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

[bscinstnct]

9 minutes ago, storm319 said:

 

And make nearly every driver and many fairway metals produced post-2000 non-conforming in the process. Then if regulations are bifurcated, having multiple versions of the same model available at retail to support both high and low COR regulations (similar to the .860 and .830 version of the TM R500 series). Doesn't seem simple to me. Attempting to rollback a single facet in effort to reduce gains caused by multiple facets will have unintended negative consequences. 

 

The lower limit COR drivers would only be mandatory for PGA Tour pros.

 

Everybody else can use what they want ; )

Like the MLB has to use wood bats. Why should pros need massive Titanium drivers and 46” shafts?

I don’t think there will be anything done though. The PGA Tour and the pros won’t allow anything that impacts the money and the tv deals and gate keeps going up. 

 

The game evolves, that’s how it is. 
 

But it’s really some top driving pros like Adam Scott and Rory commenting of how the current driving gear “dumbs” down the skill in driving that makes you think.

 

Although Adam Scott thinks the real solution is to design/set up courses to emphasize more ball working skill off the tee. As opposed to just longer and straighter. The PGA Championship is a great example. Excellent tournament and good mix of players who could compete. 

 

 

 

 

 

[ThinkingPlus]

8 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

The lower limit COR drivers would only be mandatory for PGA Tour pros.

 

Everybody else can use what they want ; )

Like the MLB has to use wood bats. Why should pros need massive Titanium drivers and 46” shafts?

I don’t think there will be anything done though. The PGA Tour and the pros won’t allow anything that impacts the money and the tv deals and gate keeps going up. 

 

The game evolves, that’s how it is. 
 

But it’s really some top driving pros like Adam Scott and Rory commenting of how the current driving gear “dumbs” down the skill in driving that makes you think.

 

Although Adam Scott thinks the real solution is to design/set up courses to emphasize more ball working skill off the tee. As opposed to just longer and straighter. The PGA Championship is a great example. Excellent tournament and good mix of players who could compete. 

 

 

 

 

 

How much are you wanting to Nerf the driver?

[clevited]

1 minute ago, ThinkingPlus said:

How much are you wanting to Nerf the driver?

 

This much I would guess.

 

[QuigleyDU]

51 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

I agree and will add....all a person needs to do is look at the pga tour stats for club head speed. The average of virtually every player is 95% of their fasted recorded swing. They might FEEL like they are going at it 80% but are most assuredly not. 
 

https://www.pgatour.com/content/pgatour/stats/stat.02401.y2020.html

Exactly.. also, go back some years. Did you ever see Greg Norman swing a persimmons? He swung as hard as he could..

 

This isn’t persimmons, but not far from it.

 

he is literally swinging out of his shoes.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEQd-0r5T7c
 

 

Edited October 26, 2020 by QuigleyDU

[HappyGilmoresBoots]

[bscinstnct]

15 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

How much are you wanting to Nerf the driver?

 

TP! What’s happening?

 

Bryson WITB be like, 

 

 

[storm319]

44 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

The lower limit COR drivers would only be mandatory for PGA Tour pros.

 

Everybody else can use what they want ; )

Like the MLB has to use wood bats. Why should pros need massive Titanium drivers and 46” shafts?

I don’t think there will be anything done though. The PGA Tour and the pros won’t allow anything that impacts the money and the tv deals and gate keeps going up. 

 

The game evolves, that’s how it is. 
 

But it’s really some top driving pros like Adam Scott and Rory commenting of how the current driving gear “dumbs” down the skill in driving that makes you think.

 

Although Adam Scott thinks the real solution is to design/set up courses to emphasize more ball working skill off the tee. As opposed to just longer and straighter. The PGA Championship is a great example. Excellent tournament and good mix of players who could compete. 

