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

[smashdn]

My point was sort of that if a US Open set up at Congressional is not penal enough then we have no hope. I'll concede that soft greens didn't help but you'd think deep, wet rough would counter that to an extent (if you hit it in the rough). But then how do you not hit it in the rough? Used to you would club down to something more controllable, 3wood, driving iron, 2I, etc. That's tough sledding on a 7500 yard par 71 course.

[Soloman1]

"Tiger and Jack never complained about the ball going to far at the height of their careers......LOL! they were the long hitters. I like your solution. It's something that could be implemented NOW." [sic] -- Titleist99

 

Duh, because the ball is going 50 yards farther than when Jack was playing and 25 yards more than when Tiger was at his peak. Maybe that's why?

 

Hell, guys on the Champions Tour are hitting it 300 yards.

[ThinkingPlus]

The soft conditions kept the ball in the fairways (lawn darts) which minimized how often the rough played a roll. The soft greens allowed players to hold greens when playing from the rough further minimizing the impact. Only the players that hit poor tee shots and got horrible lies were really penalized. You have to have both fast/firm and penal areas in order to impact scoring and affect play strategy.

[15th Club]

Let's emphasize this. Ask a Tour player if a well-designed golf course presents more problems (the best kinds of problems, since they emphasize the ground game and the need for detailed understanding of the course) when it is firm and fast, as opposed to when it is so wet that distances are reduced. A thoughtful player will always say that firm and fast is more challenging. It is harder to keep a drive in the fairway. With more bounce and longer rollouts, knowledge of the ground contours is needed.

It's better golf. All we need to do, is to scale the equipment to fit those courses in those conditions. And not water them down, to cover for balls that go too far.

 

[ThinkingPlus]

That's only true if there is some kind of penalty at the end of the misplayed shot. Otherwise fast and firm is easy because it makes every course short.

[bodhi555]

 

Really? Considering when Tiger was at his peak the Pro V1 was already available, and he was using the Nike Tour Accuracy at the time - are you honestly suggesting that the 2020 Pro V1 goes 25 yards further than a 2001 model? As if you are I'm gonna need some sort of evidence before I call BS.

 

As you can probably tell I'm not a fan of rolling back the ball in the slightest - especially if it affects the amateur game as well. Losing 20% distance off the Driver means even DeChambeau is going to struggle to hit it much past 250, never mind we humans who will struggle to top 200. That doesn't sound like a version of golf I particularly want to watch or play if I'm honest.

 

It would still be far better to put a premium on accuracy and make the pros think twice about bomb and gouge. So narrow the fairways, grow the rough (and the fairways for that matter), and if you must mess around with equipment, limit Driver head size to 250cc, and ban tees in the Professional game so they have to hit it off the deck. However I don't see the value in making the game measurably worse for 98% of the people who play it, just to keep a few retired pros happy.

[bscinstnct]

 

It’s just funny that Jack, a guy who benefitted from being the longest is now against the long ball.

 

As far as TW. So...

 

The average tour driving distance in 2006 was 290. TW was averaging about 303. He was one of the longest.

 

In 2019, the average driving distance was 294. And TW had dropped to 298. The big hitters were out there at 315. TW was ranked like 75th.

 

So, the average distance only went up 4 yards in the 14 years from TWs prime until now. But, he went down 5 yards and went from one of the longest to average.

 

And here he is looking for a roll-back. That Tiger ?

 

 

[Soloman1]

 

[farmer]

I can think of two players who were long enough and good enough to beat courses up with their power: Jack and Tiger. Bryson is having a good run with high finishes, BK had a nice little run, Bubba won a Masters, and there's Phil. I'm not sure Phil won a lot because of his length, but he is still long. I remember Lee Trevino talking about his advantage over the long hitters because they had to hit shorter clubs off the tee, and he was good enough to accurately hit driver. Professional golf is entertainment for a rainy Saturday for most people outside ForumWorld. To re-arrange an industry to punish a tiny subset of players is absurd on it's merits.

[Soloman1]

The thread is about a TOUR BALL. A TOUR BALL, not a ball for everyone.

Why do people not understand this? Here, let's say it again: a TOUR BALL!

That means a ball that tour players use. Is it still not sinking in?

Kind of like there is a Major League bat for baseball, but others can use a different bat so they can continue to hit and feel like a major leaguer, except they are not.A Tour Ball.

No one is talking about changing or limiting the ball you play.

 

A tour ball.

 

 

 

 

 

 

A tour ball.

 

 

SIgh.

 

 

[15th Club]

This comment really angers me, since I have posted about 100 comments through the many, many ball-rollback threads insisting that no one on the pro-rollback side wants to "punish" any player or subgroup of players.

How many times does that need to be repeated for you? Why have you not gotten it? Who is it, that you think harbors a desire to "punish" certain players? Can you quote anybody? Does Mike Davis want to "punish" anybody? (He has said the opposite.) Does Geoff Shackelford think that there is a need for "punishment" for longer hitters? (He too has said the opposite.)

