**Poll! Should the golf ball be “rolled-back” 10% or more. Only for the PGA tour

[bscinstnct]

There have been a number of threads on the topic but I don’t think there’s been a poll. Golfwrx has thousands of members so I thought we could get a good sample size.

Vote! Takes one second, make your opinion known!

[bscinstnct]

65 views and 14 votes. Smh.

 

This apathy is very disappointing.

 

[caniac6]

No, and a lot of folks have expressed their views in the many threads concerning this issue. You can get an idea of their views by scanning those threads.

[Leftlove94]

The second click is a lot to ask.

[bscinstnct]

 

Yes, but we don’t make decisions based on opinions in cable news. We vote!

 

Ok, here is a deal. If we can get 1000 views by 10pm next Sunday. I will not post on golfwrx for one entire week!

 

Thats right, 1000 votes and a whole week of peace and silence and none of my moronicness.

 

Im thinkin we will have 1000 votes by the end of today now ?

[Sean2]

To answer the original question: No. :-)

[caniac6]

only 986 to go

[oikos1]

Not for amateur/recreational golfers. I think most wouldn't care if it was for pros, but the die hards and equipment manufactures would fight it to the bitter end.

[ChillyDipper]

I voted yes, but I wish the poll had given the option to vote yes or no for PGA Tour only and PGA Tour + else, as it would make the results a lot more valuable. I believe the Tour should roll back the ball to bring more courses into play, and us non-real competition regular folk should have the option to play the Tour ball or the latest rocket ball. When there are no stakes, who cares? When there are stakes, don't I want to watch more interesting, challenging golf?

[bscinstnct]

Dang, you're right, I edited to change it.

 

****If you voted and, after the edited parameters, you're vote is not reflected accurately and you can't change it, send me a pm with you're vote based on the new parameters and I will reflect in the final tally

[NoTalentLefty]

No

[bscinstnct]

105 views and 20 votes.

 

Right now, the roll back side is making a good showing.

 

Cmon people, really too hard to click yes or no?

 

Actually, not surprised, reflects the general voter lack of interest. (Use a little reverse psychology; )

 

“In most major cities, fewer than 15 percent of voters turn out to cast a ballot for mayor”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-01/almost-no-one-votes-in-mayoral-elections-in-the-u-s

 

 

 

[15th Club]

This poll may make it appear, inaccurately, that people voting in the affirmative actually like the idea of bifurcation.

The other myth that this poll perpetuates is that distance is “only” a problem for the PGA Tour. In fact, the Tour — awash in money and golf course choices (some of them miserable “TPC” courses) — is by no means the only problem area. It’s a terrible misconception to think that it is purely a Tour problem. Collegiate golf is another big problem area. Elite amateurs are often too long for their historic venues.

[bscinstnct]

Thanks for voting, 15.

 

And thanks, Yes, if you are voting “yes”, you do support the idea of bifurcation. The poll is clear that it only applies to the pga tour. So, I guess if you’re for a roll back that applies to all golfers, you’re out of luck on the poll options.

But, if you want a full roll back, just pm me or say so here and I’ll tally it up.

[ChillyDipper]

Thanks - much better.

[gvogel]

Yes.

Yesterday I played 18 holes on a par 3 course with a severely distance limited ball, the Point Five. My 220 yard drive was limited to 165 -ish. Hitting my 7-iron (normal 140) about 115. Had a great time. Good contact with proper strike was rewarded. Bad strike with bad face angle was no good at all. We played 18 holes in less than 3 hours. It was golf.

The first time I did this, last year, it took me about 4 holes to figure out the distances. Chipping is about the same; putting is not quite as good because the ball is lighter.

Could this be the future of golf? Why not. Because you don't hit the ball as far, you don't loose as many. I think that this ball would be a great way to introduce new players to the game. Even young adults, because the misses are more findable.

this is an extreme example, but I can definitely see a rolled back, heavier ball being played and enjoyed on shorter golf courses. And there is nothing wrong with playing it forward, or even more forward.

