Who Said That Ya Can Never Go Back......

[lowheel]

> @iteachgolf said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > They’d still have ball speeds in the 170s. And notice how many balls were in the fairway. Play wouldn’t drop off as much as you think. Kinda like how the groove rule was supposed to make scrambling harder, but from day 1 it actually made it easier and more predictable

> >

> > I agree with this. But. I think it would be just the right amount to provide balance at the top.

> >

> > Even adding 2 clubs to the average approach would make a difference.

>

> No way it’d add 2 clubs to average approach. Ballspeed would be maybe 5 mph slower, and clubhead speed roughly 2 mph slower with steel shafted persimmon. I think they’d hit it just as far or further than a modern 3 wood. It’s not going to be a 30 yard difference

 

I respect your background but your #s are way off. Mishits would instantly go up so ball speed would really suffer up to 10mph easy. you cant go after those clubs consitently like the modern clubs. Steel shafts will take off more than 2mph swing speed just by definition. 130+ gram shafts versus on average 65 gram graphite shafts. Ive done these tests on trackman with buckets of data.My old Lemas and macgregors even with new/modern balls are 25+ yards shorter with double the dispersion rates and spin. From tee to green its easily 2 clubs and if its windy make it 3. scores would suffer if played from modern tips.Lets not pretend otherwise.

[A.Princey]

Futile argument from the word go. Pure fantasy-land talk. Has anything so widely accepted in any sport been reigned in and done away with, going backwards to an obsolete piece of equipment? Maybe we should get rid of the 3-point line in the NBA, let's go back to the glory years...

[oz dee cee]

Distance won’t be too dissimilar however surely off hits would be punished more, in both distance and direction?

 

However, peeps have to remember the pros shot low scores back in the day. With poorer clubs, balls, greens, conditions and no trackman.

It would just hurt us hackers more I reckon.

[Ferguson]

> @straightshot7 said:

> > @Ferguson said:

> > > @new2g0lf said:

> > > The groove rule was the biggest failure since the change of the Coke formula, it did nothing to change the game for the pro's. Unless you go across the board, all pro tours including the LPGA, you're not going to see any rollback of drivers on the PGA Tour.

> >

> > Poor compare.

> >

> > New Coke was a marketing campaign directed at regaining market share lost to Pepsi (and others).

> >

> > The groove rule was enacted with the intent to make "playing from the rough" more challenging thus promoting accuracy from the tee. It had nothing to do with marketing.

> >

> >

>

> ? He only compared them as both being big failures...he never said they shared the same purpose.

 

 

He stated the groove rule was the biggest failure since New Coke.

 

New Coke didn't fail because of a change in consumption methodology.

It failed due to taste and negative customer sentiment.

 

The groove rule didn't fail at all.

It just didn't have the impact on the sport at the pro level as intended.

 

 

[iteachgolf]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @iteachgolf said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > They’d still have ball speeds in the 170s. And notice how many balls were in the fairway. Play wouldn’t drop off as much as you think. Kinda like how the groove rule was supposed to make scrambling harder, but from day 1 it actually made it easier and more predictable

> > >

> > > I agree with this. But. I think it would be just the right amount to provide balance at the top.

> > >

> > > Even adding 2 clubs to the average approach would make a difference.

> >

> > No way it’d add 2 clubs to average approach. Ballspeed would be maybe 5 mph slower, and clubhead speed roughly 2 mph slower with steel shafted persimmon. I think they’d hit it just as far or further than a modern 3 wood. It’s not going to be a 30 yard difference

>

>

> Maybe so. But it begs the question. Why do we all use them then ?

 

Because we can? Stenson does fine hitting 3 wood off almost every tee

[iteachgolf]

> @lowheel said:

> > @iteachgolf said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > They’d still have ball speeds in the 170s. And notice how many balls were in the fairway. Play wouldn’t drop off as much as you think. Kinda like how the groove rule was supposed to make scrambling harder, but from day 1 it actually made it easier and more predictable

> > >

> > > I agree with this. But. I think it would be just the right amount to provide balance at the top.

> > >

> > > Even adding 2 clubs to the average approach would make a difference.

