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

[Nard_S]

On 11/1/2020 at 2:39 PM, Shilgy said:

Go for it....but I don’t think you would like the result. The long guys on tour have more face control than you seem to think. So if they can still hit it as far as now that will not bring back the bunt it into the fairway strategy you apparently prefer.  If the long guy can keep it between the tree line a short hitter has no chance. And by short I mean what apparently many want-a 260 or so elite player. Not gonna happen...ever again. Unless of course some guy is sprinkled with fairy dust and makes every single putt from any distance. The reason I say that is because, unlike in the days past on tour, the long guys also have the same other skills as the short hitter. Same short game...same putting skills....same approach skills. There is no way for a truly short hitter to compete is simply because the long guys also have the other skills necessary.

Why does everyone think this is a 'revenge of the bunter's' cause? I get the generality of bunter having a better wedge game over bomber but it has zero to do with any of this. It's really more about the dispersion thing and not all that much about the distance. Anyone think old wound & persimmon is as straight Ti & Pro V, please pass me what you're smoking. Must be good s***.

[milesgiles]

7 hours ago, clevited said:

 

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.

 

You did indeed say you did it every time though..

 

“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.“

 

and who who said anything about ONLY reducing the cc size anyway? I said about looking at CoR, MOI, shaft length etc dozens of pages ago 

 

the mental gymnastics are something else 

[milesgiles]

8 hours ago, clevited said:

 

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.

 

If we bow out it’s because we inevitably get told the same thing a dozen times a dozen different ways, which we’ve already answered, and don’t care to repeat ourselves.

 

at the end of the day, you, a mid cap scruffler with no real frame of reference for anything you claim, knows better than Scott, Faldo, Nicklaus, Rory and many other major champions who have forgotten far more about golf than you will ever know.

i do at least play regularly with two ex tour pros and plenty of scratch men, while being at least semi decent myself 

Edited November 3, 2020 by milesgiles

[smashdn]

16 hours 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. 

 

I don't know.  But it doesn't matter.  The USGA and R&A are on record as stating any and all distance gains are undesirable.  They can really only legislate equipment rules though.

 

I, too don't really care from where it comes.  The end result is the same whether distance is gained from the ball, the club, trackman or protein shakes.  The effect is my interest not so much the cause or all the causes.  There is only one aspect that the USGA and R&A can impact from and that is equipment.  I'll confine my theories as to "what is coming next" from them to what they can control.

[clevited]

7 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

You did indeed say you did it every time though..

 

“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.“

 

and who who said anything about ONLY reducing the cc size anyway? I said about looking at CoR, MOI, shaft length etc dozens of pages ago 

 

the mental gymnastics are something else 

 

See the bold.  Get in a groove, is what I said and that only happens for me after many hits on the range getting my timing down with my early extension.  But if I can manage that, I do believe a pro, with a repeatable swing without the need to get in a groove after many swings like me, can hit it middle pretty much every time.

 

You said 3/4 inch tee over and over and assumed that the tee alone would lead to your goal of the game being played as it were again.  I debunked that as thoroughly as I can on a forum.  You have since moved on to adding more to your tee idea, as in, it is no longer just the tee that will solve it which you have been so incredibly confident about on more than just this particular thread.  It is ok to admit to someone that maybe they are right, and then say, ok, well what if we add "x" change as well?  Ask people on here what they think, and lets talk about it.  

 

Do you know how to have a rational conversation or is everything a battle with you?  Lets have a discussion, as in, like we are solving a problem.  I like to bounce ideas around, see what people come up with, find flaws in arguments, see what a person can come up with to fix their flaws, and I enjoy defending my own position.  I think its fun and a person can learn a lot, meaning I can, and you can.

[Soloman1]

To some of us it just reads like someone needs to find a job.

[clevited]

7 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

If we bow out it’s because we inevitably get told the same thing a dozen times a dozen different ways, which we’ve already answered, and don’t care to repeat ourselves.

 

at the end of the day, you, a mid cap scruffler with no real frame of reference for anything you claim, knows better than Scott, Faldo, Nicklaus, Rory and many other major champions who have forgotten far more about golf than you will ever know.

i do at least play regularly with two ex tour pros and plenty of scratch men, while being at least semi decent myself 

 

You guys do the same exact thing and I am not bowing out yet.  I am fielding questions, and responses from 3 or 4 of you guys, all the same points I have seen over and over again, but once and a while, the conversation goes somewhere and either someone changes their mind, or realizes the hole in their position and rethinks it.  Worth it sometimes for that, we learn stuff that way.

