Monty says a new tour ball is needed to counter Bryson DeChambeau's crazy distance

[QuigleyDU]

We will see.

[Jagpilotohio]

Hey brother! What’s up? Long time no talk. Hope all is well.

quick chime in here. I’m in agreement with the “domination” idea. He won’t dominate because his wedge play and putting has always been so-so. I don't ever see that changing. Just my 2 cents. Cheers!

[QuigleyDU]

Hey man, how are ya?! I don't disagree, I just see he has a drive that most others do not have.

[Jagpilotohio]

Gotta say, As much as He irritates me, I respect the analytical aspect of him looking at the numbers and simply coming to the Conclusion that distance is a massive advantage and he was going to grab that advantage...period. He said he was going to transform his body and his driving distance and he did.

Love him or hate him or somewhere in between, I’d say that demands some respect.

[Lincoln_Arcadia]

I still play them, but those “S” flights seem to only happen when the flatness becomes quite obvious.

It would be nice to be able to tell before it gets that bad? What’s the secret?

[Nykt1000]

Not sure why they can't just grow the grass out and maybe put a shrub at around 310yds. It would be minimal cost...

[oikos1]

Yes, but golfers are supposed to play the golf course the way it was designed 100 or more years ago. You know, like it was embalmed and sealed in a vacuum tube never to change. Ever. Not even the growth of a single tree.

[15th Club]

Just so you know; about your contempt for golf course architecture and history. It is exactly the same contempt I have for those who are ignorant of the art and history of golf course architecture. So we're even. Of course no one mentioned "the growth of a single tree" in any serious part of the distance debate. That was your own hysterical overreaction.

[Pepperturbo]

An out-of-round ball is obvious in flight and or on the putting surface, least to my eyes. Having said that, as long as I played Balata's I don't recall an out of round ball. Maybe because I never hit them hard enough, don't know. Plus due to cover I was happy when a ball lasted more than one round, and same is true with early ProVs.

[gvogel]

Just think, if they roll back the ball and the size of the driver, and they play courses like Harbour Town every week, it won't make a difference! The guys who can hit it will still be playing fairway woods or irons off the tee, and the guys who can putt will still go way under par!

What's the big deal?

[Jeff58]

All that’s needed is a compression limit. Impacts require two components. We limit the driver‘s COR component, but currently the only limits on balls are performance-based. The ball must only correspond to the USGA’s specific metric. How it performs to an actual golfer is irrelevant. A physical definition of ball performance is easily achieved if the governing bodies wished to implement one.

[Lincoln_Arcadia]

Those old ProV1s certainly were classic Lol

I really don’t miss those days. I will agree that modern equipment has made golf simpler. Less thinking and analyzing, if anything.

Balata and Persimmon seem to go hand in hand better. That’s more likely why you didn’t smash the ball to bits?

Currently only at 106 and was at my best possibly 109, and I also never distorted a ball in that manner. Mostly, mine blistered. However, my son hits very hard and has noticeably altered the shape of an old Balata after one or two holes playing an early Big Bertha and Balata. He’s left handed so he can’t use my old persimmons.

[Nels55]

Here is an interesting look at how Bryson is doing this:https://youtu.be/a9EkzYWgGkE

[Lincoln_Arcadia]

332 on the fly 181 ball speed and 365 total?

Well, getting the launch and strike perfect. Fitting really goes a long way, that’s for sure!

Makes sense that Bryson would to that.

[clevited]

Yeah, don't put too much stock in that carry and total. Knowing what I know about that particular launch monitor, it way over estimates carry when really low spin occurs. That would have dropped out of the sky. Best a guy could hope for at sea level on a calm day with that ball speed is around 308 carry. Still, a good poke and on today's concrete tour courses, that could still end up at 365+ for all we know.

[Nels55]

Interesting point. It seems then that it would be much better to see such data outside on Trackman or Flightscope? I am guessing that is how DeChambeau is optimizing his launch?

[trilerian]

How about eliminating par 5s on the pro tour and grow the rough, narrower fairways, and add a third or fourth cut heavy rough for those shots 20 yds off? No par 5s would bring down the par on the course, but really we are just looking at scores retaliative to par anyway.

If a ball could be made that doesn't affect the current average male, but starts to get less distance the higher the swing speed, that could work. But it would affect everyone on this forum since we all hit it 300+ with our 3w. But I think I am more in favor of my first response.

[Nels55]

I don't think that it would be fair to punish someone for getting or being faster. My idea is to make the ball have the same spin ratio off of a wedge and the driver. That way if someone wants to be able to control short shots they would have to play a really high spin shot with the driver which would make the ball go less distance and more offline but would still give a stronger faster player a potential advantage. The game would be more like it was with balata golf balls. That way ams could play low spin surlyn balls and still get the same distance as today if that suited them.

[clevited]

You can still learn something from these LMs, but yes, Trackman or Flightscope outside on a calm day is the best way to learn what is best for carry distance. Total distance will still always be course condition dependant. The flight algorithms for all of these LMs can be very misleading. Always bring your old driver when getting fit and do a comparison. Even then, you can be easily duped by the ball flight algorithms.