 

 

 

 

 

It wouldn’t be limited only to the PGA Tour (for which the USGA/R&A don’t have direct authority over). As with the groove rule local condition, a COR rollback would likely be adopted for any professional and elite amateur events (including the LPGA for which I have never seen a player make a course look obsolete). Whether or not OEMs would bring equipment to retail that would conform to the new standard would impact the future of professional golf (potential severe harm to aspiring juniors and amateurs due to lack of availability for conforming equipment and inability to get direct OEM support while maintaining their amateur status). Again there will always be unintended consequences.

[bscinstnct]

19 minutes ago, storm319 said:

It wouldn’t be limited only to the PGA Tour (for which the USGA/R&A don’t have direct authority over). As with the groove rule local condition, a COR rollback would likely be adopted for any professional and elite amateur events (including the LPGA for which I have never seen a player make a course look obsolete). Whether or not OEMs would bring equipment to retail that would conform to the new standard would impact the future of professional golf (potential severe harm to aspiring juniors and amateurs due to lack of availability for conforming equipment and inability to get direct OEM support while maintaining their amateur status). Again there will always be unintended consequences.

 

Yes, I mentioned it’s the PGA Tour and players that would have to support this and they won’t as long as the money/viewers keep flowing in.
 

But, if the tour and players want to “man up” and quit using these giant toasters akin to training wheels ; ) Then....
 

The driver would only be mandated for the pros but, since the ball and rest of the bag would not be affected, it’s the most efficient way. MLB players adjust from metal bats they use their entire lives to wood. Anybody anywhere near good enough to be a pro, or anyone at all for that matter, can get the “new” driver to practice or play with. 

 

 

[storm319]

1 minute ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Yes, I mentioned it’s the PGA Tour and players that would have to support this and they won’t as long as the money/viewers keep flowing in.
 

But, if the tour and players want to “man up” and quit using these giant toasters akin to training wheels ; ) Then....
 

The driver would only be mandated for the pros but, since the ball and rest of the bag would not be affected, it’s the most efficient way. MLB players adjust from metal bats they use their entire lives to wood. Anybody anywhere near good enough to be a pro, or anyone at all for that matter, can get the “new” driver to practice or play with. 

 

 

Baseball and golf are not comparable. Wooden bats are fairly accessible and inexpensive while bifurcated clubs won’t be if it is not profitable for the OEMs (not to mention the regulation is primarily for safety due to the pitchers relative proximity to the batter). 

[Shilgy]

8 hours ago, mahonie said:

Poor design is poor design...those courses don’t tend to stay around too long, particularly if they are unplayable.

 

I’ve said it before, but nobody seems to have noticed. The game is dying in the UK and it’s because the modern game cannot be played on the majority of our courses without it being a vastly diluted experience. I played a course 2 years ago that is in the top 100 courses where I used nothing longer than 7-iron for my second shot and I’m not that long. The tees are at the boundaries of the site and nothing more can be done to make it a proper challenge to modern equipment. Even the shorter guys in our party thought it was nice quality but a bit boring.

 

That’s pretty typical of most of the courses around me. Kids aren’t interested if they can’t bomb driver on every hole so no kids play. Membership at my course has gone from over 600 to less than 200 in the last 10 years. The course owner can’t afford to keep the course going and is looking at mining the sand and gravel that’s left beneath to get something back from nearly 50 years of managing and running it. Our sister course already has planning permission for residential development. You can’t blame the owner...land for residential development is worth £1m/acre and we would all sell a failing business given those terms. Give it another 20 years and most courses will be flattened for houses and golf will become a niche sport played only by the very wealthy at exclusive clubs...again.

 

That is an objective summary of what the problem is. Perhaps that doesn’t matter to you because what I’ve described doesn’t really have an impact on how you play and look at the game, but it’s a very selfish and short-sighted view that is killing the game in the country that gave you the game in the first place.

If the club was doing much better the owner would still be better served to take £1m per acre. 

[Shilgy]

2 hours ago, QuigleyDU said:

Exactly.. also, go back some years. Did you ever see Greg Norman swing a persimmons? He swung as hard as he could..

 

This isn’t persimmons, but not far from it.

