What's coming next from the USGA and R&A...

[ivygynonc]

4 hours ago, bladehunter said:

I agree. But a very large part of that parity is the equipment.  

There was parity before Jack and there was parity before Tiger...  There is alway "parity" before the next phenom takes root.   I for one am excited to see who that next phenom is.  

[ivygynonc]

2 hours ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Tiger, at 43 years old, with a dilapidated pair of legs and a light switch plate screwed to his back

 

Quickly rose within months from #1200 in the world to #5

 

Won the Tour Championship against the uber-golfers

 

And beat them all at Augusta 

 

After basically a 2 year layoff during which he was on drugs and couldn’t even walk.

 

 

Imagine what TW 1.0 would do to these chumps?

 

; )

 

Here. I mean, TW used to do this week in and week out

 

 

 

 

 

exactly.  

 

[clevited]

7 hours ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Nice. Yeah, pro golfers have stupid skills, they can work a ball like an MLB pitcher. The current crop is as talented as has ever been out there.

 

But if you look at owgr, there’s nobody there with close to TW 1.0 game.

 

You got DJ at #1. Consider how huge the gap is between DJ and TW 1.0

 

In fact, DJ said it best ; )

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tiger inspired many of these guys to play.  Of course they are going to say that.  I actually think when Tiger wasn't playing, there was less enthusiasm from these newer guys to compete.  At least that is what I felt.  He is like a father in a way to a lot of these guys.  I think they have realized Tiger is still great, but he isn't a machine.  He has some physical setbacks that he has largely overcome.  Don't forget the mental and emotional set backs from his messy divorce.  Tiger's biggest asset I felt, was his drive to win.  You can have all the skills in the world but i you don't have the drive to win and the focus needed, you will just not dominate.  Look at Rory, has the skills, not the drive.  He has said it so himself multiple times I think.

[Sean2]

12 hours ago, bladehunter said:

Before Covid I didn’t see growth at all. I saw decline.  By a lot.  
 

I’m on my courses competition committee which includes handicaps and membership drives ( now).  Our biggest talk each year is how to gain new members to replace the ones dying.  We are a semi private that sees loads of public play.  So survival isn’t the issue. The issue is getting participants for events.   It’s literally $100 a month family membership which includes unlimited play 15% off pro shop where titleist TM and Wilson is sold.   And range.   it’s a laid back place.  People just don’t really want to do the work to play this game.  
After Covid.   We are doing so many public rounds that I can’t get out alone on a weekday afternoon to just chill or take my kid out.  It’s walk to wall.  We’ve replaced the entire cartpath , and re roofed the cart and maintenance barns paid in full just off this summers take.  It’s nuts how many more rounds we’re doing compared to last year.  Close to double.  
 

 

Now.  I don’t agree with you on the overall snooty attitude.   Some places yes.  Usually the upper crust joints are a bit much for even me.  I’m as blue collar as they come.  But. The majority simply provide a place where appearance and actions are expected to be cleaned up.  And I prefer that.   The world has plenty of truck stops.  The club house doesn’t have to be boom boxes , wife  beaters and denim.  That’s the charm in my opinion.   Dress like somebody , act like somebody and be treated like somebody.   Which is how most of the world works.  Those who buck that usually are attention seekers who complain when  they get what they are asking for.  I have a brother who is just this. We were raised in the same place.  Golfs clean expectations are just fine.  We can’t dumb down everything . 
 

and when you do find a truly snooty place , by all means call it out.  I have.  But it’s rare. Generally when you’re in a spot where you feel uncomfortable, it’s you’re own insecurities that cause it.  And I’m speaking about myself.  I came from a house that thought golf was for rich folks.  Which is how I came to work at a course In my youth and  never play the game.  But later I found out the truth was , that idea was wrong.  It was my own self holding me back.  

 

by all means fire that list off.  

 

 

Maybe some high-end private clubs are like that, but I haven't witnessed that kind of "snootiness". My home course, though private, is fairly middle class, as are the local municipals.

 

I have noticed a lot more activity on golf courses during the week, no doubt due to people staying/working from home. Before Covid I could just show up on any weekday and get out and play, now I have to have a tee time, and I need to make that well in advance. 

[bladehunter]

7 hours ago, ivygynonc said:

There was parity before Jack and there was parity before Tiger...  There is alway "parity" before the next phenom takes root.   I for one am excited to see who that next phenom is.  

Will never be another.  No room.  That’s my entire gripe in a small nutshell.  Tiger is the last samurai.  