If we need to put tee markers in the fairways for ladies until we build up new tees for them, I have no problem with that. Where I play, many of the senior tees are low cut areas forward of the regular tees, but not so far up as the ladies tees. They are just closely mown squares in the rough.

Heck, back in the day at the fancy country club, my wife's tees were many times on the front of the same tees that we played. Big deal.

[gvogel]

To expand on my comment, the best players won with the guttie. The best players won with the wound ball, even Jack with the inferior MacGregor ball.

Whatever the ball spec, the best players will figure it out and win. So i say, why not reduce the ball distance and be able to play shorter golf courses? Makes sense to me.

[Z1ggy16]

If possible, this kind of thread should also include age of voter. My guess is most of the people voting yes are old timers.... Kind of like basically 100% of the pro's that complain are previous players from decades ago.

It's so weird how people think a ball roll back will "teach those dang long hitting kids with no skills!!", when they don't realize guys like Brendon Todd will get absolutely brutalized when his good drives leaves him long irons in on every hole. Imagine a final pairing with DJ still hitting it 30-40 yards by him, with a 7i in hand instead of a 9i or PW, and then the shorter hitter has a 5i in hand, with a big carry over water to a tucked pin. Good luck with that.

The only way rolling back the ball would work is if the mechanism is by adding crap tons of spin, otherwise these slower speed guys who will be forced into hitting longer irons into some pretty crazy pins have 0 shot at winning. Rolling back the ball still benefits longer hitters.

What courses need is to soften up fairways, narrow them and grow the rough to borderline unplayable lengths out past the 300-320 range. If you force the "long but wild" hitters to lay up while still allowing the "short" hitters to hit driver, it levels the playing field muchhhhh more than a ball roll back. This also benefits the course's budget as well as there will be less mowing and maintenance needed. Literally a win-win.

[15th Club]

“...Could this be the future of golf?”

The Future of Golf:https://www.amazon.com/Future-Golf-How-Lost-Back/dp/1570614563

[Darth Putter]

Is this going to be one of those deals where NO wins the popular vote, but YES wins the electoral vote?

[adl300]

I can respect your opinion. but i have to disagree. majority of people prefer to see their ball fly. not a lot of people enjoy hitting it 10% shorter. i am glad that you enjoyed your round with the limited ball but that is definitely not for me.

[gvogel]

That is where all of you anti-ball-rollbackers are wrong. It isn't about trying to teach those dang long hitting kids with no skills. They have tremendous skills. Maybe most of them have more skills than Jack Nicklaus and Arnold Palmer. Many are certainly more athletic. It certainly is not about hampering them because they are longer, more athletic and more well rounded because of their amateur competition.

it is all about fitting the modern game into the playing fields that are available. I think that going to 8,000 yard courses is lunatic. Get a ball and maybe a driver COR where a 260 yard drive is huge, and you open up the game to so many more golf courses. Right?

And you and I can move up a tee or two.

[oikos1]

Awesome. Play your rolled back ball whenever you want.

[gvogel]

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation."

[oikos1]

Edit: I know it was early, but changing the parameters of the poll during the poll is just not good research.

[Darth Putter]

The funny part of the way the poll is stated is that the USGA and R&A are the ones making the rules. They can roll it back for their events, but the PGA Tour, The Masters, the PGA Championship and the Ryder Cup could (and in the PGA Tour's case almost certainly will) just say NO.

[gvogel]

Yes, that could certainly happen. But i think that if the USGA rolls back the ball, the guys at ANGC will be front and center ready to adopt it for their tournament. Better than lengthening 13.

[bscinstnct]

 

Ha! The “yes” candidate is making a surprisingly good showing.

 

We may have to wait up and see what happens after all the precincts report in Florida ; )

 

Meantime, I think the thread is picking up because of my offer to disappear for a week if we get 1000 votes ?

[dcfas]

No. But maybe they should stop it from going any farther.

[Darth Putter]