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

[smashdn]

4 hours ago, clevited said:

 

No.  You have admitted many times to it being for selfish reasons you want the change.  I remember many of our back and fourths.  I have always been against any roll back of any kind for reasons beyond anything simple like a selfish desire.  I have been very consistent about that.

 

Pro roll backers are a smaller population and not representative of the people that play the game regularly.  The polls out there have shown this time and time again, and I tend to believe those polls are rather representative of the larger golfing population.  I don't believe that a small group of people should be able to dictate the game for the larger mass of people due to subjective reasons.  I also don't believe in mob rule mind you, I just believe in intelligent decision making.

 

This will sound snobbish, higher than thou, etc., but the masses often don't know what is best for them.  I'd venture if you poled the masses that they would be all in for technology that guaranteed they hit straight drives every time.  Just aim, swing and voila, perfect results right where you aim.  That might be good for the individual's game but not for the integrity of the game.

 

No doubt I am in the minority but if we don't police ourselves we are going to mess it up to the point of no return.  Men's slow pitch had to stop themselves or they weren't going to have a game left to be played.

[milesgiles]

17 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

So you can’t mishit the derisively nicknamed toaster driver but the same pros are blasted for missing fairways? What am I missing lol? Can they or can they not be mishit?

 

Stress free play might work at our level. You asked a few posts ago about the hypothetical player making top 10’s with stress free golf and how to win. At the tour level you need better than that.  What you call bomb and find golf does not exist. No one is just blasting away and hoping they can find it. No one! These pros are much better than you give them credit for. And with that comes a need to play aggressively if you want to win. You want to lay back and play safe? Fine....see you next week while you miss the cut. Someone will have their A game this week and that is what you need to beat. You are not competing with the scratch player happy to make pars on a tough track. 

 

Mishitting is not the same as missing the fairway in this context 

[smashdn]

1 hour ago, Sean2 said:

This seems like a solution in search of a problem. The game is evolving, which is pretty much the nature of everything. And, it's not like you have a majority of professional golfers who carry the ball 340. Brian Gay won this past week and is ranked 136th in driving distance. The average drive on Tour is 295...with roll. I think Bryson DeChambeau is a bit of an outlier...even if people follow his regimen that doesn't mean they will achieve 200 mph+ ball speed. 

 

The impacts of this evolution cannot be ignored.  The average of 295 is ten yards longer than the longest player in 1988.  

 

I know it is very early into 2021 schedule but the tour average is 3.6 yards farther than in 2019.  2019 was 3.9 longer than 2016.  2016 was 2.8 yards longer than 2013.

 

I wish it was leveling off but it does not seem to be.  Distance is being gained, from whatever method, still.

 

2013 Tour Average - 287.2

2021 Tour Average - 297.5

^That is not insignificant nor are the ramifications of it.  Now factor in almost 30 years of it.  

 

I am reminded of this - 

 

“A game dependent on so much of the earth’s acreage on a shrinking planet with finite resources is inevitably going to be on the wrong side of history and a game where the balls and implements aren’t effectively controlled within certain parameters befitting the challenge is similarly going to become antiquated, much as that may seem counter-intuitive.” - Mike Cirba

 

He sums it up superbly.

[Sean2]

^^^I don't happen to agree with Mr. Cirba. 1988 was 30+ years ago. No real surprise that players are hitting it longer today. I wonder what the difference is in driving distance between 1988 and 1956? Plus, isn't equipment already regulated? For example, with regards to size, MOI, and the spring like affect of club faces?

 

While I don't agree with it, I think there will be a dialing back of equipment, and probably bifurcation. Most average golfers are distance challenged as it is. Dialing back equipment for us would probably do the game more harm than good. 

[clevited]

46 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

This will sound snobbish, higher than thou, etc., but the masses often don't know what is best for them.  I'd venture if you poled the masses that they would be all in for technology that guaranteed they hit straight drives every time.  Just aim, swing and voila, perfect results right where you aim.  That might be good for the individual's game but not for the integrity of the game.

 

No doubt I am in the minority but if we don't police ourselves we are going to mess it up to the point of no return.  Men's slow pitch had to stop themselves or they weren't going to have a game left to be played.