 

he is literally swinging out of his shoes.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEQd-0r5T7c
 

 

If this is 80% .......can you imagine?

 

 

 

[storm319]

8 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

If the club was doing much better the owner would still be better served to take £1m per acre. 

Exactly. The reality is that the land that the majority of courses on planet Earth occupy are more valuable as something other than a golf course and no amount of regulatory rollback is going to change that (even more so in the UK which is far more densely populated than the US).

[Shilgy]

50 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Yes, I mentioned it’s the PGA Tour and players that would have to support this and they won’t as long as the money/viewers keep flowing in.
 

But, if the tour and players want to “man up” and quit using these giant toasters akin to training wheels ; ) Then....
 

The driver would only be mandated for the pros but, since the ball and rest of the bag would not be affected, it’s the most efficient way. MLB players adjust from metal bats they use their entire lives to wood. Anybody anywhere near good enough to be a pro, or anyone at all for that matter, can get the “new” driver to practice or play with. 

 

 

Just the driver you say? Well heck, I will just paint a big 3 on my toaster on a stick. 🤔

[DaveMc82]

3 hours ago, storm319 said:

Exactly. The reality is that the land that the majority of courses on planet Earth occupy are more valuable as something other than a golf course and no amount of regulatory rollback is going to change that (even more so in the UK which is far more densely populated than the US).

The biggest factor of land prices in the UK is the stupid notion that everything needs to revolve around London and proximity to it!

 

London is a dirty stinking pit full of little wannabe gang rats intent on ruining everyone’s lives. On top of that you have the “wealthy” who got the most part are just better dressed scum with attitudes to match. If any positive can come from COVID it’ll be that the rest of the UK away from a London becomes more desirable to live in. There’s plenty of empty retail and industrial space that can be converted to residential for a fraction of the cost. 

 

The previous poster who claimed their UK course is short, boring and obsolete sounds to me like they WANT to hit driver all day but can’t. I bet the scoring round that course is far tighter bunched than on championship layouts!
 

I wouldn’t be blaming dwindling memberships on the game though. Too many clubs have memberships full of people who make newer or younger people feel very unwelcome. The trend of single year members who leave due to this is huge across the UK. Rubbish attitudes from members and clubs alike have alienated people to the point of them playing nomadically.
 

Much to the horror of long term members, we have really pressed with integration of new members and helping them find groups. Funnily enough on our ‘shorter’ 6000 yard course, the challenge of being in position off the tee negates any distance debates. Par 70 and course record by a multi European Tour winner is 64. 

[milesgiles]

7 hours ago, QuigleyDU said:

Exactly.. also, go back some years. Did you ever see Greg Norman swing a persimmons? He swung as hard as he could..

 

This isn’t persimmons, but not far from it.

 

he is literally swinging out of his shoes.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEQd-0r5T7c
 

 

 

He was number one in the world and possibly the best driver of a ball ever..

 

shorter tee and minimum loft avoids bifurcation.

[bscinstnct]

10 hours ago, Shilgy said:

Just the driver you say? Well heck, I will just paint a big 3 on my toaster on a stick. 🤔

 

Shilgy show up like,

 

Whats the problem?

 

 

[disco111]

OEM's are going to put forth new 600cc drivers and both the USGA and R&A will bless this as a solution to the distance debate. The 600cc head will decrease the speed of the swing, due to wind friction across the larger face and thus the ball will automaticly be rolled back. The OEM's will sell them like hot cakes,because some brain thrust came up with an outstanding ad compaign and name for the club. You heard it here first!!!! So now we can go on to bigger and better debates, like should Tiger and DeShampo team up for the 2 man tournaments or should players be allowed to re-putt after missing the first for we all know that the second putt is always the best......

Quote

 

 

[QuigleyDU]

6 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

He was number one in the world and possibly the best driver of a ball ever..

 

shorter tee and minimum loft avoids bifurcation.