As many times as I have written this, I have also stated the general goal of a ball rollback; to protect the playing integrity of classic championship golf course architecture. NOT to "punish" a-n-y-o-n-e.

[bscinstnct]

 

Thank you. It’s really the only practical solution that allows sufficient development and testing of the ball under competitive conditions and allow players to gain life long expertise with it to excel at the pro level.

 

There is no way, zero, they are going to develop ball specs, demand the manufacturers make it, and require the current pros to use it.

 

Heck, the lawsuits alone will take a decade to be settled so why not just implement a new ball at the junior level.

[smashdn]

I am afraid that you can't grow the rough enough to matter (and it not be absurd). A nine iron or wedge from the rough is better than a six or seven from the fairway. A six or seven from the rough might give them pause though.

[Titleist99]

I chuckle when a certain population on this board thinks that changing the ball is as simple as sending a memo to the production line to change the die casting and shrink the rails.

[Titleist99]

Why would anyone want to protect the playability of a classic golf course that probably started out as a 9 or 12 hole course....designed for a hickory shaft club and a feathery golf ball with a driver that went 200 yards? chances are your classic golf course has been redesign several times. Jack Probably redesigned 500+/-........(sarcasm).

[15th Club]

Why WOULDN'T we want to protect great classic golf courses? What good is it, to allow equipment technology to dominate them? Golf is a game where we want to PLAY the courses. Not dominate/overpower/overwhelm them.

[Titleist99]

While I respect your opinion......You're welcome to go play the classic course anytime you feel necessary but keep is mind that everyone do not feel the nostalgia that you do......happy golfing!

P.S.....I gave you the reason a person WOULDN'T in my response....

[15th Club]

There is absolutely, positively no more room to move tees back, or otherwise lengthen The Old Course, or Oakland Hills, or Riviera, or Merion, or the Mackenzie-designed University of Michigan Golf Course, or LACC, or Scioto, or etc., etc. etc.

[Titleist99]

The Golf courses that you mentioned will be just fine.....I suggest those courses toughen up a bit in lieu of the 330 yard driving Bryson DeChambeau ......Oh wait! Bryson's not winning anything or bringing any courses to it's knees.......Never mind. (sarcasm)

P.S. .....Average drive on the PGATour is 290 yards......may be going down a tad.

[Titleist99]

Golf is one of the few sports where the average hack want to wear what the Pros wear and play what the Pros play. A tour ball is not practical.

[Soloman1]

But a MLB bat is practical?

Why is it not practical?

Do you work for Titleist?

And the average drive is only measured twice per round and players may not be hitting a driver. But you know this, right?

[Titleist99]

Yes I do know how the PGATOUR measure on two holes, one going in one direction and another going opposite...That's why they should measure all drive, which is another reason I don't put stock in the PGATOUR average. No other Major sport uses a Professional ball unless you count the WNBA or fluffier tennis balls to slow down the serve so there wont be a serving match. Golf is in a good place, don't screw it up with different golf balls.

[15th Club]

"Bryson's not winning anything..."

I am not letting up on what a a rotten, baseless misconstruction of this entire debate that is.

AGAIN; the rollback initiative is not aimed at preventing the handful of the longest hitters on the PGA Tour from winning PGA Tour events.

The rollback initiative is aimed at making it possible to hold elite-level (and "elite-level" includes the NCAA, state amateur championships, USGA qualifiers, etc., etc.) competitions at historic courses without distorting them, and without distorting scoring.

[smashdn]

"Thank you. It’s really the only practical solution that allows sufficient development and testing of the ball under competitive conditions and allow players to gain life long expertise with it to excel at the pro level."

Hogwash. Somehow Arnold Palmer strolled out onto St. Andrews in 1960 and finished second in The Open using a ball that only the week before he had used. 1.68" v 1.62"

[Soloman1]

You didn't answer my question. Do you work for Titleist?

[Titleist99]

Point#1.....I mentioned Bryson De. because he current lead the tour in driving but can't win a belching contest.

Point#2......To have a major tournament or any tournament certain criteria's must be met, with course yardage down on the list. logistics is the main one along with the members consent being just a couple. Most courses don't need the notoriety for membership and who want to give up their club most of the year for one tournament week.

P.S. Pebble Beach is not a long course but have no problems hosting a tournament.......Please do not respond with the tired statement of the wind blowing.

[Nels55]

Yep. I would guess that it would take a tour pro a day of working with their launch monitor to adjust to the new ball. They would all be in the same boat anyway. Not a big deal!

[ThinkingPlus]

Almost no one over the age of 25 plays baseball except the pros. Almost no women ever play baseball. So how is MLB material to this conversation?

[Titleist99]

No, I do Not work for Titleist but I like their Products. I use their clubs, bag, balls and apparel.

[15th Club]

I just got finished indicating that the distance problem is not just "major championships." It is all of elite-level golf. So I don't need to make any further effort on the strawman argument about which courses have the infrastructure to host a major championship.

Regarding DeChambeau: the problem is not whether he wins anything or not.* The problem is that it is possible for his stock driver distance, by his own account, is 325 yards of carry.