'm sure I read here somewhere that at least some of the R-90's had dot punched faces, in which case I could see how there might be an issue with the rules gurus.

 

Personally I can't think of too many things that would be cooler than vintage pros from the past showing up to play a modern event with vintage equipment from the past. I really like it. I'm surprised the event people didn't capitalize on that very thing and promote it.

 

None of the Wilson wedges of the 70s or 80s had dot punched faces.

 

There were a lot of wedges during that time that did due to the classic club craze. PGA/Tommy Armour made a brown shafted wedge called the D-20 that had a dot punched face. Dynacraft offered a remake of the Wilson Johnny Revolta wedge that had a dot punched face. There were many others, and many from component suppliers.

 

But none of those were made by Wilson. The fact is, if a club is not on the conforming club list, it's non-conforming. I don't suppose it can be approved on site at a tournament. It probably has to go through a process at the USGA HQ. I don't believe anything old is on that list, so if someone shows up at a USGA event with a set of FG-17s, those aren't going to conform either.

 

Once it was shown that the USGA could be sued out of existence, they lost whatever authority they had. They only authority they ever had was that which was granted to it, whether by an individual, a foursome, a club event or a professional tour, and truth is they are mostly ignored every single day. If they tried to roll back the golf ball, the PGA Tour could simply say that they were going to play under their own rules and tack another 50 on to the ball if they so desired, because after all they are in the sports entertainment business as well as having the largest influence on equipment purchases.

 

The USGA only truly governs their events, and they aren't going to make a stink over the ball. Instead, they just bake the greens into concrete or grow rough up to the players as... uhh... knees, none of which stops the 230 yard forged blade 6 iron or 625 yard Par 5s reached with two fairway woods (which don't show up in the stats, and neither of which has to do with COR or clubhead size or fitness or any of the other BS excuses we hear all the time). ;) :D :wave:

 

Ha! I’ve been using the PGA / Tommy Armour S-20 (grooved model) off / on for the last 35 years! Love that wedge.

[Shallowface]

 

 

Ha! I've been using the PGA / Tommy Armour S-20 (grooved model) off / on for the last 35 years! Love that wedge.

 

I never had one of those, but I used a D-20 for a number of years. The PGA R-91 was a really good wedge as well.