 

I don't disagree with you at all, but this roll back is far beyond taking care of the game.  The window was missed for the opportunity to prevent the game from getting "too long".  Right now, the game is great by most people's standards.  It is as challenging as ever to me and everyone I know.  I know great golfers and bad golfers alike, all say the game is plenty challenging and that there is no problem with it.  I would have been, and would still be, fully supportive of the RBs incorporating limits where needed to prevent any further distance gains etc.  2 years or so ago when these threads popped up after Jacks infamous remarks, and still today, I suggest that the RBs stop focusing on woulda coulda shoulda, and start focusing on what they can do today to prevent it from doing anything more.  2 years ago i was noting how hollow heads on irons were an issue and going to be an issue, I said shaft technology and weight was something to limit, I have mentioned MOI and CG placement etc etc.  No issue in trying to steadfast or slow changes to try and keep the game as it is currently.  I just think it is objectively wrong to try and take a nerf bat to something that is too far gone.  I still firmly believe that the majority of what makes golf what it is, and what makes it a very difficult game is still there and represented almost totally in full.  

[clevited]

28 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

The impacts of this evolution cannot be ignored.  The average of 295 is ten yards longer than the longest player in 1988.  

 

I know it is very early into 2021 schedule but the tour average is 3.6 yards farther than in 2019.  2019 was 3.9 longer than 2016.  2016 was 2.8 yards longer than 2013.

 

I wish it was leveling off but it does not seem to be.  Distance is being gained, from whatever method, still.

 

2013 Tour Average - 287.2

2021 Tour Average - 297.5

^That is not insignificant nor are the ramifications of it.  Now factor in almost 30 years of it.  

 

I am reminded of this - 

 

“A game dependent on so much of the earth’s acreage on a shrinking planet with finite resources is inevitably going to be on the wrong side of history and a game where the balls and implements aren’t effectively controlled within certain parameters befitting the challenge is similarly going to become antiquated, much as that may seem counter-intuitive.” - Mike Cirba

 

He sums it up superbly.

 

What percentage of that distance is caused by the game just attracting more kids with Tiger like speed and ability to hit the middle with said speed?  I really think years ago, people wrong instructed kids to swing nice and easy and that you are limited one what speed you can learn to swing.  That has been almost entirely blown out of the water.  People now tell kids to swing hard and learn to control it later.  Speed I think is best learned young, and much tougher to learn when you are older and set in your ways.  It is especially hard when you have a good repeatable swing and decide to go for more speed.  It can ruin your game if you aren't careful.  I think the average coming up since 2013 or even back to early 2000s, is largely a movement in longer and longer players reaching the tour combined with existing players retooling and working at hitting it longer.  Hitting it long off the tee is and always has been a great strategy to scoring well.  More people are just realizing it is achievable and it is showing on tour. 

[bladehunter]

59 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

This will sound snobbish, higher than thou, etc., but the masses often don't know what is best for them.  I'd venture if you poled the masses that they would be all in for technology that guaranteed they hit straight drives every time.  Just aim, swing and voila, perfect results right where you aim.  That might be good for the individual's game but not for the integrity of the game.

 

No doubt I am in the minority but if we don't police ourselves we are going to mess it up to the point of no return.  Men's slow pitch had to stop themselves or they weren't going to have a game left to be played.

1000x yes.   People in general are searching for the path of least resistance.  Andy that is rarely the correct path. 

[J_Tizzle]

Everyone just needs to stop even talking about armlock bans etc and making the putter the shortest club in your bag.  If they take away my side saddle putter I'd probably just quit.  

[bladehunter]

2 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

What percentage of that distance is caused by the game just attracting more kids with Tiger like speed and ability to hit the middle with said speed?  I really think years ago, people wrong instructed kids to swing nice and easy and that you are limited one what speed you can learn to swing.  That has been almost entirely blown out of the water.  People now tell kids to swing hard and learn to control it later.  Speed I think is best learned young, and much tougher to learn when you are older and set in your ways.  It is especially hard when you have a good repeatable swing and decide to go for more speed.  It can ruin your game if you aren't careful.  I think the average coming up since 2013 or even back to early 2000s, is largely a movement in longer and longer players reaching the tour combined with existing players retooling and working at hitting it longer.  Hitting it long off the tee is and always has been a great strategy to scoring well.  More people are just realizing it is achievable and it is showing on tour. 

That teaching came about when the 460cc heads came  out with a hitting zone 3 inches square.  
 

that’s the entire point.  Shrink the driver enough and that idea goes away. 