 

Your ability to play, or who you play with doesn't make your points any more valid or invalid than anyone else's.  I have played golf for close to 30 years, I have plenty of experience watching it, playing it, and playing with really good players as well as really bad players.  I love the game and I have a deep knowledge of it and how it was played and how it is today.  I experienced golf with a wound ball, wooden drivers and really thin bladed irons.  I won't tell you for a minute though, that anyone without those experiences has any less valid of a point.  We are all stake holders in the game.

 

 

 

[clevited]

4 minutes ago, Soloman1 said:

To some of us it just reads like someone needs to find a job.

 

You do realize that is poor form given the current world wide situation we are in right?

[smashdn]

16 hours 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.

 

Go to youtube and pull up a SWWOG or an old Open from prior to 1990.  Watch the broadcast.  Plenty of pros going wayward.  But also watch how short a mishit was.  That's another important part of it.

[clevited]

1 minute ago, smashdn said:

 

Go to youtube and pull up a SWWOG or an old Open from prior to 1990.  Watch the broadcast.  Plenty of pros going wayward.  But also watch how short a mishit was.  That's another important part of it.

 

You guys are really getting my post count up in here by always replying to me.  I should just do one big response to several people every so often instead.  Hard to fight a battle on 4 fronts.

 

I have seen plenty of people hit persimmon.  I have 2 of them myself and 3 woods and 5 woods.  Yes, you can miss more easily and there would indeed be more cases where a pro will miss and miss badly.  They already do that here and there.  They rarely show the bad shots on tv these days is part of why it seems likely nobody ever has a bad day, or a bad shot or two.  It does happen, they are human not robots.

 

I am going to try and explain this next part as best I can.  I have been trying this whole time to both simultaneously defend the anti rollback position but also provide my thoughts on what a  proper roll back should look like should it happen.  I have largely been disagreeing with you guys over what change would be enough.  I don't really understand why I get so much flack for simply saying the RBs should test many different solutions thoroughly outside of the tour, come to the best possible conclusion of what to do given what they decide is the goal, and then proceed to implement it very slowly over the course of many years if at all possible.  I just don't see these one and done ideas solving anything, and a lot of it has to do with downplaying the skill level of players today among other things.

[NRJyzr]

I guess we should nerf persimmon and Tour Balata, too.  This is from the 95 Masters, DL3 hitting his second shot on #15.  9 iron.

 

Earlier in the same event, they show Couples hitting from 260+ on a par 5, with an iron....

 

 

 

Edited November 3, 2020 by NRJyzr

[bscinstnct]

32 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

You guys are really getting my post count up in here by always replying to me.  I should just do one big response to several people every so often instead.  Hard to fight a battle on 4 fronts.

 

I have seen plenty of people hit persimmon.  I have 2 of them myself and 3 woods and 5 woods.  Yes, you can miss more easily and there would indeed be more cases where a pro will miss and miss badly.  They already do that here and there.  They rarely show the bad shots on tv these days is part of why it seems likely nobody ever has a bad day, or a bad shot or two.  It does happen, they are human not robots.

 

I am going to try and explain this next part as best I can.  I have been trying this whole time to both simultaneously defend the anti rollback position but also provide my thoughts on what a  proper roll back should look like should it happen.  I have largely been disagreeing with you guys over what change would be enough.  I don't really understand why I get so much flack for simply saying the RBs should test many different solutions thoroughly outside of the tour, come to the best possible conclusion of what to do given what they decide is the goal, and then proceed to implement it very slowly over the course of many years if at all possible.  I just don't see these one and done ideas solving anything, and a lot of it has to do with downplaying the skill level of players today among other things.

 

Forget about us. What do the actual tour pros say...,

 

Rory and Adam Scott (two fairly decent drivers of the golf ball ; ) are very clear and disagree with you, they think that the driver is too forgiving and, if it wasn’t, it would have an impact that they would be in favor of.

 

 

“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 (Scott) 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.”

