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

[15th Club]

 

It’s now the year 2020. Jack is long retired from competitive golf. He is even retired from the day to day operations of his parent namesake company. He has no golf ball contract, and almost certainly no equipment-manufacturing interest that bears on the current distance debate.

He is voicing opinions about the combination of golf equipment and golf course architecture at elite levels that he has held consistently for decades.

You are mouthing this blather about how Jack “is not above the fray” in this debate, and I am not buying it for even a moment.

You need to tell me what is Jack’s personal and/or financial interest in promoting a ball rollback.

Because I can clearly and concisely tell you what the financial intere$t$ are, of every current Tour professional with a Titleist ball contract.

[trilerian]

So we have changed threads, but still the same discussion... I voted no. Not because I’m entirely against it, but because I don’t think it is needed. Also, I watched a few of the feature groups at the Travelers and there is no way Furyk would have made the cut with 10% less distance. The tournament was enjoyable for me to watch and the course held up fine for being so short.

 

In the end, these guys are professionals. They should go low, they should destroy the courses. They are the very best at this game we love and play to a level most of us will only dream to.

 

As for those who want a rollback for everyone. The decision on that is even easier. Given a choice between making professionals more “human” and me still hitting it as far as I do. Yeah, I don’t want to give up any distance. I’ll continue to watch them bomb and gouge.

[Mcgeeno]

I think something needs to be done. I'm just not 100 percent sure what. I voted a "soft yes" to the rollback haha. I am not sold either way.

 

I don't get as much fun or enjoyment out of watching rock hard runway fairways and 350+ yard bombs though. I like to see a mix. I love it when guys like Webb and Berger are working their way around a tight course and hitting to the proper quadrants of a green or leaving themselves the perfect angle to a tight pin. I have no desire to watch the PGA extend out Majors to 8000 yards.

If I had my way I would add a sliver of first cut rough and then grow out the rough to 6 inches or more. Make the native areas and errant shots really penalizing. Narrow the fairway corridors. The guys who hit the fairway are rewarded. The ones who don't are penalized.

[clevited]

You could do with a change of perspective. Read your own posts. You are not speaking with any kind of logic. You dismiss tour players for having contracts with a ball manufacturer that may or may not lose market share in the event a wholesale ball change is mandated, while admitting a retired tour player that owns a ball company that could stand a chance to gain market share from the same ball change mandate.

You throw out an anonymous poll of players because it doesn't fit your perspective, you throw out any outspoken player sponsored by a ball manufacturer unless they support a roll back. If they support a roll back then obviously they are speaking from the heart, or so it seems you feel they are by what you say.

How about we throw out all of these past and present tour players, the golf architects etc, and just focus on the people that actually keep the sport relevant and the courses in business. I am all for that if you are, but something tells me you won't be.

[ThinkingPlus]

He is a lawyer and is conducting a debate. So that means logic and the truth have nothing to do with it. It is all about half-truths, obfuscation, and avoiding discussion areas where his arguments are weak.

[15th Club]

So that’s what it comes down to? You think that the trivial, minuscule, vanity Nicklaus golf ball branding (I don’t think the do any manufacturing at all) is what is behind Jack’s rollback advocacy?

The nice thing is that Jack addressed that directly. When in a past interview Jack accused Titleist of “owning the game,” Jack also said that Titleist “has the best product,” and that after any rollback, he thinks Titleist will still have the best product as well as the number one market share.

 

[clevited]

I think that, and ego have to be taken into account absolutely. He has a stake in the golf industry outside of just the love for the game. If you dismiss any anonymous tour player poll, you pretty much have to dismiss his comments as well.

[15th Club]

Did you have a direct question for me, sport?

[ThinkingPlus]

Of course not counselor. There is nothing you know that I have need of.

[15th Club]

Then you can leave me out of your pathetic **** passive-aggressive ****.

Please.

 

[storm319]

You are greatly exaggerating what these endorsement deals are worth (especially with Acushnet). With exception to a handful of extreme cases (ex: Tiger, Phil, Rory), the vast majority of tour players make far more money on the course than they do in equipment related endorsements and we have continued to see those amounts decline over the past few years (as well as a drastic reduction in "tee up" money opportunities).

In your hypothetical scenario for Tiger, that maybe would have had more opportunities to win in the past decade, but he likely would have been less successful early in his career.

As for Jack, more than anything he is just an out of touch old man. Here are some examples:https://www.golfchannel.com/news/jack-nicklaus-eager-help-usga-rein-golf-ball-distance#:~:text=%E2%80%9CYou%20can%20start%20with%20Titleist,opposed%20to%20any%20roll%20back.

"Nicklaus would like to see the USGA and R&A roll back the distance today’s ball flies by 20 percent. He said that would put driving distances back to what they were in the mid-‘90s"

-2019 PGA Tour average for measured driving holes was 293 yards. He is proposing a rollback that would result in an average drive (293 x .80 = 234 yards) that is 23 yards shorter than it was in 1980 (257 yards, first year stat was officially measured).

"Nicklaus said he would like to see golf courses and golf balls rated, so that different courses could be played with different rated balls. For example, a ball rolled back “70 percent” would fit courses rated for that ball. He said players could still play those courses with a 100 percent ball, but handicapping could be factored into the game so players could compete using differently rated balls."

-This is literally one of the dumbest, most convoluted suggestions I have ever seen.