> >

> > No way it’d add 2 clubs to average approach. Ballspeed would be maybe 5 mph slower, and clubhead speed roughly 2 mph slower with steel shafted persimmon. I think they’d hit it just as far or further than a modern 3 wood. It’s not going to be a 30 yard difference

>

> I respect your background but your #s are way off. Mishits would instantly go up so ball speed would really suffer up to 10mph easy. you cant go after those clubs consitently like the modern clubs. Steel shafts will take off more than 2mph swing speed just by definition. 130+ gram shafts versus on average 65 gram graphite shafts. Ive done these tests on trackman with buckets of data.My old Lemas and macgregors even with new/modern balls are 25+ yards shorter with double the dispersion rates and spin. From tee to green its easily 2 clubs and if its windy make it 3. scores would suffer if played from modern tips.Lets not pretend otherwise.

 

Ive done test as well. My clubhead speed doesn’t change with a steel shafted driver vs my normal driver. Most it’s barely any difference. Again we are talking elite players, guys who fly a tiny blade 3 iron 255. They definitely don’t spin more than current drivers, they spin less and roll out more. Most guys really aren’t going after driver full tilt very often. There’s a company that is using titanium faces on persimmon heads that they are testing locally and they go just as far as a modern driver.

 

For amateurs the difference would be huge. For the best of the best the difference would be much smaller than you think

[bladehunter]

> @iteachgolf said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > > They’d still have ball speeds in the 170s. And notice how many balls were in the fairway. Play wouldn’t drop off as much as you think. Kinda like how the groove rule was supposed to make scrambling harder, but from day 1 it actually made it easier and more predictable

> > > >

> > > > I agree with this. But. I think it would be just the right amount to provide balance at the top.

> > > >

> > > > Even adding 2 clubs to the average approach would make a difference.

> > >

> > > No way it’d add 2 clubs to average approach. Ballspeed would be maybe 5 mph slower, and clubhead speed roughly 2 mph slower with steel shafted persimmon. I think they’d hit it just as far or further than a modern 3 wood. It’s not going to be a 30 yard difference

> >

> >

> > Maybe so. But it begs the question. Why do we all use them then ?

>

> Because we can? Stepson does fine hitting 3 wood off almost every tee

 

Lol. Yep. Good answer. I’m same. Played yesterday. Very firm 6500 yard course and two of us in the group could only hit driver 4-5 times. And then it left a flip sand or lob wedge in. 8-9 irons into par5s etc.

 

I’m not arguing that scores would change much. ( those guys are good) but what episode the effect be on pressure situations both off the tee and approach? Just seems like your both saying it makes no difference and it makes a big difference at the same time.

[iteachgolf]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @iteachgolf said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > > > They’d still have ball speeds in the 170s. And notice how many balls were in the fairway. Play wouldn’t drop off as much as you think. Kinda like how the groove rule was supposed to make scrambling harder, but from day 1 it actually made it easier and more predictable

> > > > >

> > > > > I agree with this. But. I think it would be just the right amount to provide balance at the top.

> > > > >

> > > > > Even adding 2 clubs to the average approach would make a difference.

> > > >

> > > > No way it’d add 2 clubs to average approach. Ballspeed would be maybe 5 mph slower, and clubhead speed roughly 2 mph slower with steel shafted persimmon. I think they’d hit it just as far or further than a modern 3 wood. It’s not going to be a 30 yard difference

> > >

> > >

> > > Maybe so. But it begs the question. Why do we all use them then ?

> >

> > Because we can? Stepson does fine hitting 3 wood off almost every tee

>

> Lol. Yep. Good answer. I’m same. Played yesterday. Very firm 6500 yard course and two of us in the group could only hit driver 4-5 times. And then it left a flip sand or lob wedge in. 8-9 irons into par5s etc.

>

> I’m not arguing that scores would change much. ( those guys are good) but what episode the effect be on pressure situations both off the tee and approach? Just seems like your both saying it makes no difference and it makes a big difference at the same time.

 

I didn’t say it’s no difference. I said it’s not a 30 yard difference and it’s not as big a difference as many seem to think at an elite level.

[bladehunter]

> @iteachgolf said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > > > > They’d still have ball speeds in the 170s. And notice how many balls were in the fairway. Play wouldn’t drop off as much as you think. Kinda like how the groove rule was supposed to make scrambling harder, but from day 1 it actually made it easier and more predictable

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I agree with this. But. I think it would be just the right amount to provide balance at the top.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Even adding 2 clubs to the average approach would make a difference.

> > > > >

> > > > > No way it’d add 2 clubs to average approach. Ballspeed would be maybe 5 mph slower, and clubhead speed roughly 2 mph slower with steel shafted persimmon. I think they’d hit it just as far or further than a modern 3 wood. It’s not going to be a 30 yard difference

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > Maybe so. But it begs the question. Why do we all use them then ?