 

 

As far as testing. Why would the testing be done “outside of the tour”? Nothing would be mandated until after testing but, looks to me, like guys like Rory and Adam Scott would be first in line to volunteer ; )

 

 

 

Edited November 3, 2020 by bscinstnct

[Bubbtubbs]

9 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Forget about us. What do the actual tour pros say...,

 

Rory and Adam Scott (two fairly decent drivers of the golf ball ; ) are very clear and disagree with you, they think that the driver is too forgiving and, if it wasn’t, it would have an impact that they would be in favor of.

 

 

“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 (Scott) 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.”

 

 

As far as testing. Why would the testing be done “outside of the tour”? Nothing would be mandated until after testing but, looks to me, like guys like Rory and Adam Scott would be first in line to volunteer ; )

 

 

 

For anecdotal evidence to have some weight here, it would be necessary to poll the PGA, Euro and mini tours to find a consensus. Otherwise it's just the opinion of a few players whose feelings may be motivated by several different factors.

 

Jack's opinion is difficult to take seriously, given that he has a vested interest in his legacy, records and a wealth of existing golf courses designed by him, plus an unspecified amount of nostalgia.

[bscinstnct]

9 minutes ago, Bubbtubbs said:

For anecdotal evidence to have some weight here, it would be necessary to poll the PGA, Euro and mini tours to find a consensus. Otherwise it's just the opinion of a few players whose feelings may be motivated by several different factors.

 

Jack's opinion is difficult to take seriously, given that he has a vested interest in his legacy, records and a wealth of existing golf courses designed by him, plus an unspecified amount of nostalgia.

 

Its up to you whether or not you value the #5 and #15 players in the worlds opinion on the subject.

 

In the context of them both being active, considered elite drivers, and in Rory’s case, a perennial leader/top 5 driving distance.

 

I agree on Jack but these aren’t retired guys of a bygone era or the Zach Johnson’s of current players. 
 

 

[ThinkingPlus]

8 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Its up to you whether or not you value the #5 and #15 players in the worlds opinion on the subject.

 

In the context of them both being active, considered elite drivers, and in Rory’s case, a perennial leader/top 5 driving distance.

 

I agree on Jack but these aren’t retired guys of a bygone era or the Zach Johnson’s of current players. 
 

 

If Rory and Adam told you that hitting fairways was the most optimal way to play golf, would you believe them?

[oikos1]

42 minutes ago, NRJyzr said:

I guess we should nerf persimmon and Tour Balata, too.  This is from the 95 Masters, DL3 hitting his second shot on #15.  9 iron.

 

Earlier in the same event, they show Couples hitting from 260+ on a par 5, with an iron....

 

 

 

 

The winning score was also -14.

 

What an obsolete, over-powered pitch and putt dog track.  I can't believe it's still in the professional rotation.  🤣

[bscinstnct]

10 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

If Rory and Adam told you that hitting fairways was the most optimal way to play golf, would you believe them?

 

TP!

 

Heres Rory hitting the fairway...365 yards , after clearing the trees ; )

 

Aerial view is pretty sweet here,

 

 

 

 

Edited November 3, 2020 by bscinstnct

[ThinkingPlus]

1 minute ago, bscinstnct said:

 

TP!

 

Heres Rory hitting the fairway...365 yards , after clearing the trees ; )

 

 

 

 

Yes, he is a very talented golfer, but you are avoiding the question again as you frequently do.

[NRJyzr]

1 hour ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Its up to you whether or not you value the #5 and #15 players in the worlds opinion on the subject.

 

In the context of them both being active, considered elite drivers, and in Rory’s case, a perennial leader/top 5 driving distance.

 

I agree on Jack but these aren’t retired guys of a bygone era or the Zach Johnson’s of current players. 
 

 

 

Ability to hit a ball with a stick in as few attempts as possible doesn't have a direct correlation with one's intelligence about how to do the same.  They may or may not possess that, but their World Golf Ranking is completely irrelevant in that regard.

 

Were that true, Butch Harmon would be regarded as being less of a coach than he is.

 

Edited November 3, 2020 by NRJyzr
Autocorrect.... sigh

[smashdn]

1 hour ago, clevited said:

 

You guys are really getting my post count up in here by always replying to me.  I should just do one big response to several people every so often instead.  Hard to fight a battle on 4 fronts.

 

I have seen plenty of people hit persimmon.  I have 2 of them myself and 3 woods and 5 woods.  Yes, you can miss more easily and there would indeed be more cases where a pro will miss and miss badly.  They already do that here and there.  They rarely show the bad shots on tv these days is part of why it seems likely nobody ever has a bad day, or a bad shot or two.  It does happen, they are human not robots.