Possibly, I am not sure that is true or not. But maybe. But the idea that golfers now are swinging all out and that in previous times they were not out of fear is unabashedly false. We can discuss the tools being more accommodating now. But the idea that old generation golfers swung more controlled is just wrong.. 

 

Those guys were swinging out of their shoes as well. From the beginning of golfing time golfers wanted more distance.. To pretend otherwise is just silly.. It may be rewarded more so now than previously but I am not even sure that is true.. 

Think about Jack, he won a ton maybe primarily because he was longer than everyone and hit that towering fade that he could attack every green with.. He probably more so than anyone else created the movement to power and away from a "ground game".. 

 

If you have ever played a Jack course (there are few in my area). They all have some similar features. They are long, have decent landing areas to accommodate aggressiveness off the tee. Then green that requires high fades to be carried all the way to the green due to false fronts etc.. 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 26, 2020 by QuigleyDU

[milesgiles]

19 minutes ago, QuigleyDU said:

Possibly, I am not sure that is true or not. But maybe. But the idea that golfers now are swinging all out and that in previous times they were not out of fear is unabashedly false. We can discuss the tools being more accommodating now. But the idea that old generation golfers swung more controlled is just wrong.. 

 

Those guys were swinging out of their shoes as well. 

 

 

 

 

 

The majority certainly did not swing out of their shoes, nothing like today. You’re referencing two of the greatest ever and one who never won outside of Japan..would we ever see an O Connor, a Player, a Purtzer, much less a Moe Norman today? 

 

fact is most tournaments now are not of any any real importance and we could easily try my idea any week we wanted. A min lift of (say) 10 degrees won’t affect hardly any amateurs and a max 3/4” tee and smaller clubhead would benefit them as they would need some basic understanding of technique to hit it properly. 

 

Adjusting the ball or CoR limits is more problematic. 

[QuigleyDU]

1 minute ago, milesgiles said:

 

The majority certainly did not swing out of their shoes, nothing like today. You’re referencing two of the greatest ever and one who never won outside of Japan..would we ever see an O Connor, a Player, a Purtzer, much less a Moe Norman today? 

 

fact is most tournaments now are not of any any real importance and we could easily try my idea any week we wanted. A min lift of (say) 10 degrees won’t affect hardly any amateurs and a max 3/4” tee and smaller clubhead would benefit them as they would need some basic understanding of technique to hit it properly. 

 

Adjusting the ball or CoR limits is more problematic. 

Moe Norman?? Seriously?? He was more circus act than golfer. He drank more coke than anyone possibly ever.. 

 

You can knock Jumbo if you want. But there is a very big reason he stayed in Japan and it was not because he was not good enough. In the 90s no golfer made more money than him. No one even came close... He simply stayed where the money was for him. He was an amazing golfer. He was teeing it high with a low spinning ball and swinging 5 degrees up on it before anyone else even thought about doing that.. 

[storm319]

2 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

The majority certainly did not swing out of their shoes, nothing like today. You’re referencing two of the greatest ever and one who never won outside of Japan..would we ever see an O Connor, a Player, a Purtzer, much less a Moe Norman today? 

 

fact is most tournaments now are not of any any real importance and we could easily try my idea any week we wanted. A min lift of (say) 10 degrees won’t affect hardly any amateurs and a max 3/4” tee and smaller clubhead would benefit them as they would need some basic understanding of technique to hit it properly. 

 

Adjusting the ball or CoR limits is more problematic. 

 

The majority of PGA Tour players today are also not swinging out of their shoes, they just swing faster on average than their predecessors (equipment is a factor mainly in the reduction of static weight of the average driver vs 50 years ago).

 

We have discussed this before when you brought this up in another thread but you really don't seem to comprehend how short 3/4" really is. Once the tee is stably in the ground at that length, you may as well not have a tee at all (which I believe was Nick Price's suggestion to the distance debate). Granted a no tee regulation could be circumvented with the Laura Davies approach which would also be very damaging to the tee boxes if it became the norm. 

[Bubbtubbs]

12 minutes ago, QuigleyDU said:

Moe Norman?? Seriously?? He was more circus act than golfer. He drank more coke than anyone possibly ever.. 