[trilerian]

What would stop the pros from playing the low spin surlyn balls? I've made low spin balls check on fast greens before. Can I do it every time, no, but I'm sure the pros could. Unless you are saying they play one ball specifically, then why not just limit the distance of it so golf courses don't have to change?

[QuigleyDU]

I am not sure I agree. I am personally witnessed these launch monitors side by side outside. The numbers were essentially the same. With GCquad you get club face data.

 

The idea that Flightscope or Trackman are better is not really true anymore. They are just more well known. Bryson is sponsored by flight scope. Yet, you always see him with a foresight unit.

[clevited]

I am speaking in regards to carry distance only, most notibly with Driver. Flightscope and Trackman can track the ball flight until lands on faux horizon. GC2, GCQ is all algorithm. Trackman and Flightscope indoors, all algorithm. This isn't about club data at all and entirely about carry distance. It is a very well known issue with GC2 and GCQ that their carry algorith breaks down with low spin shots. 2k spin and below seems to be the cliff.

[Nels55]

This has already happened as surlyn balls were introduced in 70s or so and other then Johnny Miller at the Open Championship one year no tour pros that I know of played low spin surlyn balls. They all played balata wound balls which were high spin off the driver and the wedge. That said it is possible that this would not work as modern equipment might be able to get around the ball limitation but I think that it might.

Anyway further limiting the distance the ball can go might be a better solution but I would want to see it limited for everyone not just the big hitters. The ball should go proportionally shorter for everyone and should affect the 'average male' imho.

[trilerian]

The problem with limiting distance for everyone, is that you have to re rate every golf course in the world. If you reduce the average male distance by 10%, which I'm not even sure that is enough for the pros, he will never reach a 400 yd par 4 in 2. The more I think about this, the more I lean towards doing nothing with equipment. Keep it where it is, do not allow the balls to go any farther. I personally don't have an issue with the pros being pros and decimating golf courses. Watching them hit out of 5-6" Kentucky Bluegrass might be interesting though.

[15th Club]

A "ball [that] doesn't affect the current average male, but starts to get less distance the higher the swing speed" has been discussed. It's been discussed in golf's most influential grill room (Seminole GC), by golf's most influential rule-maker (Mike Davis), according to the Dean of American golf club professionals (Bob Ford): Bob Ford On The Ball: "I would be very surprised if it doesn’t roll back." — Geoff Shackelford btw: I will always be amazed at your notion of making restrictive, boring, anti-architectural changes to historic championship golf courses instead of simple changes to golf balls. You left out the notion of needing to lengthen courses that may not have the requisite real estate to do so. That's not just expensive, but in many cases impossible. All of your change ideas have been suggested by countless other GolfWRX commenters, so I don't want this to sound as if it is picking on you personally. But to the hundreds/thousands/millions who think as you do; your views represent a kind of illiteracy on the subjects of golf architecture and golf history.

~Chuck

[trilerian]

Since I don't play on courses that have 50 yd wide fairways and short rough it is hard for me to appreciate any sort of golf course architecture. My home course has 30 yd wide fairways, and some are narrower. A bunch of trees to get into trouble in, and 3" Kentucky Blugrass rough after it's been cut. And fwiw, I don't think golf courses need to be any longer than they already are. But, I've seen some of your posts on the architecture of the course, and you seem to be steadfast in your resolve. Which is fine, that's your opinion, and I won't hold you in contempt for it. However, I don't think narrowing fairways and growing out the rough goes against course architecture. All you are doing is growing the grass... With that said, I think what happens during the US Open is a travesty, cutting the fairways down to roll forever and the greens getting scalped isn't good for the course and punishes good shots too.

Regardless, I don't think there is a win-win. In the end, if something is done, somebody (or a group of somebodies) will be upset. There will be complaining, there always is. But do you know what the only constant in life is? Change...

[15th Club]

Lol. It’s not at all essential to the conversation, but the one time I caddied for the greatest shotmaker of our lifetimes — Lee Trevino — in the middle of his run of six major championships, he told me how much he hated bluegrass.

 

[grm24]

John Huston in the 1990's set the PGA Tour scoring record (28 under) playing a 2 piece surlyn covered Maxfli XS Tour. Other players played surlyn covered balls over the years as well.

[Lincoln_Arcadia]

The solution:

1) Wilson Limited Flight balls

2) All tour players must use regular low kick shafts fitted by the USGA. Minimum driver spin is 6000RPM.

3) Every par4 and 5 must use these drivers. No 3W or driving irons or hybrids allowed off the tee.

4) Fire all the Driver design Engineers.

I’m joking, of course, but that’ll do it.

[Soloman1]

I'm in the camp that feels the bifurcation would not be the end of the world. No aluminum bats in MLB, only wood. Why doesn't baseball use aluminum bats, hot balls and force all of the stadiums to buy more land and/or build bigger stadiums? Probably because that would be stupid. The baseball equipment companies are not dictating the game, like in golf.

The metal woods and balls of today simply go straight through design to circumvent the CoR and ball limits, but at the cost of sidelining classic courses. It's easier to have a tour ball than force classic courses to go through all of the efforts to extend a course (if it can be done at all) that alter the vision and strategy of the architect.

You cannot compare records and scores when the equipment has changed the game completely.