 

I am going to try and explain this next part as best I can.  I have been trying this whole time to both simultaneously defend the anti rollback position but also provide my thoughts on what a  proper roll back should look like should it happen.  I have largely been disagreeing with you guys over what change would be enough.  I don't really understand why I get so much flack for simply saying the RBs should test many different solutions thoroughly outside of the tour, come to the best possible conclusion of what to do given what they decide is the goal, and then proceed to implement it very slowly over the course of many years if at all possible.  I just don't see these one and done ideas solving anything, and a lot of it has to do with downplaying the skill level of players today among other things.

 

So, explain what you wanted proof of then.  I thought you were claiming, based upon your own abilities, that a pro would not miss hit a smaller club.  I offered you where to find evidence contrary to that.  Now you say they do miss hit it and even miss hit it with the modern driver.

 

If the argument is now how much change is necessary and the need to test it I guess we can have that but I don't know why we would.  I've said return to the playing characteristics of persimmon with the woods for starters.  No need to test it, we have basically from the advent of the steel shaft (1930's?) to about 1990 to serve as evidence as to what you can expect.  You want to do something with the ball that is fine by me as well.  Make it so it behaves similarly to what the wound ball of the 1980's did.  I am cool with keeping the tech that makes the covers more resilient and the cores staying round.  No need to re-introduce problems not related to playability.  My goal would be to enact rules changes aimed at woods specifically that would return the game to the playability seen with persimmon and wound balls.  This playability would, I hope, restore the balance of "shotmakers" and "distance players" abilities to counter one another.  The caveat being I know that if a long player is also a guy capable of throwing darts and putting lights out he is going to win.  

 

That said, if a BDC or Dustin Johnson can take that new performance criteria and still hit it 320 I am good with that too.  We can give those guys an old Callaway BB with a 43" steel shaft and see where they can take it.  Maybe it won't be enough, I don't know.  That would literally take an afternoon at the driving range to ascertain. 

 

I'm good with bi-furcation as well if that is the road they want to go down.

 

If making the postulation that hitting a 460cc driver and consistently getting good results, is easier than the same with a persimmon-like driver, is downplaying the skill level of current players, then I guess I am guilty of downplaying the skill level of current players.  I simply don't see how you can make an argument to the contrary when there are pros on record stating as much.  (They would have to spend more time practicing driver to get consistent results with a less forgiving driver.)

 

Since you are apt to bring your own game into play, let me do the same.  I play more than half my rounds with persimmon woods (1,3,4 oft a mix of brands, sometimes all Hogan) and apex plus irons and some worn out Hogan wedges.  The balance are played with my "modern" set (913, adams 3w, cobra forged cb irons, vokey wedges).  When I am in the groove as you say, I hit the modern driver pretty darn good.  On the bad ones they are a push or push slice but still no real loss of distance.  I can't say the same for the persimmons.  A touch high on the face it is a high riser.  A touch low and it is a low rocket with topspin.  Left or right are slices and hard hooks.  There is no subtlety with the misses.  You know and the results are definitive.  It is either good or it turns out mostly bad.  There is not the "grey area misses" with the modern stuff aside from the low runners, those are playable but short.

[oikos1]

25 minutes ago, NRJyzr said:

 

Ability to hit a ball with a stick in as few attempts as possible doesn't have a direct correlation with one's intelligence about how to do the same.  They may or may not possess that, but their World Golf Ranking is completely irrelevant in that regard.

 

We're that true, Butch Harmon would be regarded as being less of a coach than he is.

 

 

It might also be that neither has won a major in the last 5 years, one is in his early thirties, the other 40, and that they've come to the realization that the next generation and the game is passing them by.  I don't remember either one complaining about how far they hit the ball when they first came on tour.

[bscinstnct]

Just now, ThinkingPlus said:

Yes, he is a very talented golfer, but you are avoiding the question again as you frequently do.

 

I really thought you were being facetious

 

Rory and AS are 2 of the best drivers to ever walk the planet. 

 

If they said hitting the fairway was most important, of course I’d believe them.

 

 

 

[clevited]

44 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

So, explain what you wanted proof of then.  I thought you were claiming, based upon your own abilities, that a pro would not miss hit a smaller club.  I offered you where to find evidence contrary to that.  Now you say they do miss hit it and even miss hit it with the modern driver.