 

Also, in his interview at the Honda in 2018 he mentioned pace of play more than anything in terms of his reasoning. His perception is that the length of the course is the primary driver in how long it takes to play, however far more time is spent on/around the green where length has little bearing (especially on tour).

[ThinkingPlus]

LOL! Counselor, it's not like you to lose your temper. That's not how to win a debate.

[Titleist99]

You do realize the PGATOUR just played a course 6841 yards, right? That's a far cry from 8000 yards wouldn't you say. Oh wait, it doesn't fit your narrative, never mind......

[bscinstnct]

Gonna give this a time out ; )

[bscinstnct]

Ok, hope we all had a nice dinner and relaxin.

 

Some good discussion, points of view, history, here.

 

But let’s remember. Getting perturbed on the Internet forum is just silly.

 

Unless, of course, somebody talk bad about Tigerrrrr!

 

That TW crack me up sayin he for ball roll back now that he like Brad Faxon off the tee ?

 

*i can talk bad bout TW, of course ; )

[clevited]

Eh, to be fair, it does suck to get ganged up on in forums, I don't really blame him for getting a little upset, but at the same time.....

I know the feeling.

[oikos1]

Of course he "missed" the point. Actually, maybe a more accurate assessment would be he is ignoring the point because it gets in the way of his argument. Retired, eh? No family interests at all? Sure.

[MattyO1984]

It’s an interesting question as to whether or not they should do it but the reason why it is to be done hold different weight for me.

 

If the balls are to be made 10% shorter to allow older courses to stick around then OK, I get why people would make that argument. That some classic courses are obsolete or on the road to becoming obsolete is a great shame. From a TV viewer perspective, I would rather watch a tournament at Merion than the latest TPC monstrosity which looks exactly the same as the last one.

 

If it is to get at the guys that are absolutely bombing it then I am not sure that makes as much sense as robbing them of 10% isn’t really going to have that much of an impact. It’s going to have an impact more on the shorter hitters. If we take 10% off Brian Gay for example, are there going to be Par 4’s that he can’t reach any longer?

 

This might be totally stupid but it is something that I have thought about. If they are concerned that too many guys are knocking it 320 plus why not just get rid of the fairway after 320 yards and then re-introduce it at 380 yards? At the 1997 Ryder Cup, they had a massive strip of thick rough on the fairway. The idea was that it would stop some guys from taking driver and hitting it as hard as they can. If they wanted to go for the green in two they had to knock something to keep them out of the rough and then they were left with a long iron to a tiny green with water in front. Was it slightly crude? Yes. Was it effective? You bet your ass it was. I genuinely would have no problem if they were to try that on Tour. The longer hitters would still have an advantage because they would be hitting less club than the short hitter but it would reintroduce something of a more even playing field.

[Soloman1]

So let's put the shoe on the other foot. Should the ball be allowed to go 10% more?

[CAT GOLFER]

The ball is fine, but the course layouts aren’t. Let the grass grow and decrease green sizes. I say this from a PGA perspective which I believe was the intent of the question.

[ChillyDipper]

Who would benefit from that?

[Valtiel]

 

[braincramp52]

Personally I don't care what they do to the Pro Tour. Just don't mess with the other 99.5% of golfers. One thing I do know. If the powers that be try to roll back the ball, there's gonna be some awful rich lawyers running around.

[JohnnyCashForever]

It doesn't sound that crazy. If a British Open course can have internal out-of-bounds, having a designated driving area is not too much of a stretch from there. Marking it with stakes or whatever would be a pain. Perhaps an augmented reality video display could be used to color code the DDA. The DDA would be kind of similar to having 6in rough but slightly different. With 6in rough, you'd chop out and be 50-100 yards closer to the green. With the DDA, you incur the penalty but do not get the extra 50-100 yards. However, you might have a perfect lie since rough may not be necessary with DDA penalties. You could have a course with all fairway length grass. It opens up some interesting possibilities for course strategy and course set-up.

[klebs01]

That might be one of the worst ideas I’ve heard. That’s not golf. I would stop playing or watching if that happened. If you want a pure test of execution of a prescribed shot just create your own game like top golf or on a launch monitor.

[bigred90gt]

Speaking to the last paragraph, did you ever consider the notion that possibly, maybe, it is simply because they dont like the idea of a rolled back ball? I know that concept may be hard for you to grasp, but give it a shot champ. We're pulling for you.

[bigred90gt]

So, because YOU say it is false, makes it false?

 

You never disappoint my man.

[15th Club]

Sure, sport. I think it is a combination. Of perhaps three things. One, they have been essentially bribed by their endorsement deals. Two, they are dumb. Dumb about architecture an history. Three, they are the kind of millennial dopes who like being contrarian to what they perceive as traditional administrative powers in golf.

I don't know; sure, there may be some current Tour players who just have an honest opinion on the subject. I'd like to see them interviewed in depth by a Geoff Shackelford and articulate it for themselves. Answer all the questions.

I didn't start this. I repeatedly said that it was an unfortunate direction for the debate. But as it always happens on these forums and on this topic, somebody wants to weigh in with how the rollback proposals are all about older golfers wanting to somehow punish younger, fitter golfers. Picking on Nicklaus. Which prompts me to write about the current Tour players' endorsement deals making them absolutely incredible on the topic.

[SheriffBooth]

Shutting this down now. We'll review for appropriate discipline.

 

/thread