> > >

> > > Because we can? Stepson does fine hitting 3 wood off almost every tee

> >

> > Lol. Yep. Good answer. I’m same. Played yesterday. Very firm 6500 yard course and two of us in the group could only hit driver 4-5 times. And then it left a flip sand or lob wedge in. 8-9 irons into par5s etc.

> >

> > I’m not arguing that scores would change much. ( those guys are good) but what episode the effect be on pressure situations both off the tee and approach? Just seems like your both saying it makes no difference and it makes a big difference at the same time.

>

> I didn’t say it’s no difference. I said it’s not a 30 yard difference and it’s not as big a difference as many seem to think at an elite level.

 

Mostly agree. At least on the big hitters. Now the short guys. I’d wager it makes a bigger difference.

 

Th whole tech debate is one of my favorites. I think some players live off new tech help. And some seem to not need an ounce of it.

[Forged4ever]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @iteachgolf said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > > > > > They’d still have ball speeds in the 170s. And notice how many balls were in the fairway. Play wouldn’t drop off as much as you think. Kinda like how the groove rule was supposed to make scrambling harder, but from day 1 it actually made it easier and more predictable

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I agree with this. But. I think it would be just the right amount to provide balance at the top.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Even adding 2 clubs to the average approach would make a difference.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > No way it’d add 2 clubs to average approach. Ballspeed would be maybe 5 mph slower, and clubhead speed roughly 2 mph slower with steel shafted persimmon. I think they’d hit it just as far or further than a modern 3 wood. It’s not going to be a 30 yard difference

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Maybe so. But it begs the question. Why do we all use them then ?

> > > >

> > > > Because we can? Stepson does fine hitting 3 wood off almost every tee

> > >

> > > Lol. Yep. Good answer. I’m same. Played yesterday. Very firm 6500 yard course and two of us in the group could only hit driver 4-5 times. And then it left a flip sand or lob wedge in. 8-9 irons into par5s etc.

> > >

> > > I’m not arguing that scores would change much. ( those guys are good) but what episode the effect be on pressure situations both off the tee and approach? Just seems like your both saying it makes no difference and it makes a big difference at the same time.

> >

> > I didn’t say it’s no difference. I said it’s not a 30 yard difference and it’s not as big a difference as many seem to think at an elite level.

>

> Mostly agree. At least on the big hitters. Now the short guys. I’d wager it makes a bigger difference.

>

> The whole tech debate is one of my favorites. I think some players live off new tech help. And some seem to not need an ounce of it.

 

I agree wholeheartedly and I don’t know how Dan feels about this however I don’t believe that the majority of Tour Players have the repertoire of shots in their bags that the guys had 30-40+ years ago, at least at the long end of the bag, ie., some with the driver, all whom Play metals/hybrids, and those that Play MCBs/CBS and non-blades, though in fairness, that’s an equipment /ball issue versus Player cuz I’m confident that like all of us that started with persimmon, blades & the old balata balls that they would’ve learned to hit the shots out of necessity, just as we all did, some better than others, with your Tour Boys at the top of the heap.

 

The other thing is that most of their Tour stops have tracks, especially those built in the last 15-20 years, that cater to the current technology & game, and a lot of the “old” courses, like my Club’s, have had to make modifications if we wanted to stay relevant and in the loop for USGA events and even Oakmont was not so subtly told by the USGA, along with rebuilding and enlarging the bridge, to “get rid of the trees??,” lol.

 

Have a great weekend Bro?

 

My Best,

Richard

[straightshot7]

> @Ferguson said:

> > @straightshot7 said:

> > > @Ferguson said:

> > > > @new2g0lf said:

> > > > The groove rule was the biggest failure since the change of the Coke formula, it did nothing to change the game for the pro's. Unless you go across the board, all pro tours including the LPGA, you're not going to see any rollback of drivers on the PGA Tour.

> > >

> > > Poor compare.

> > >

> > > New Coke was a marketing campaign directed at regaining market share lost to Pepsi (and others).

> > >

> > > The groove rule was enacted with the intent to make "playing from the rough" more challenging thus promoting accuracy from the tee. It had nothing to do with marketing.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > ? He only compared them as both being big failures...he never said they shared the same purpose.

>

>

> He stated the groove rule was the biggest failure since New Coke.