 

If the argument is now how much change is necessary and the need to test it I guess we can have that but I don't know why we would.  I've said return to the playing characteristics of persimmon with the woods for starters.  No need to test it, we have basically from the advent of the steel shaft (1930's?) to about 1990 to serve as evidence as to what you can expect.  You want to do something with the ball that is fine by me as well.  Make it so it behaves similarly to what the wound ball of the 1980's did.  I am cool with keeping the tech that makes the covers more resilient and the cores staying round.  No need to re-introduce problems not related to playability.  My goal would be to enact rules changes aimed at woods specifically that would return the game to the playability seen with persimmon and wound balls.  This playability would, I hope, restore the balance of "shotmakers" and "distance players" abilities to counter one another.  The caveat being I know that if a long player is also a guy capable of throwing darts and putting lights out he is going to win.  

 

That said, if a BDC or Dustin Johnson can take that new performance criteria and still hit it 320 I am good with that too.  We can give those guys an old Callaway BB with a 43" steel shaft and see where they can take it.  Maybe it won't be enough, I don't know.  That would literally take an afternoon at the driving range to ascertain. 

 

I'm good with bi-furcation as well if that is the road they want to go down.

 

If making the postulation that hitting a 460cc driver and consistently getting good results, is easier than the same with a persimmon-like driver, is downplaying the skill level of current players, then I guess I am guilty of downplaying the skill level of current players.  I simply don't see how you can make an argument to the contrary when there are pros on record stating as much.  (They would have to spend more time practicing driver to get consistent results with a less forgiving driver.)

 

Since you are apt to bring your own game into play, let me do the same.  I play more than half my rounds with persimmon woods (1,3,4 oft a mix of brands, sometimes all Hogan) and apex plus irons and some worn out Hogan wedges.  The balance are played with my "modern" set (913, adams 3w, cobra forged cb irons, vokey wedges).  When I am in the groove as you say, I hit the modern driver pretty darn good.  On the bad ones they are a push or push slice but still no real loss of distance.  I can't say the same for the persimmons.  A touch high on the face it is a high riser.  A touch low and it is a low rocket with topspin.  Left or right are slices and hard hooks.  There is no subtlety with the misses.  You know and the results are definitive.  It is either good or it turns out mostly bad.  There is not the "grey area misses" with the modern stuff aside from the low runners, those are playable but short.

 

Nuts, was hoping I wouldn't get tagged anymore today and that some others would take a turn for a while.  Oh well.

 

So, explain what you wanted proof of then.

-It was in context to people learning to swing harder.  If you or anyone ever thought I was implying that pro's never miss the sweet spot, that is simply wrong.  It is common knowledge that even pro's are not robot.  I simply don't think there is evidence to support that they will swing any less hard based on the typical pro ball striking ability and consistency.  

 

If the argument is now how much change is necessary and the need to test it I guess we can have that but I don't know why we would.

-First, the RBs need to quantify exactly what amount of distance or challenge roll back they think will accomplish the goal they wish to achieve.  Second, they need to determine the best way to do such that this issue doesn't come back, but that they also don't go too far (which I think is impossible btw).  This would require testing.  I have tried to demonstrate, over and over and over again, why a very large rollback would be needed to prevent this issue from ever arising again but I swear most of you don't try and follow your thought to the end or look at it in a critical enough way.  You can't just pick an era and run with it.  These are not the same crop of players.  This is a crop of players many with Tiger prime swing speed and confidence.  We have to quantify what they are capable of, and what the future player will be capable of and test and make a plan to mitigate that so this doesn't come back.  I showed you what Kyle Berkshire can do with a persimmon and a modern ball.  I have show that wound balls were held to the same speed limits that modern balls are.  I have shown that we have no real world data of a non age diminished wound ball performance.  You have to test this stuff otherwise you are just guessing.  What will OEMs do to fight the changes?  That is also part of the big picture.  I can go on and on about this.  I am a little frustrated that so many on here don't try to think about all of the consequences or countermeasures that will or likely will occur after said change.  For me its so plain and easy to see, for you guys it doesn't seem to be which is why I am trying to show you.