[Sean2]

45 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

Tiger inspired many of these guys to play.  Of course they are going to say that.  I actually think when Tiger wasn't playing, there was less enthusiasm from these newer guys to compete.  At least that is what I felt.  He is like a father in a way to a lot of these guys.  I think they have realized Tiger is still great, but he isn't a machine.  He has some physical setbacks that he has largely overcome.  Don't forget the mental and emotional set backs from his messy divorce.  Tiger's biggest asset I felt, was his drive to win.  You can have all the skills in the world but i you don't have the drive to win and the focus needed, you will just not dominate.  Look at Rory, has the skills, not the drive.  He has said it so himself multiple times I think.

His drive to win, along with his mental toughness. All the professionals are great golfers. I think what defines the top tier is their mental toughness and unwavering belief in themselves. 

[clevited]

28 minutes ago, Sean2 said:

His drive to win, along with his mental toughness. All the professionals are great golfers. I think what defines the top tier is their mental toughness and unwavering belief in themselves. 

I think Bryson may be starting to get that unwavering belief.  He gets mocked a lot due to his methods among other things. He might just have a big enough chip on his shoulder to go on a significant winning run in the months to come.

[smashdn]

DJ, one of the longest guys on tour, carrying it 275 and total around 290-300 is about where I think the equipment should get you.  300 yards should be the 100mph fastball.  Doable but a very, very rare and impressive feat.

 

So, yeah, approximate the playing characteristics of persimmon and I think the game will be in a better place.

[milesgiles]

23 minutes ago, smashdn said:

DJ, one of the longest guys on tour, carrying it 275 and total around 290-300 is about where I think the equipment should get you.  300 yards should be the 100mph fastball.  Doable but a very, very rare and impressive feat.

 

So, yeah, approximate the playing characteristics of persimmon and I think the game will be in a better place.

 

3/4” tee max would solve that next week. And if half the pros knew what side their bread was buttered, they’d be begging for it 

[bladehunter]

1 minute ago, milesgiles said:

 

3/4” tee max would solve that next week. And if half the pros knew what side their bread was buttered, they’d be begging for it 

You know.  That’s an incredibly good point.  I picked up more carry from a long tee and hovering the driver last year than all/any other equipment changes.  3/4 max height would absolutely work.  

[smashdn]

Except there are guys hitting their 3 woods as far as he is hitting that persimmon driver.  I hit my modern three wood on average farther than my persimmon drivers.  Much higher flight as well.

[clevited]

37 minutes ago, smashdn said:

DJ, one of the longest guys on tour, carrying it 275 and total around 290-300 is about where I think the equipment should get you.  300 yards should be the 100mph fastball.  Doable but a very, very rare and impressive feat.

 

So, yeah, approximate the playing characteristics of persimmon and I think the game will be in a better place.

 

Start at 2:15.  You would have to roll it back much further.  I have made this point a million times.  If you want to correct the "problem" you have to account for guys like this because that is the player that will become the new elite on tour.

 

Edit:  This is precisely why 20% is pretty close to what would be required to get the long term effects that USGA/R&A are after.  Anything else, is pointless.  Then you have to think, ok, 20% is the number, is that acceptable to the golfing population?  The answer is HECK NO.

 

I predict if they decide to do anything, it will be suggesting golf courses require a special ball to be used for their tournaments, or that they slowly roll back the ball each year, over the course of like 10 years.  I am not ok with either of those, but at least the second option wouldn't be sudden and they could achieve the amount of rollback necessary to actually accomplish their goal.  They at least mitigate the potential chaos and mass exodus that could occur if they did a sudden huge change.

 

 

Edited October 21, 2020 by clevited

[bscinstnct]

2 hours ago, bladehunter said:

Will never be another.  No room.  That’s my entire gripe in a small nutshell.  Tiger is the last samurai.  

 

[bscinstnct]

3 hours ago, clevited said:

 

Tiger inspired many of these guys to play.  Of course they are going to say that.  I actually think when Tiger wasn't playing, there was less enthusiasm from these newer guys to compete.  At least that is what I felt.  He is like a father in a way to a lot of these guys.  I think they have realized Tiger is still great, but he isn't a machine.  He has some physical setbacks that he has largely overcome.  Don't forget the mental and emotional set backs from his messy divorce.  Tiger's biggest asset I felt, was his drive to win.  You can have all the skills in the world but i you don't have the drive to win and the focus needed, you will just not dominate.  Look at Rory, has the skills, not the drive.  He has said it so himself multiple times I think.

 

Yeah but DJ know that’s just flat out true cause he’s a little older and saw TW in his prime.

 

 

But, the JTs or Jordan’s never did in person. To them TW 1.0 was just some legend on TV. But by the time they went pro, TW was pretty much washed up. 
 