>

> New Coke didn't fail because of a change in consumption methodology.

> It failed due to taste and negative customer sentiment.

>

> The groove rule didn't fail at all.

> It just didn't have the impact on the sport at the pro level as intended.

>

>

 

Not having the intended impact = (some degree of) failure

 

I think he was just being playful with the Coke comment, and you're way overanalyzing it.

 

Like if I said "Tiger Woods is the Wayne Gretsky of golf"---and you said "No, Tiger is not from Canada and never had long flowy hair".

[Christosterone]

This whole series is beyond awesome...

How I play golf and how to break 90 are a must own for everyone on WRX...

https://www.amazon.com/Bobby-Jones-Complete-Warner-Collection/dp/B00A33J8XY/ref=sr_1_fkmrnull_2?crid=QAN0HNHNCC9P&keywords=bobby+jones+how+i+play+golf+dvd&qid=1556916379&s=gateway&sprefix=Bobby+Jones+how%2Caps%2C171&sr=8-2-fkmrnull

 

[tiderider]

> @Titleist99 said:

> Baseball has progressed, Football has progressed, Tennis has progressed.....Why not golf? I do not want to go back to the Feathery ball....If Old Tom Morris had a new Taylormade Iron, he would have used it!

 

haven't those "progressed" largely because of rules changes? ... no other game/sport uses equipment to the extent we do ...

[Mitchell]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @Titleist99 said:

> > Baseball has progressed, Football has progressed, Tennis has progressed.....Why not golf? I do not want to go back to the Feathery ball....If Old Tom Morris had a new Taylormade Iron, he would have used it!

>

>

> Tom Morris was a gentleman. No chance he bagged a TM iron. Lol

 

If Old Tom Morris was waiting on a Taylormade release delay, he would have been Gone Tom Morris by time got his full kit.?

[smashdn]

Food for thought. Watch and see what you think.

 

[Forged4ever]

> @Christosterone said:

> This whole series is beyond awesome...

> How I play golf and how to break 90 are a must own for everyone on WRX...

> https://www.amazon.com/Bobby-Jones-Complete-Warner-Collection/dp/B00A33J8XY/ref=sr_1_fkmrnull_2?crid=QAN0HNHNCC9P&keywords=bobby+jones+how+i+play+golf+dvd&qid=1556916379&s=gateway&sprefix=Bobby+Jones+how%2Caps%2C171&sr=8-2-fkmrnull

>

>

 

Nice vid Brother??!!

 

Thanks for posting?

 

Have a great weekend?

Richard

[rgk5]

> @iteachgolf said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > > They’d still have ball speeds in the 170s. And notice how many balls were in the fairway. Play wouldn’t drop off as much as you think. Kinda like how the groove rule was supposed to make scrambling harder, but from day 1 it actually made it easier and more predictable

> > > >

> > > > I agree with this. But. I think it would be just the right amount to provide balance at the top.

> > > >

> > > > Even adding 2 clubs to the average approach would make a difference.

> > >

> > > No way it’d add 2 clubs to average approach. Ballspeed would be maybe 5 mph slower, and clubhead speed roughly 2 mph slower with steel shafted persimmon. I think they’d hit it just as far or further than a modern 3 wood. It’s not going to be a 30 yard difference

> >

> >

> > Maybe so. But it begs the question. Why do we all use them then ?

>

> Because we can? Stenson does fine hitting 3 wood off almost every tee

 

Whose stepson is that? ;) Ah, I see you did an edit. No harm, no foul.

[lowheel]

[lowheel]

> @straightshot7 said:

> > @Ferguson said:

> > > @straightshot7 said:

> > > > @Ferguson said:

> > > > > @new2g0lf said:

> > > > > The groove rule was the biggest failure since the change of the Coke formula, it did nothing to change the game for the pro's. Unless you go across the board, all pro tours including the LPGA, you're not going to see any rollback of drivers on the PGA Tour.

> > > >

> > > > Poor compare.

> > > >

> > > > New Coke was a marketing campaign directed at regaining market share lost to Pepsi (and others).

> > > >

> > > > The groove rule was enacted with the intent to make "playing from the rough" more challenging thus promoting accuracy from the tee. It had nothing to do with marketing.

> > > >

> > > >

> > >

> > > ? He only compared them as both being big failures...he never said they shared the same purpose.

> >

> >

> > He stated the groove rule was the biggest failure since New Coke.

