USGA DISTANCE INSIGHT

[deadsolid...shank]

I guess I’ll defer to the majority. Maybe their numbers are more correct than I thought.

[QuigleyDU]

I think both sides are saying stupid things at times because the numbers on both sides are not real. Everyone is guessing and letting emotion guide the conversation. The wise thing would for the USGA and PGA to come together and hire a third party to investigate, gather stats, explore costs of course Maintainence, run some trials etc.

 

if that happened, if the investigation and report was done by an uninterested third party. I would 100% accept the results. Otherwise it is biased and partisan with selfish h goals and skewed number to drive a specific result.

[Argonne69]

Average age is probably 65. Plenty of retirees, but also many working stiffs.

[deadsolid...shank]

Thanks Arg, but if the average age was 65, don’t you feel that would skew your numbers downward a bit? It brings me back to my question of what is the “average” golfer.

[15th Club]

Almost everything you’ve written is wrong. I might have let it go, until you got into accusing the USGA of being “a joke.”

So let’s do this. NO joking.

The USGA knows very well that the distance problem is with elite golf, and not with recreational golf. Every solution that they are going to consider recognizes that fact. And they won’t do anything that has a major impact on recreational players.

Now; as for your trash talk about how the PGA Tour is gonna show the USGA who’s boss... Baloney. The PGA Tour has almost never shown any interest or motivation to take over responsibility for the Rules or equipment regulations. The sole exception being Ping Eye 2 litigation with Bob Gilder, et al.

The Tour doesn’t want responsibility for the Rules. The Tour doesn’t want responsibility for testing equipment.

The Tour LOVES having the USGA doing those expensive and thankless tasks for them. The Tour is too lazy, too Ill-equipped, too litigation-averse, too wracked with sponsor conflicts, to do any of it effectively.

[jmck]

One thing I can tell you for sure about the average golfer....he’s not here on golfwrx posting about the bend profile differences between a Ventus Black and KK Dual Core TX. We’re a self-selecting group here, lol.

[deadsolid...shank]

I know that is very true J. As I’ve thought back through my pairups over the years, I’ve ride to filter out the WRX’ers I’ve played with. They (us)

probably don’t fit the definition of average either.

[bladehunter]

Wow. 50 rounds in 11 weeks. Must be nice.

The old saying is that “ youth is wasted on the young “. Well. You can flip it around on retirement golfers. Lol.

 

Just poking at you , since I’m jealous. If I get 18 holes a week in it’s good.

[clevited]

Sorry, absolutely hate it when people bring that Shiels video up. 3 things. First, old wound balls don't age well. Second, specs for those balls show the ball tests at absolute ball speed limit, same as today and at a speed faster than Shiels hits. Third, those are LM numbers. I wouldn't believe anything but a tracked ball outdoors for actual distance comparison.

 

In short, those balls would be really close to identical to modern balls if brand new. They would primarily spin a tad more which can be "addressed".

 

Edit: Didn't address the club any, I don't want to get into why I dislike that too as far as a test goes. Videos like that spread so much inadvertent misinformation imo.

[Sean2]

@Holy Moses Distance is a problem at my level...I don't hit it nearly far enough.

[klebs01]

Is a true average golfer even important? It seems a weighted average golfer is would make more sense. The golfer that plays 100 rounds a year is much more important than the person that plays twice a year.

I know my recent experience isn’t reflective of the full golf population, but I can’t think of anyone under 40 that I’ve played with in the past few years that averages less than 250 off the tee. Most are 275+. It’s partially equipment, but mostly other factors and change in style of play. We will occasionally use old equipment, even persimmons, and we don’t lose much distance. Even going to equipment that old isn’t going to make people swing slower or change strategy.

[15th Club]

I know this will sound crazy, but how about a golf tournament featuring the world’s best players, playing for a national championship on a fabulous old golf course like Royal Melbourne or NGLA or Riviera or LACC or Shinnecock or Oakland Hills or The Old Course. And we set the course(s) up to play firm and fast. As virtually all great architects and great players agree makes for the best and most challenging golf.

The only problem is that with modern equipment and techniques, those players will mostly obviate all of the challenges and intended angles of play.

So we solve that problem with just one simple change; we change the ODS for golf balls such that their performance is limited to matching the players’ performance to the courses.

[QuigleyDU]

The best just played royal mebourne and it held its ground very very well. No one overpowered that course.

[Lincoln_Arcadia]

Keep in mind, two sets of agendas will conclude diametrically opposing conclusions from even the same dataset.

I like your idea, but in the end the louder party shall win the argument while drawing their own conclusions.

Link’s predictions...

Get ready for a new set of bifurcated equipment rules where the shorter balls and clubs will be purchased by nearly everyone anyway.

The net result will be yet even slower pace of play and the longer hitters will simply train themselves to hit nearly as long with this supposedly shorter equipment.

If anyone has taken their old clubs out and hit them with a typical range ball, that’s what it’s going to be like. Good shots aren’t really that much shorter than your on course shots, if at all. However, these newer shorter clubs will still be much more forgiving than the old clubs and balls will be possibly even more consistent than now albeit a bit shorter.

Professionals will likely not lose any distance from today’s numbers. It’ll just be much stronger players all with body clones of Dustin with Tiger’ musculature. Short game will no longer even matter any more.