Tiger stunk! These kids would see Tiger and slowly but surely, they started to think,
 

“Well, sure, Tiger was great back *then. But how good was he really?”

 

I remember a press conference, can’t remember which, maybe in 2018 at the beginning of TW comeback, everyone thought TW was still washed up. And Justin Thomas said something to TW on camera that was not outwardly disrespectful but clearly, to me, something nobody would say to TW in that way in his prime.

 

But then,

 

Tiger goes and beats the crap out of all of them at 43 years old!

 

Wins the Masters, the most coveted major amongst Tour pros. Wins his 5th when Rory, DJ, JT, BK, Bryson, got nada, zero, zilch.

 

Now they get it ; )

 

Was kind of like when Tony just got out of the hospital and everybody thought they could act tough around him...but then Tony beat up that guy in front of all of them and they were like,

 

 

 

 

[smashdn]

26 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

Start at 2:15.  You would have to roll it back much further.  I have made this point a million times.  If you want to correct the "problem" you have to account for guys like this because that is the player that will become the new elite on tour.

 

 

I don't think so.  And here is why.  So what if he is the next tour player.  If he is able to do that with that equipment more power to him.  But I have watched enough of his videos to have formed the opinion that he can't.  He isn't on tour now and doesn't look like he will be given the rest of his game.  He has to give up some of the distance via re-focusing his game on the other parts he is not as good at.  He is a good golfer but he is not PGA Tour good.  I hesitate to even put him in KF Tour caliber.  His game is like BDC's but with much worse short game and putting and some really questionable course management.  (Check his round at Firestone.  How many times did he under club?)

 

There are always going to be guys who crank the ball out there long distances because they are swinging fast.  If you can do it with essentially persimmon tech good for you, you deserve to hit it that far.  But it will be shorter than today.  The norm will be around 280 for a "long" drive and on most courses, as they are configured today, that makes sense from an architectural merit standpoint.

 

But honestly, if the guys can get distance with rolled back specifications due to optimizing swing and lifting weights, etc. I am cool with that.  

 

 

[clevited]

17 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Yeah but DJ know that’s just flat out true cause he’s a little older and saw TW in his prime.

 

 

But, the JTs or Jordan’s never did in person. To them TW 1.0 was just some legend on TV. But by the time they went pro, TW was pretty much washed up. 
 

Tiger stunk! These kids would see Tiger and slowly but surely, they started to think,
 

“Well, sure, Tiger was great back *then. But how good was he really?”

 

I remember a press conference, can’t remember which, maybe in 2018 at the beginning of TW comeback, everyone thought TW was still washed up. And Justin Thomas said something to TW on camera that was not outwardly disrespectful but clearly, to me, something nobody would say to TW in that way in his prime.

 

But then,

 

Tiger goes and beats the crap out of all of them at 43 years old!

 

Wins the Masters, the most coveted major amongst Tour pros. Wins his 5th when Rory, DJ, JT, BK, Bryson, got nada, zero, zilch.

 

Now they get it ; )

 

Was kind of like when Tony just got out of the hospital and everybody thought they could act tough around him...but then Tony beat up that guy in front of all of them and they were like,

 

 

 

 

 

Sure showed them at the US Open.  

 

But seriously, I do hope he proves me wrong and dominates again.  43 isn't old at all by most standards.  Phil is 50 and has plenty of skill and power, he is just, well, Phil.  

 

I do predict if he dominates again, it won't be his skill set nearly as much as his mojo.

[Dr. Block]

31 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

Sure showed them at the US Open.  

 

But seriously, I do hope he proves me wrong and dominates again.  43 isn't old at all by most standards.  Phil is 50 and has plenty of skill and power, he is just, well, Phil.  

 

I do predict if he dominates again, it won't be his skill set nearly as much as his mojo.

All you've done in recent posts aside from sharing some goofy commercials, is refer back to this years US Open. For someone who grew up a Tiger fan you sure aren't grasping the magnitude of what he did in that stretch that included the near miss at the British Open, the Fed-ex final and then the Masters the following spring.  That wasn't mojo, that wasn't his galleries, that was the treasured remains of one the greatest golf games we'll ever see coaxed back out of a man with a broken body.  If you think Tiger's biggest asset was his will to win, then you don't understand the game of golf very well.  He had a level of mastery over the game that's without peer and thanks to modern equipment won't ever be needed again.  

 

I bet if you took all these young guns (that you are trying to say are superior by skill comparison), sat them in a room and asked them their opinion on this nonsense, the majority of them would agree with us.  