[bladehunter]

12 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

I don't disagree with you at all, but this roll back is far beyond taking care of the game.  The window was missed for the opportunity to prevent the game from getting "too long".  Right now, the game is great by most people's standards.  It is as challenging as ever to me and everyone I know.  I know great golfers and bad golfers alike, all say the game is plenty challenging and that there is no problem with it.  I would have been, and would still be, fully supportive of the RBs incorporating limits where needed to prevent any further distance gains etc.  2 years or so ago when these threads popped up after Jacks infamous remarks, and still today, I suggest that the RBs stop focusing on woulda coulda shoulda, and start focusing on what they can do today to prevent it from doing anything more.  2 years ago i was noting how hollow heads on irons were an issue and going to be an issue, I said shaft technology and weight was something to limit, I have mentioned MOI and CG placement etc etc.  No issue in trying to steadfast or slow changes to try and keep the game as it is currently.  I just think it is objectively wrong to try and take a nerf bat to something that is too far gone.  I still firmly believe that the majority of what makes golf what it is, and what makes it a very difficult game is still there and represented almost totally in full.  

I don’t understand the idea that it’s too late to repair a wrong.  
 

you’re saying if this were 1994 and someone’s was up in arms to cap driver heads etc and cap the ball , youd support that ?  And yet somehow today that’s crazy talk.   Even if it’s not run that far back.  I don’t see the bridge being too far to do that.  Sure. Some folks will gripe.  But if it’s done pro first and then by free choice at the am level , it’s doable.  Egos will get ams to swap to pro equipment.  You know That’s true. And in one generation it’s fixed.  The only flaw in that slaw is the oems Their lawyers.  

Edited November 2, 2020 by bladehunter

[clevited]

2 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

That teaching came about when the 460cc heads came  out with a hitting zone 3 inches square.  
 

that’s the entire point.  Shrink the driver enough and that idea goes away. 

 

Prove it.  I have said this time and time again, mid handicapper me can get in a groove and repeat my swing over and over again on the driving range and hit a persimmon on the screws every time full tilt.  Why in the world wouldn't a pro be able to do that pretty much every time?  Especially after some initial getting use to it time.

 

I think Tiger started the swing hard thing, and that it also took time for the old way of teaching to die off and get replaced by the new.  All happened during the early 2000s.  I think the 460 heads are just a coincidence and not the reason.

[milesgiles]

6 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

That teaching came about when the 460cc heads came  out with a hitting zone 3 inches square.  
 

that’s the entire point.  Shrink the driver enough and that idea goes away. 

 

You have to be incredibly dense to not realise this 

[milesgiles]

4 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

Prove it.  I have said this time and time again, mid handicapper me can get in a groove and repeat my swing over and over again on the driving range and hit a persimmon on the screws every time full tilt.  Why in the world wouldn't a pro be able to do that pretty much every time?  Especially after some initial getting use to it time.

 

I think Tiger started the swing hard thing, and that it also took time for the old way of teaching to die off and get replaced by the new.  All happened during the early 2000s.  I think the 460 heads are just a coincidence and not the reason.

 

Sam Snead couldn’t do it. Duffs  his first tee shot at Pebble

 

 

mid handicap you can’t miss though..

[clevited]

8 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

I don’t understand the idea that it’s too late to repair a wrong.  
 

you’re saying if this were 1994 and someone’s was up in arms to cap driver heads etc and cap the ball , youd support that ?  And yet somehow today that’s crazy talk.   Even if it’s not run that far back.  I don’t see the bridge being too far to do that.  Sure. Some folks will gripe.  But if it’s done pro first and then by free choice at the am level , it’s doable.  Egos will get ams to swap to pro equipment.  You know That’s true. And in one generation it’s fixed.  The only flaw in that slaw is the oems Their lawyers.  

 

The amount needed to roll back is past 90s stuff overall.  If you remember what they want to accomplish, even 90s stuff wouldn't cut it and besides that, 90s stuff had the same COR and the ball had the same standards as today.  We just got better at making clubs at the maximums of those set standards and understanding efficient launch conditions for maximizing distance.  Truth be told though, I don't remember the exact date the current COR was decided upon.  Someone else can chime in there.

 

To answer your question about me supporting 90s equipment, if the 1990s had significantly lower limits than what we had always had, lets say COR (which it may have I can't remember) and ball speed limits, I would have been 100% with keeping the status quo.  i would have supported that yes.  I believe it is just plain irresponsible and silly to try and roll back what would amount to at least persimmon COR and a lower ball speed limit or some other way of accomplishing that.  