 

There are so many other issues with most all of these ideas or desires you guys that want a roll back have that I just don't have the time to explain.  I have already binged this thread too much.  I don't back down from a reply, especially when someone misunderstands me and it can get repeated or distorted more like a bad game of telephone so I get called back here a lot more than I would prefer. 

 

If making the postulation that hitting a 460cc driver and consistently getting good results, is easier than the same with a persimmon-like driver, is downplaying the skill level of current players, then I guess I am guilty of downplaying the skill level of current players.  I simply don't see how you can make an argument to the contrary when there are pros on record stating as much.  (They would have to spend more time practicing driver to get consistent results with a less forgiving driver.)

 

-I didn't say it isn't easier to hit a 460 driver, you are misunderstanding.  I said a persimmon like driver isn't going to prevent players from swinging as hard as they do today in general and isn't going to roll back distance enough on tour.  I showed the contact of a pro golfer on a modern driver several pages ago.  They would play just fine with a persimmon with that kind of strike grouping.  Are they going to have more miss hits with a persimmon?  Sure, but it isn't going to prevent them from swinging hard.  Heck, with a lower COR, you can basically have peace of mind that if you don't catch it perfect, it will not go 350 into the crap, it will go less and maybe even stay in the fairway.  This is why you test instead of make subjective statements about things and try to pass them off as truth or fact.

 

-All I will say about your last statement regarding playing older equipment.  I hear what you are saying but you are not a pro.  Your experience won't be equivalent to what we would see on the tour, which is why it would have to be tested.  There is a big picture with all of this that I see, but you guys don't seem to.  One of the most important variables you guys seem to overlook or downplay the importance of is the impact of a change to the bulk of the golfing population.  You have to consider how they will receive a change and if that endangers the enjoyment or sustaining of the game as it is today.  That is a huge part of the issue that the RBs have to consider and rolling back to a persimmon sized head, or even a 975D size would not be well taken by the masses, and it also wouldn't solve the problem at hand.  When you guys make these claims, you also forget how that weaves into the OEM part of the deal.  They will be making the best "persimmon" possible within the rules.  They will be making the best 975D possible within the rules.  RBs would have to define those rules for club design to future proof things.  That is another reason you don't just say the solution is to just make them use "x" or "y" from "z" era and that will solve everything.

 

-Smash, I appreciate your usually thoughtful and respectful responses.  Please don't look at my response as anything but the same.  I have more and more appreciated and enjoyed your responses and I don't mean to be disrespectful with my wording.  I admit, I ranted a bit but understand I don't mean any insult or anything even if I use strong matter of fact tone in my response.

Edited November 3, 2020 by clevited

[ThinkingPlus]

18 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

I really thought you were being facetious

 

Rory and AS are 2 of the best drivers to ever walk the planet. 

 

If they said hitting the fairway was most important, of course I’d believe them.

 

 

 

That is the crux of the problem in this thread.  I wouldn't believe them.  Their's is a subjective opinion that has largely been disproven via the advanced analytics of strokes gained.  I am not saying that every golf course or setup works that way, but statistically over all courses played by professional male golfers hitting the fairway off the tee is relatively unimportant relative to optimal scoring.  Further I am not claiming that everyone can play that optimal strategy or should based on their skill set.  Most of the pros should, however.  This is also why those of us against a rollback have a hard time seeing the need for it.  As scientists we have a need for an objective problem statement that quantifies the detriment to golf. Subjective opinions of the RBs, old champions, current champions, architects, media, etc... are informed opinions, but opinions nonetheless.  Arguments between those with subjective opinions and those with objective opinions cannot be resolved because the opinion basis is diametrically opposite.  It's futile and generates lots of churn and angst, but no resolution.

[bladehunter]

2 hours ago, NRJyzr said:

I guess we should nerf persimmon and Tour Balata, too.  This is from the 95 Masters, DL3 hitting his second shot on #15.  9 iron.

 

Earlier in the same event, they show Couples hitting from 260+ on a par 5, with an iron....

 

 

 

Isn’t that before the new tees were put  back into the woods over 12 ? 

Edited November 3, 2020 by bladehunter

[milesgiles]

3 hours ago, Soloman1 said:

To some of us it just reads like someone needs to find a job.