Edited October 21, 2020 by Dr. Block

[clevited]

8 minutes ago, Dr. Block said:

All you've done in recent posts aside from sharing some goofy commercials, is refer back to this years US Open. For someone who grew up a Tiger fan you sure aren't grasping the magnitude of what he did in that stretch that included the near miss at the British Open, the Fed-ex final and then the Masters the following spring.  That wasn't mojo, that wasn't his galleries, that was the treasured remains of one the greatest golf games we'll ever see coaxed back out of a man with a broken body.  If you think Tiger's biggest asset was his will to win, then you don't understand the game of golf very well.  He had a level of mastery over the game that's without peer and thanks to modern equipment won't ever be needed again.  

 

I bet if you took all these young guns (that you are trying to say are superior by skill comparison), sat them in a room and asked them their opinion on this nonsense, the majority of them would agree with us.  

 

Say what you want, I stand by what I have said about the skills and talent of modern day golfers.  Tiger was amazing, is amazing, but he had crap competition and played less difficult courses back then.  

 

You don't have to agree with me, nobody does, but you ain't changing my viewpoint on this.  I am a realist, I don't glorify things beyond reality.  I don't live in the past.

[Dr. Block]

1 minute ago, clevited said:

 

Say what you want, I stand by what I have said about the skills and talent of modern day golfers.  Tiger was amazing, is amazing, but he had crap competition and played less difficult courses back then.  

 

You don't have to agree with me, nobody does, but you ain't changing my viewpoint on this.  I am a realist, I don't glorify things beyond reality.  I don't live in the past.

He had crap competition.  That's hilarious.  And the only way you've been able to explain it is with the broad statement of parity.   You've basically drawn a non-complimentary conclusion against Tiger and a very significant era of professional golf citing a yet to be identified golfer using skills that are just developing in an era that is still in its infancy.   Solid stuff my man. 

[clevited]

1 minute ago, Dr. Block said:

He had crap competition.  That's hilarious.  And the only way you've been able to explain it is with the broad statement of parity.   You've basically drawn a non-complimentary conclusion against Tiger and a very significant era of professional golf citing a yet to be identified golfer using skills that are just developing in an era that is still in its infancy.   Solid stuff my man. 

 

Man, I can go off on this whole subject if you want and I can very clearly state the facts and observations regarding why I think what i think.  I try not to completely derail threads if at all possible.  Lets agree to disagree and if you want, we can take this conversation to a brand new thread completely about this where I will take the time to explain everything.

[Dr. Block]

You've explained yourself for quite some time on this thread, its become pretty redundant actually.  I agree, lets let it rest.   I'll gladly bow back out again.  But you better wrap your hands and lace em up.  Saying Tiger played against crap competition is going to bring more characters at you then little mac faced in Mike Tyson's punch-out

 

Edited October 21, 2020 by Dr. Block

[clevited]

Just now, Dr. Block said:

You've explained yourself for quite some time on this thread, its become pretty redundant actually.  I agree, lets let it rest. 

 

I just respond to people responding to me, and I haven't even come close to explaining all of why I think today's players are much better than people like you say they are.  You have an agenda to protect an era of golf you loved the most.  You and others completely disregard talent of today's players and talk about the legend that is Tiger.  If you sit down and objectively think about it, I think your mind will change significantly regarding the quality of players today vs years past.  The logic and facts add up and point to the field today being much more stout then ever before.  

 

Note:  If people stop responding to me, I won't respond back.  Then you don't have to see me "explain myself" and I don't have to see you complain or bring up subjective feelings about the skills of players today to further your ball roll back agenda.

[Dr. Block]

Just now, clevited said:

 

I just respond to people responding to me, and I haven't even come close to explaining all of why I think today's players are much better than people like you say they are.  You have an agenda to protect an era of golf you loved the most.  You and others completely disregard talent of today's players and talk about the legend that is Tiger.  If you sit down and objectively think about it, I think your mind will change significantly regarding the quality of players today vs years past.  The logic and facts add up and point to the field today being much more stout then ever before.  

 

Note:  If people stop responding to me, I won't respond back.  Then you don't have to see me "explain myself" and I don't have to see you complain or bring up subjective feelings about the skills of players today to further your ball roll back agenda.

If you read my posts, you'll see I've done none of those things regarding modern players and I support no agenda's.   The only belief I stand behind is the evolution of equipment removing some strategic dimension to the game of golf.  It's the reason I stepped into this thread to begin with.   

[clevited]

17 minutes ago, Dr. Block said:

You've explained yourself for quite some time on this thread, its become pretty redundant actually.  I agree, lets let it rest.   I'll gladly bow back out again.  But you better wrap your hands and lace em up.  Saying Tiger played against crap competition is going to bring more characters at you then little mac faced in Mike Tyson's punch-out

 

 

Bring em on.