 

If the RBs do decide to do something, I would at least be happy if they did their due diligence in testing options, didn't just focus on the ball, and whatever they decided, they implemented it slowly over the course of like 10 years.  So for instance a ball roll back.  They would require yearly batches of new balls to rebound slower by say 3 mph per year for 10 years or something like that.

[clevited]

14 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

Sam Snead couldn’t do it. Duffs  his first tee shot at Pebble

 

 

mid handicap you can’t miss though..

 

I am not going to watch a 45 minute video to find your nugget of evidence man lol.  Can you put in a time stamp of where your evidence is?  Him saying something or whatever please.

[milesgiles]

14 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

I am not going to watch a 45 minute video to find your nugget of evidence man lol.  Can you put in a time stamp of where your evidence is?  Him saying something or whatever please.

 

I said his FIRST tee shot so it’s not going to be at minute 43 is it 

[clevited]

8 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

I said his FIRST tee shot so it’s not going to be at minute 43 is it 

 

My bad. Don't get yourself all worked up bud.  There are more important things in life that deserve that.  Will watch when I get back.

Edited November 2, 2020 by clevited

[bladehunter]

52 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

Prove it.  I have said this time and time again, mid handicapper me can get in a groove and repeat my swing over and over again on the driving range and hit a persimmon on the screws every time full tilt.  Why in the world wouldn't a pro be able to do that pretty much every time?  Especially after some initial getting use to it time.

 

I think Tiger started the swing hard thing, and that it also took time for the old way of teaching to die off and get replaced by the new.  All happened during the early 2000s.  I think the 460 heads are just a coincidence and not the reason.

Well. I’ve officially heard it all now.    Then why the big heads ????

[milesgiles]

24 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Well. I’ve officially heard it all now.    Then why the big heads ????

 

Sadly, you have never quite heard it all with Clevited

[bladehunter]

34 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

The amount needed to roll back is past 90s stuff overall.  If you remember what they want to accomplish, even 90s stuff wouldn't cut it and besides that, 90s stuff had the same COR and the ball had the same standards as today.  We just got better at making clubs at the maximums of those set standards and understanding efficient launch conditions for maximizing distance.  Truth be told though, I don't remember the exact date the current COR was decided upon.  Someone else can chime in there.

 

To answer your question about me supporting 90s equipment, if the 1990s had significantly lower limits than what we had always had, lets say COR (which it may have I can't remember) and ball speed limits, I would have been 100% with keeping the status quo.  i would have supported that yes.  I believe it is just plain irresponsible and silly to try and roll back what would amount to at least persimmon COR and a lower ball speed limit or some other way of accomplishing that.  

 

If the RBs do decide to do something, I would at least be happy if they did their due diligence in testing options, didn't just focus on the ball, and whatever they decided, they implemented it slowly over the course of like 10 years.  So for instance a ball roll back.  They would require yearly batches of new balls to rebound slower by say 3 mph per year for 10 years or something like that.

So .... it makes no difference.  Then why not roll her back and everybody wins ! 

[bscinstnct]

1 hour ago, clevited said:

 

Prove it.  I have said this time and time again, mid handicapper me can get in a groove and repeat my swing over and over again on the driving range and hit a persimmon on the screws every time full tilt.  Why in the world wouldn't a pro be able to do that pretty much every time?  Especially after some initial getting use to it time.

 

I think Tiger started the swing hard thing, and that it also took time for the old way of teaching to die off and get replaced by the new.  All happened during the early 2000s.  I think the 460 heads are just a coincidence and not the reason.

 

Blade is 100% right

 

And Rory, Adam Scott, and other pros have said the same. 

 

You tell me if he is wrong....
 

“The driver is the most forgiving club in the bag now; it’s just swing as hard as you can and get it down there far,” he said.

 

“It’s not a skilful part of the game anymore and it’s really unfair for some guys who are great drivers of the golf ball.

“I don’t think their talents are showing up as much as they should.”

 

https://www.foxsports.com.au/golf/bmw-championship-adam-scott-blasts-unfair-courses-stars-continue-to-exploit/news-story/b2b1f4c962145771c6639ed615ef913f

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[bladehunter]

1 hour ago, milesgiles said:

 

You have to be incredibly dense to not realise this 

He’s not that dense.  He just doesn’t want to see it shrink.  And I’m ok with that if he’d just say “ I prefer to be able to bash away and have my 2 inch miss in the fairway “.  
 

and I’m not calling anyone out for missing.  I miss a lot too. And playing a big head im usually in the fairway.  