> >

> > New Coke didn't fail because of a change in consumption methodology.

> > It failed due to taste and negative customer sentiment.

> >

> > The groove rule didn't fail at all.

> > It just didn't have the impact on the sport at the pro level as intended.

> >

> >

>

> Not having the intended impact = (some degree of) failure

>

> I think he was just being playful with the Coke comment, and you're way overanalyzing it.

>

> Like if I said "Tiger Woods is the Wayne Gretsky of golf"---and you said "No, Tiger is not from Canada and never had long flowy hair".

 

Id pay to see Tiger with a mullet

[lowheel]

> @iteachgolf said:

> > @lowheel said:

> > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > > They’d still have ball speeds in the 170s. And notice how many balls were in the fairway. Play wouldn’t drop off as much as you think. Kinda like how the groove rule was supposed to make scrambling harder, but from day 1 it actually made it easier and more predictable

> > > >

> > > > I agree with this. But. I think it would be just the right amount to provide balance at the top.

> > > >

> > > > Even adding 2 clubs to the average approach would make a difference.

> > >

> > > No way it’d add 2 clubs to average approach. Ballspeed would be maybe 5 mph slower, and clubhead speed roughly 2 mph slower with steel shafted persimmon. I think they’d hit it just as far or further than a modern 3 wood. It’s not going to be a 30 yard difference

> >

> > I respect your background but your #s are way off. Mishits would instantly go up so ball speed would really suffer up to 10mph easy. you cant go after those clubs consitently like the modern clubs. Steel shafts will take off more than 2mph swing speed just by definition. 130+ gram shafts versus on average 65 gram graphite shafts. Ive done these tests on trackman with buckets of data.My old Lemas and macgregors even with new/modern balls are 25+ yards shorter with double the dispersion rates and spin. From tee to green its easily 2 clubs and if its windy make it 3. scores would suffer if played from modern tips.Lets not pretend otherwise.

>

> Ive done test as well. My clubhead speed doesn’t change with a steel shafted driver vs my normal driver. Most it’s barely any difference. Again we are talking elite players, guys who fly a tiny blade 3 iron 255. They definitely don’t spin more than current drivers, they spin less and roll out more. Most guys really aren’t going after driver full tilt very often. There’s a company that is using titanium faces on persimmon heads that they are testing locally and they go just as far as a modern driver.

>

> For amateurs the difference would be huge. For the best of the best the difference would be much smaller than you think

 

We’re talking persimmon steel shafted drivers? If so they’re harder to get airborne but definitely spin more sideways. If you catch one slightly offcentre you’re losing 20-30 yards. Not even debatable. Modern driver you can catch slightly thin or slightly heeled or toed and barely lose 10-12 yards. The modern 3 woods are longer than classic drivers. You are correct most tour players are controlled off the tee with a go to drive /flight however they let it fly on par 5s and some par 4s. Their misses would be magnified with that old tech. Even if they’re elite. They would adjust but it would change their games dramatically. I’ve done the tests with sealed packs of titleist professional 100s and the #s are very telling

[iteachgolf]

> @lowheel said:

>

 

 

 

[lowheel]

> @iteachgolf said:

> > @lowheel said:

> >

>

>

>

>

I’ve seen this. His #s are way down. Losing 20 yards in carry.Look at that spin. Ricky swings @117 normally and gets 175+ in ball speed.This is with a pro v1.the #s with a balata would be even worse. Add cross wind and look out. I simply disagree with how much it’s downplayed.

 

[lowheel]

Case in point

[Krt22]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @iteachgolf said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > > > > > They’d still have ball speeds in the 170s. And notice how many balls were in the fairway. Play wouldn’t drop off as much as you think. Kinda like how the groove rule was supposed to make scrambling harder, but from day 1 it actually made it easier and more predictable

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > I agree with this. But. I think it would be just the right amount to provide balance at the top.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Even adding 2 clubs to the average approach would make a difference.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > No way it’d add 2 clubs to average approach. Ballspeed would be maybe 5 mph slower, and clubhead speed roughly 2 mph slower with steel shafted persimmon. I think they’d hit it just as far or further than a modern 3 wood. It’s not going to be a 30 yard difference

> > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > Maybe so. But it begs the question. Why do we all use them then ?

> > > >

> > > > Because we can? Stepson does fine hitting 3 wood off almost every tee

> > >

> > > Lol. Yep. Good answer. I’m same. Played yesterday. Very firm 6500 yard course and two of us in the group could only hit driver 4-5 times. And then it left a flip sand or lob wedge in. 8-9 irons into par5s etc.