 

And a wife 

[bladehunter]

4 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

That is the crux of the problem in this thread.  I wouldn't believe them.  Their's is a subjective opinion that has largely been disproven via the advanced analytics of strokes gained.  I am not saying that every golf course or setup works that way, but statistically over all courses played by professional male golfers hitting the fairway off the tee is relatively unimportant relative to optimal scoring.  Further I am not claiming that everyone can play that optimal strategy or should based on their skill set.  Most of the pros should, however.  This is also why those of us against a rollback have a hard time seeing the need for it.  As scientists we have a need for an objective problem statement that quantifies the detriment to golf. Subjective opinions of the RBs, old champions, current champions, architects, media, etc... are informed opinions, but opinions nonetheless.  Arguments between those with subjective opinions and those with objective opinions cannot be resolved because the opinion basis is diametrically opposite.  It's futile and generates lots of churn and angst, but no resolution.

Right.   Isn’t that last thought exactly what I said thrice yesterday to clevite ?  That his selfish wants vs my selfish wants equals this argument ?  
 

It’s the self righteous idea that one opinion is worth more than another that is grating.  And maybe I come off that way sometimes too ?  If so though , I’ve certainly fixed that by clearly stating that my opinion is quite selfish.  While the other side of that argument refuses to admit that.  Majority or not.  It’s a selfish argument on both sides.  
 

my issue with the use of some scientific study to decide is that  the anti roll back crowd refuses to agree before hand on a set level of what’s best for the game .... a quantity of distance vs local and pro courses I guess is what I mean.  To simply say “ no changes needed “ negates the methods ability to even begin. . Doesn’t it ?  So it’s hard to hear the same folks screen “ science man “ and at the same time block the science  talk from getting off the ground.  
 

a study of top ams and pros is needed vs a grouping of 6k 6500 and 7000 yard courses.  Just to try to figure out  where or if to rollback at all.  Then and only then can club testing begin.  
 

I guess what I’m saying is it’s like two parties arguing over the price of a school bus.  One side says “ let the kids walk to school “ the other says “ let’s buy the busses from company xyz”.    Well. We can’t very well take applications from the other companies to build buses until we convince the off side that the kids can’t walk 10 miles to school.    So here we are.   One side seeing an issue with where the games headed. And the other with firm foot planted says “ we see no issue.  Let the arms race continue ...oh and science !  “.     🤦‍♂️
 

 

this isn’t shot at you personally.  Just at the argument as a whole.  We can’t pretend that it’s not a first world , selfish argument from all sides.  There is no moral high ground as some have eluded to.  

[milesgiles]

2 hours ago, NRJyzr said:

I guess we should nerf persimmon and Tour Balata, too.  This is from the 95 Masters, DL3 hitting his second shot on #15.  9 iron.

 

Earlier in the same event, they show Couples hitting from 260+ on a par 5, with an iron....

 

 

 

 

The two longest hitters besides Daly on the tour at that time.

trouble is, everyone hits a short iron into 15 now, and there’s nowhere for the tee to go. An iconic hole, Sarazen, Jack, Seve.. moments lost like tears in rain.. 

[clevited]

16 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

And a wife 

 

I have both thank you very much, and kids.  I work on a computer and this annoying notification keeps ringing on my phone that I have several people replying to me.  I come in here to reply and then things like this pop up as well.  🙄 

[bscinstnct]

42 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

That is the crux of the problem in this thread.  I wouldn't believe them.  Their's is a subjective opinion that has largely been disproven via the advanced analytics of strokes gained.  I am not saying that every golf course or setup works that way, but statistically over all courses played by professional male golfers hitting the fairway off the tee is relatively unimportant relative to optimal scoring.  Further I am not claiming that everyone can play that optimal strategy or should based on their skill set.  Most of the pros should, however.  This is also why those of us against a rollback have a hard time seeing the need for it.  As scientists we have a need for an objective problem statement that quantifies the detriment to golf. Subjective opinions of the RBs, old champions, current champions, architects, media, etc... are informed opinions, but opinions nonetheless.  Arguments between those with subjective opinions and those with objective opinions cannot be resolved because the opinion basis is diametrically opposite.  It's futile and generates lots of churn and angst, but no resolution.

 

Huh?  they are agreeing with you when you say,  

 

 

“I am not saying that every golf course or setup works that way, but statistically over all courses played by professional male golfers hitting the fairway off the tee is relatively unimportant relative to optimal scoring. “

Rory was 1st in SG off the tee and 104th in driving accuracy in 2019. He knows hitting fairways is far less relevant than distance. 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 3, 2020 by bscinstnct