[clevited]

45 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

I said his FIRST tee shot so it’s not going to be at minute 43 is it 

 

I lied, time stamp please, I am not waiting until the gibberish is over for this tee shot you speak of, and by the way, a pro duffing a shot means absolutely nothing.  Nobody is 100% all the time.  Hosel rockets happen as do occasional bad strikes with the driver.

[bladehunter]

9 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Blade is 100% right

 

And Rory, Adam Scott, and other pros have said the same. 

 

You tell me if he is wrong....
 

“The driver is the most forgiving club in the bag now; it’s just swing as hard as you can and get it down there far,” he said.

 

“It’s not a skilful part of the game anymore and it’s really unfair for some guys who are great drivers of the golf ball.

“I don’t think their talents are showing up as much as they should.”

 

https://www.foxsports.com.au/golf/bmw-championship-adam-scott-blasts-unfair-courses-stars-continue-to-exploit/news-story/b2b1f4c962145771c6639ed615ef913f

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yep. Adam Scott plays  the hardest to hit irons on tour ...... and once had titleist make him a 915 D5 driver head.  Which was around 380cc.  Because he found he could swing it 4/5 mph faster.  But .... after a season he went away from it.  Why ?   It lacked the forgiveness that everyone else was playing with.   He won a few times with  that I believe.   
 

so if he was faster with a smaller head , and could play it.  What happens to the poor driver who’s slow ( by tour standards ) and relays on launch conditions and forgiveness ???  He looks for a new job after a while and the Adam Scott’s of the world win more.   

Edited November 2, 2020 by bladehunter

[clevited]

32 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Well. I’ve officially heard it all now.    Then why the big heads ????

 

I was looking for a good facepalm image but dinner is on so I don't have time.  If you reread, I can find the middle multiple times in a row while swinging full tilt.  I don't have a pro level repeatable swing to do it each shot, or to a confident degree without hitting a bunch of balls on the range and getting in a groove.  I am a mid level handicapper that enjoys a bit bigger driver for my less than repeatable swing.  So do many other ams i am sure.  The pro's don't miss middle nearly as much, and their swings are extremely repeatable.  They may miss once and a while too or have a bad out of rhythm day, and a big headed driver will indeed help with those occasional bad shots but it ain't like it will bring down their average a ton unless you are also rolling back COR.

[clevited]

12 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

Sadly, you have never quite heard it all with Clevited

 

Sadly, you don't participate in this discussion with any new info.  It is funny how these threads go btw.  What will happen is since I am the only one kind of binging forum talk on the anti roll back side today, I get to field the responses by 3 or 4 of you over and over again.  As soon as a few others on the anti roll back side come in and bombard you guys with similar insights to mine, or others, you guys all bow out for extended periods of time.  Just a funny observation.

[clevited]

9 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

He’s not that dense.  He just doesn’t want to see it shrink.  And I’m ok with that if he’d just say “ I prefer to be able to bash away and have my 2 inch miss in the fairway “.  
 

and I’m not calling anyone out for missing.  I miss a lot too. And playing a big head im usually in the fairway.  

 

Gee thanks.  🙄

 

Just something to ponder, how often are you in the fairway with a driving iron or a 3 wood?  Smaller heads you know.

[disco111]

[bscinstnct]

34 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Yep. Adam Scott plays  the hardest to hit irons on tour ...... and once had titleist make him a 915 D5 driver head.  Which was around 380cc.  Because he found he could swing it 4/5 mph faster.  But .... after a season he went away from it.  Why ?   It lacked the forgiveness that everyone else was playing with.   He won a few times with  that I believe.   
 

so if he was faster with a smaller head , and could play it.  What happens to the poor driver who’s slow ( by tour standards ) and relays on launch conditions and forgiveness ???  He looks for a new job after a while and the Adam Scott’s of the world win more.   

 

Rory has the same sentiment. 
 

Neither says,

 

“oh yeah, if they make the driver less forgiving...

 

we can all just groove our swings perfectly every time”

 

; )

 

 

 

 

 

[bladehunter]

1 hour ago, clevited said:

 

Gee thanks.  🙄

 

Just something to ponder, how often are you in the fairway with a driving iron or a 3 wood?  Smaller heads you 

Edited November 3, 2020 by bladehunter