 

You can knock Jumbo if you want. But there is a very big reason he stayed in Japan and it was not because he was not good enough. In the 90s no golfer made more money than him. No one even came close... He simply stayed where the money was for him. He was an amazing golfer. He was teeing it high with a low spinning ball and swinging 5 degrees up on it before anyone else even thought about doing that.. 

Moe Norman is a real modern tragedy. So much natural talent struggling against equally giant personal problems.

[QuigleyDU]

2 minutes ago, Bubbtubbs said:

Moe Norman is a real modern tragedy. So much natural talent struggling against equally giant personal problems.

For sure.. Not all his fault. Obviously autistic or the like... Created some amazing skills but lacked in areas that would truly make those applicable. 

[physasst]

I think course design is where they need to focus. Not longer, but more challenging. There was a course here a while back that was challenging. Links style set up, the second hole was a perfect example. Par 5. Had a creek that was only maybe 10 yards wide, but the valley the creek ran through was 25 yards wide. They put it right at 225...so you had trouble all across the fairway from 225-250. Now, PGA pros will cover that distance, not even to mention the average WRXer, but most amateurs struggle. For me, if I am hitting driver well (which is another story) I can carry about 255-260. If I am not, it's more like 240...also, no trees and windy. Wind was a factor. I always enjoyed that hole because it made you really think. Can I cover the 250? No, well now I'm laying up short, and because it starts at 225, I can't hit 3 wood, and if it's dry, I can't even hit hybrid because it might run in...which had happened to me when it was dry and running fast. So now, I'm looking at teeing up with a 4 iron, which means NO shot of getting there in 2 (526 yards)....

 

I think more of the PGA courses should put water, rocky creeks like Sherwood, etc. at yardages that make pros have to think...tall rough isn't enough...see Bryson at Winged Foot, it needs to be more penal....

 

I don't think they should nerf equipment at all. 

 

M

[Soloman1]

Jumbo didn't like staying in Western hotels, eating western food, hearing the sound of English, didn't speak English and simply did not like life or culture outside Japan.

 

He was so important to golf in Japan in his heyday that if he didn't play in a tournament, they wouldn't even bother to televise it. Only Tiger later on had the same type of devotion from fans. Everyone, including fans, the networks, the tour and sponsors wanted him to win.

 

He just like Nicklaus or Tiger in that he was consistently longest in his era. They would mow the rough down in areas where he would land his drives just to give him an advantage, hoping he would win. And he was a great shotmaker who could move a balata around any direction or trajectory.

 

He had been a professional baseball pitcher, so he was an athlete with great hands and feel. He turned to professional golf at 23 years old.

 

Unfortunately, his wife was a lousy business woman and he was worse. He's been broke for a decade from all of his business failures, even after a dozen years as leading money winner on the Japanese Tour.

[Soloman1]

2 hours ago, QuigleyDU said:

Moe Norman?? Seriously?? He was more circus act than golfer.

I don't think circus acts win 55 tournaments on any tour. I knew him, played with him a few times and Moe was just Moe - a nice guy if you were nice to him and just trying to survive in the world. Leave him alone.

[Dr. Block]

3 hours ago, physasst said:

I think course design is where they need to focus. Not longer, but more challenging. There was a course here a while back that was challenging. Links style set up, the second hole was a perfect example. Par 5. Had a creek that was only maybe 10 yards wide, but the valley the creek ran through was 25 yards wide. They put it right at 225...so you had trouble all across the fairway from 225-250. Now, PGA pros will cover that distance, not even to mention the average WRXer, but most amateurs struggle. For me, if I am hitting driver well (which is another story) I can carry about 255-260. If I am not, it's more like 240...also, no trees and windy. Wind was a factor. I always enjoyed that hole because it made you really think. Can I cover the 250? No, well now I'm laying up short, and because it starts at 225, I can't hit 3 wood, and if it's dry, I can't even hit hybrid because it might run in...which had happened to me when it was dry and running fast. So now, I'm looking at teeing up with a 4 iron, which means NO shot of getting there in 2 (526 yards)....