Others, who can barely hit 200 now will likely quit unless tees are moved yet further up. When USGA realizes the mistake they’ve made, they’ll adjust the “Tee it forward” tables forcing courses to add more tee boxes in the middle of the fairways. Sub-5000 yard tees will become more commonplace. Executive 18 hole courses will become more popular.

Unfortunate that we common folk are left with the ideologies of the loud highly biased individuals, just like in our governments.

[deadsolid...shank]

Well, I’m glad someone else has seen it this way. Blade and I were starting to feel lonely.

[MtlJeff]

Do you play with a bunch of lumberjacks? Truly averaging 275 off the tee considering weather, mishits here and there (even if we're only counting hit fairways) as a real amateur is monstrous.

[Londoner]

I dont know where you play or who with but that sounds like BS.

[molecularman]

I agree in part. If there is a separate set of equipment rules for professionals, you will have some faction of golfers buying that, but I doubt that it would be the majority of average players.

 

I disagree that professionals could simply do something to make up the distance. I suppose it depends on what regulations are put into place. Make maximum CC 300 and roll the COR back to .8 + a slightly rolled back ball would be plenty IMO.

[bladehunter]

They’re out there. Go play a us mid am qualifier. It’s going to be 7200 yards plus and it needs to be.

[MtlJeff]

I'm not saying it's not out there, if I wanted to see someone do it i could just record one of my own rounds and watch it.

I'm just saying its rare.

Whe we talk about some of these events we are talking about the top 1 percent of golfers.

 

[bladehunter]

This whole argument more and more points to bifurcation as being the real solution. I don’t want it to be. Truly.

 

But the point of view from 205 yards cannot be seen by the guy who hits a 6 iron that far , nor can the point of view be seen of the guy who blows it over doglegs by the 205 yard player. They cannot even believe someone when they say that’s happening. Much less imagine that point of view. It’s a bridge too far. Two sets of equipment rules is likely the answer.

[Lincoln_Arcadia]

It’s difficult to say, but I doubt bifurcation would work.

Not the same professionals, I’m guessing as a group they’ll all be 6’5” and 230 pounds of solid muscle or bigger much like most long drivers these days. It would be even more of a power game than now.

Agree that 0.8 is reasonable.

[bladehunter]

Yea. I keep saying that. I’ve recently told another guy that to put his mind into proper perspective on some swing issues he’s had. As in “ hey man. Chill. You’re top 1 % of the planet , it will work itself out “.

 

But when you play with that weekly as I try to do , and am not always the biggest beast in the barn , then you play events and see kids coming up , you start to wonder.

Even seniors I play with sometimes. 2 in particular then will fly a 3 wood 235-240 regularly. Both over 65. Neither are now or ever a pro. I guess rare is an apt word. But rare is also relative. I guess I’ve done a good job of surrounding myself with talent ? Only thing that makes sense. Otherwise half of those 1.%ers are in the upstate of SC

[jmck]

Kind of where I am with it too. The pro game and the “average” amateur game (whatever exactly that is) might as well be different games, so might as well be governed by two different sets of rules.

I’d also say that this has been going on informally forever. Lots of golfers out there playing winter rules year round, who’ve never treated OB as stroke and distance, everything inside of four feet is good, etc.

[deadsolid...shank]

My problem with bifurcation is at what level do you implement it?

[MtlJeff]

Yeah i've run into guys like that. Was paired with a guy in a tournament a few years back who was 65 or so and was hitting his driver a good 260+. We have a famous amateur in Canada who plays regularly at my home course and he was smacking the ball well into his 60's pretty good.

Overall i think i'm less exposed to it naturally because Canada has a small population and golf isn't our national passtime or anything. But if you play in events you run into these guys. One of the top 2-3 juniors in the country played at my club the last two years. He could carry it 290+

Otherwise my club is actually known for being a bunch of old dudes who hit it 230 but score well. Don't know why that is. But not a lot of big hitters at my home course. I'm probably the longest if you discount our pros (both of whom are former can tour players)

[bladehunter]

To me it seems easy to implement it at the college level and USGA Am events level and above. Kids in high school can make the transition at any point. And a lot of good players would.

 

The hopes would be more and more trickle down effect. So say 20 years time more players have rolled themselves back than not. No different than the groove rule really.

[jmck]

Heck of a question, ain’t it?

In a way the grove rule was a test run I suppose. You could use whatever wedges/irons you wanted for posting a handicap or trying to take your buddy’s money, but if you wanted to play in certain competitions your wedges/irons needed to be on a certain list. People will of course howl, but the same could be done with balls.

[jmck]

Lol, great minds, eh Blade?

[molecularman]

I've been a fan of bifurcation for years now, but I think it's all kind of silly at this point. The barn doors have been open for far too long.

 

I still think it depends on what they do with clubs. At a certain point you can't just hulk out on a club and get good results.

A persimmon driver, just as a material, isn't THAT much shorter than a modern club. But when you are able to use modern material to make a club twice the size, move weight all over and utilize a longer and lighter shaft; that both gets you more yardage from the start, and allows you to go at the ball way harder.

 

Limit the CC down , and ban hollow bodies. You aren't going to take away a person's inherent advantage of being a longer hitter. It's always been that way. However, I think you can limit how successful a person can be in swinging all out on every driver swing.

 

Though really, I'd prefer to see the PGA go to higher grass heights in the fairways, no rakes for bunkers (make them a real penalty again) and have courses that utilize more dog legs and risk/reward carries.