> > >

> > > I’m not arguing that scores would change much. ( those guys are good) but what episode the effect be on pressure situations both off the tee and approach? Just seems like your both saying it makes no difference and it makes a big difference at the same time.

> >

> > I didn’t say it’s no difference. I said it’s not a 30 yard difference and it’s not as big a difference as many seem to think at an elite level.

>

> Mostly agree. At least on the big hitters. Now the short guys. I’d wager it makes a bigger difference.

>

> Th whole tech debate is one of my favorites. I think some players live off new tech help. And some seem to not need an ounce of it.

 

Agreed. People think who think we need to roll back the ball/clubs think doing so will reign in the bombers, failing to realize it will may disproportionately impact their beloved short knockers

[Ashley Schaeffer]

> @iteachgolf said:

> > @lowheel said:

> >

>

>

>

>

 

Very interesting. It almost seems like the elite players (rather than long drive specialists) wouldn't have as much of a dropoff in performance as some might think, kinda like exactly what you've been saying. Thanks for the vid.

[iteachgolf]

> @lowheel said:

> > @iteachgolf said:

> > > @lowheel said:

> > >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> I’ve seen this. His #s are way down. Losing 20 yards in carry.Look at that spin. Ricky swings @117 normally and gets 175+ in ball speed.This is with a pro v1.the #s with a balata would be even worse. Add cross wind and look out. I simply disagree with how much it’s downplayed.

>

 

Nobody is talking about balata. And they’d never have to use persimmon. Like I said before he swings it 2mph slower with 5ish mph less ball speed. What do you want me to look at spin wise? That’s near optimal. He didn’t do a clubfitting, he just randomly hit a driver. He’d hit one fit correctly further.

 

And if the rule ever changed they’d use modern materials with smaller heads, essentially a mini driver. And the impact would be minimal. Decreasing clubhead size isn’t going to change scoring significantly

[iteachgolf]

> @lowheel said:

> Case in point

>

 

Again literally nobody has talked about a balata ball, which would go way shorter and more crooked with a modern club as well. You keep trying to move the goal post. The argument was making them use a smaller headed driver would make scores go up significantly

 

 

I played persimmon until high school and used a steel shafted driver until college. I still play multiple rounds a year with persimmon. I’m very aware of how far the difference when fit correctly and the correct golf ball is used.

[lowheel]

> @iteachgolf said:

> > @lowheel said:

> > Case in point

> >

>

> Again literally nobody has talked about a balata ball, which would go way shorter and more crooked with a modern club as well. You keep trying to move the goal post. The argument was making them use a smaller headed driver would make scores go up significantly

>

>

> **I played persimmon until high school and used a steel shafted driver until college.** I still play multiple rounds a year with persimmon. I’m very aware of how far the difference when fit correctly and the correct golf ball is used.

 

So did I. I didnt say you brought up balata, I brought it up to explain the yardage difference i was referring to in my post above. I understand the argument at hand and was merely expanding it. im not moving the goal posts, im merely explaining how i came to those #s. We agree to a certain extent and disagree on other points, thats cool.Have a great weekend.

[lowheel]

> @iteachgolf said:

> > @lowheel said:

> > > @iteachgolf said:

> > > > @lowheel said:

> > > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > I’ve seen this. His #s are way down. Losing 20 yards in carry.Look at that spin. Ricky swings @117 normally and gets 175+ in ball speed.This is with a pro v1.the #s with a balata would be even worse. Add cross wind and look out. I simply disagree with how much it’s downplayed.

> >

>

> Nobody is talking about balata. And they’d never have to use persimmon. Like I said before he swings it 2mph slower with 5ish mph less ball speed. What do you want me to look at spin wise? That’s near optimal. He didn’t do a clubfitting, he just randomly hit a driver. He’d hit one fit correctly further.

>

> And if the rule ever changed they’d use modern materials with smaller heads, essentially a mini driver. And the impact would be minimal. Decreasing clubhead size isn’t going to change scoring significantly

 

Well maybe were 2 ships in the night!!! His spin is 3000 , thats not optimal. I was positing the persimmon wood question not the smaller metal head question.I agree smaller metal heads wouldnt change things much but persimmon would dramatically.

[sdandrea]

I keep putting my PING Eye 2 irons back in the bag every time my scores start creeping up......................... ;)