 

I think more of the PGA courses should put water, rocky creeks like Sherwood, etc. at yardages that make pros have to think...tall rough isn't enough...see Bryson at Winged Foot, it needs to be more penal....

 

I don't think they should nerf equipment at all. 

 

M

Agreed.  It's my opinion the PGA Tour could choose to play trickier courses more often. They might find it's not nearly as detrimental to their distance agenda and the marketability it brings at their thinking probably dictates now.  It might even be the answer to all the issues we've been discussing. 

[smashdn]

16 hours ago, storm319 said:

Baseball and golf are not comparable. Wooden bats are fairly accessible and inexpensive while bifurcated clubs won’t be if it is not profitable for the OEMs (not to mention the regulation is primarily for safety due to the pitchers relative proximity to the batter). 

 

I don't think that is true.

 

First and foremost MLB, MiLB, etc. plays with wooden bats due to tradition.  Plus several other professional leagues around the world (and a good number of amateur leagues too boot).

 

There are a slough of different non-wood baseball regulations as well.  I am not current on them now but was when I worked at a sporting goods store.  USSSA, bbCOR, etc.  There are different specifications based upon age as well (2 1/4" v 2 5/8" v 2 3/4" diameters and weight to length ratios, -3, -5 -7).

 

Softball was similar in the number of different bat rules.  

 

They changed several times while I was doing sporting goods as well. 

 

Actually, what happened with hs baseball bats mirrors drivers very well.  The original aluminum bats (1980's vintage) were brought out due to the cost of wood bats.  If you didn't know what you were doing with a wood bat you could break it with one swing.  I've done it.  College programs especially were going through acres of timber in a season.

 

Then the alloys got stronger and lighter and the bats got hotter and hotter.  Ping!  The trampoline effect was in full swing (no pun intended).  When they started reigning in the COR to limit homeruns and keep young players safe the bat manufactures found ways to keep the trampoline effect in the bats (as a whole) but abide by the COR.  I specifically remember two piece aluminum bats with a rubber material poured into the seam, carbon fiber material in cut-outs in the taper section of the bat and then composites.  Composite bats came to softball first then over to baseball.  I remember hearing from guys who played slow pitch softball tournaments that there were tournaments that had to enact rules limiting how many homeruns a team could hit in a game.

 

A good wooden bat is about 150-175 usd.  You don't want the $50 ash bat.  You will be at a decided competitive disadvantage to someone with a well made maple bat.  Just like persimmon, the really desirable, slow growth timber (ash especially) is tough to come by.  (Emerald ash borer is going to make ash bats history.)

 

So back to golf.  No need to make new persimmon clubs.  They can just throttle back the modern materials to around persimmon specifications, COR, max length, maybe they want to mess with COG, maybe not.

[smashdn]

10 minutes ago, Dr. Block said:

Agreed.  It's my opinion the PGA Tour could choose to play trickier courses more often. They might find it's not nearly as detrimental to their distance agenda and the marketability it brings at their thinking probably dictates now.  It might even be the answer to all the issues we've been discussing. 

 

The PGA Tour is run by the players.  They, as a whole, don't want trickier or harder courses.  I'll have to hunt the article but these guys (again as a whole) want a very straightforward test of golf shot making.  They don't want to make decisions or mess around with architectural trickery.  See fairway, hit fairway.  See green, get number, hit number.  Putt.

[Dr. Block]

11 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

The PGA Tour is run by the players.  They, as a whole, don't want trickier or harder courses.  I'll have to hunt the article but these guys (again as a whole) want a very straightforward test of golf shot making.  They don't want to make decisions or mess around with architectural trickery.  See fairway, hit fairway.  See green, get number, hit number.  Putt.

Maybe if they get enough players on the board that aren't giant bombers the chances will improve 

Edited October 26, 2020 by Dr. Block