[oikos1]

16 hours ago, bladehunter said:

Lol.  What do I have to do with it?  I’ve alwasy compared myself to MY amateur contemporaries.    And if one was to dig , here , I’m quite open about my many shortcomings , both when I’m whining about them and after I conquer them.  ( putter ).  Nobody anywhere can find my trying to claim tour status.  Because it’s never happened.  I’ve only yet begun to learn.  Which is why I feel like my opinion is less biased ( less not without ) compared to most.   I did not play the game before 2014.  But.  I did always watch it.  So I guess in a way I learned from jack same as tiger. ( close to same age )  If that makes any kind of sense?  
 

as for the actual conversation.  Parity on tour.  You guys have agreed before that there are some pros who wouldn’t hit it far enough to keep a card if a substantial rollback were enacted.  Doesn’t that signal t one set of bunched up guys receiving equipment help ?  
 

bottom line is that when you add elements in that make everyone excel , then when compared to each other nobody excels.   Or fewer do.    If you made the game harder , the cream would rise.  Period.  How’s that not make sense ?  
 

 

"If you made the game harder , the cream would rise.  Period.  How’s that not make sense ? "

 

Agree 100% with you.  Makes perfect sense and I think most on both sides would agree. 

 

The debate is more about how to make the game harder for the professional without impacting the amateur. 

[bscinstnct]

29 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

Say what you want, I stand by what I have said about the skills and talent of modern day golfers.  Tiger was amazing, is amazing, but he had crap competition and played less difficult courses back then.  

 

You don't have to agree with me, nobody does, but you ain't changing my viewpoint on this.  I am a realist, I don't glorify things beyond reality.  I don't live in the past.

 

So, how do explain him getting to #5 OWGR so fast at 43 with back fusion and shot knee after a two year layoff?

 

And on TOP of that. Here is owgr when TW hit #5.

 

If TW competition was “crap” back in his day, how do you explain why, with allll the uber-golfers of today... 

 

We see all these old timers, 

 

#4 Justin Rose, #5 Tiger Woods, #12 Matt Kuchar, Paul Casey #15, Adam Scott #17, Bubba Watson # 20, Phil #25

 

Tigerr used to mop the floor of these guys and he basically did it again as well as all the “young guns”....at 43 years old. 

Imagine TW 1.0? 

 

 

 

 

[clevited]

1 minute ago, bscinstnct said:

 

So, how do explain him getting to #5 OWGR so fast at 43 with back fusion and shot knee after a two year layoff?

 

And on TOP of that. Here is owgr when TW hit #5.

 

If TW competition was “crap” back in his day, how do you explain why, with allll the uber-golfers of today... 

 

We see all these old timers, 

 

#4 Justin Rose, #5 Tiger Woods, #12 Matt Kuchar, Paul Casey #15, Adam Scott #17, Bubba Watson # 20, Phil #25

 

Tigerr used to mop the floor of these guys and he basically did it again as well as all the “young guns”....at 43 years old. 

Imagine TW 1.0? 

 

 

 

 

 

Not getting into this here beyond me never saying Tiger was crap, at all, ever.  Don't mix up how I view the field he largely played against in his prime, vs how I view him.  

[bscinstnct]

2 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

Not getting into this here beyond me never saying Tiger was crap, at all, ever.  Don't mix up how I view the field he largely played against in his prime, vs how I view him.  

 

Cool, cl, we just talkin golf ; )

 

I never said you called TW “crap”, I know you’re a fan. 

 

I was referring to this quote you made,

 

“Tiger was amazing, is amazing, but he had crap competition”

[smashdn]

1 hour ago, clevited said:

 

Say what you want, I stand by what I have said about the skills and talent of modern day golfers.  Tiger was amazing, is amazing, but he had crap competition and played less difficult courses back then.  

 

You don't have to agree with me, nobody does, but you ain't changing my viewpoint on this.  I am a realist, I don't glorify things beyond reality.  I don't live in the past.

 

I think this deserves another thread just to discuss the competition.  Probably another to discuss the courses.  

[clevited]

1 minute ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Cool, cl, we just talkin golf ; )

 

I never said you called TW “crap”, I know you’re a fan. 

 

I was referring to this quote you made,

 

“Tiger was amazing, is amazing, but he had crap competition”

 

My apologies, I swear I read "Tiger was crap" in your post.  You didn't ninja change it did ya????  Regardless, lets not get into this.  Maybe i will start a thread or bump an old one.  I am sure there have been plenty on the subject of today's golfer vs ye olden days golfer.