Matthew Fitzpatrick whines about BDC...

[clevited]

2 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

I ask this respectfully and hope for a thoughtful answer.  
 

why are there rules then ?  If that’s The only goal , to get around in fewest shots , why are there any rules ? 
 

my opinion is that there is indeed an idea as to how it should be played . Many rules hint or directly speak to this.  

I know you didn't ask me this question, but I really can't help myself.  The rules dictate certain perameters to play the game by.  You are allowed to have a bag full of 14 tools to accomplish the lowest score possible.  The performance of these 14 tools has been set in stone for quite some time, as has the ball.  The object is to get the ball in the hole in the fewest number of strokes with these 14 tools.  There are no rules about how many times you must use a certain club, or the type of shot you must hit.  There are no rules saying you have to have a LW, SW, PW 9i-3i etc, you can have any mix you want.  You don't even need to use a putter if you don't want.  Everyone's tool set is different based on the course they are trying to "take apart" in the least moves as possible.  It is a puzzle in so far as how you go about using the tools you have and the skills you possess to beat the other dozens of guys or gals on a tournament weekend.  There is no true right or wrong way to play the game.  Even changing a ball or rolling back equipment isn't going to magically make the best player win every week.  What makes the best player is completely subjective.  I would argue that no one tournament can ever dictate who that is.  The best players are the ones that win frequently and under immense pressure on Sunday.  To me, dealing with the pressure alone is a HUGE skill that might outway almost every other golf skill their is.  Tiger had that, Jack had that, lots of these up and coming guys are full of confidence and talent in that department.

 

As has been said a million times, sports evolve.  Football used to be all about running, but the overwhelming successful strategy of the passing game was discovered and exploited.  It is a different game but entertaining all the same.  Hockey, used to be about enforcers smacking guys all over the place and a handful of great puck handlers dancing through the big slow enforcers.  Now, speed is the game and structure.  That was found to be effective, and later on, something else might be found more effective.  Baseball, the shift, and the change to going much more often for the long ball, need I say more?      

  

[bladehunter]

2 minutes ago, clevited said:

I know you didn't ask me this question, but I really can't help myself.  The rules dictate certain perameters to play the game by.  You are allowed to have a bag full of 14 tools to accomplish the lowest score possible.  The performance of these 14 tools has been set in stone for quite some time, as has the ball.  The object is to get the ball in the hole in the fewest number of strokes with these 14 tools.  There are no rules about how many times you must use a certain club, or the type of shot you must hit.  There are no rules saying you have to have a LW, SW, PW 9i-3i etc, you can have any mix you want.  You don't even need to use a putter if you don't want.  Everyone's tool set is different based on the course they are trying to "take apart" in the least moves as possible.  It is a puzzle in so far as how you go about using the tools you have and the skills you possess to beat the other dozens of guys or gals on a tournament weekend.  There is no true right or wrong way to play the game.  Even changing a ball or rolling back equipment isn't going to magically make the best player win every week.  What makes the best player is completely subjective.  I would argue that no one tournament can ever dictate who that is.  The best players are the ones that win frequently and under immense pressure on Sunday.  To me, dealing with the pressure alone is a HUGE skill that might outway almost every other golf skill their is.  Tiger had that, Jack had that, lots of these up and coming guys are full of confidence and talent in that department.

 

As has been said a million times, sports evolve.  Football used to be all about running, but the overwhelming successful strategy of the passing game was discovered and exploited.  It is a different game but entertaining all the same.  Hockey, used to be about enforcers smacking guys all over the place and a handful of great puck handlers dancing through the big slow enforcers.  Now, speed is the game and structure.  That was found to be effective, and later on, something else might be found more effective.  Baseball, the shift, and the change to going much more often for the long ball, need I say more?      

  

So why the CT test on driver faces ?  Why not unlimited driver size and length ? 
 

why no anchoring with putter ? 
 

why no removable alignment aides ? 
 

why no adjusting of clubs during a round.  
 

I can go on.  

[clevited]

13 minutes ago, gvogel said:

I stand by my statement, and I think that the USGA thinks approximately according to my statement.  And since they have been the rules making body for US golf, they actually get to determine if the equipment has gone too far.  Now, the PGA Tour could come up with their own set of equipment rules; but I think that the US Open, Open Championship and Masters will be conducted according to the equipment specs that the USGA/R&A decide.

 

So you might as well get used to the change.

 

I stand by my past statements that the supposed benifits to the game in the eyes of the USGA and R&A by rolling back equipment to the level it would be necessary to make the impact they seek, is not worth the risk to the appeal of the game.  People like you might be extactic, but I know way more people that have expressed how furious they would be than I do people like you.  The game isn't broken for almost all of those who play, it is subjectively broken according to governing bodies with horrible track records regarding this type of stuff.  The ruling bodies and people like you are trying to bring Mozart back to the game, when the larger population is loving the heavy metal it has currently become.

 

Wait, this just gave me an idea, and idea I have mentioned before, long ago.

 

How about this.....USGA/R&A go start their very own tour! Complete with balata and hickory or whatever.  Bring back the wool coats and slacks up to your crotch.  Start that, then I think you will find that the populace will be so attracted to it that it will win the hearts and minds of all and we will have a unanimous decision to make the roll back happen across the board.  If you are so sure that it is what is best for the game, then there shouldn't be anythign to worry about.  All the invested money will be payed back in full I am sure.

 

Ok, mostly sarcasm but I had to make that point.  No ill will intended, just trying to point out where I think this subjective style of play and idea of proper measurement of the best player is flawed.

[bladehunter]

My point was that no.  The game is not only fewest strokes wins. There are equipment parameters by which this must be achieved.  Those for a rollback are arguing for those parameters to be changed.  
 

you can’t dumb down the game to just “ fewest shots wins “.  

Edited October 16, 2020 by bladehunter

[PureStrikes54]

24 minutes ago, Nard_S said:

Isn't the point of baseball to score runs?

So if they use Ti bats that works right?

If they bring in the fences that works right?

When they had a steroid  issue, that worked right? 

Well apparently MLB did not think so.

 

Golf is the only major sport that does not bifurcate. Think about that one.

 

Football, basketball, hockey & baseball bifurcate. Golf with all it's pretense and empty rhetoric of respect for the game, not only does not bifurcate it steam rolls tradition and history. All so Joe EE Fats moves the ball 15 yards further down the fairway, which allows Protein Boy to launch the game over the trees and out of the arena of play. Thereby leaving the "fan" getting wet in the crotch over "bombs" that annihilate the original intent and design aspect of the course. So Augusta, it was nice,  but your days are numbered. Amazing to think a guy who played gutta & hickory designed that beauty.

 

I'll get off my soap box from here, cheers. 

 

 

You show that strawman.....

[Titleist99]

34 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

I ask this respectfully and hope for a thoughtful answer.  
 

why are there rules then ?  If that’s The only goal , to get around in fewest shots , why are there any rules ? 
 

my opinion is that there is indeed an idea as to how it should be played . Many rules hint or directly speak to this.  

Every game has parameters that the participants follow in general. The specifics are usually generic in order to identify the best players or individual. Take basketball for instance, we know a jumper is worth two point but the rules don't specify how far from the basket a player must shoot. Take football, we know that there's running and passing but the rules do not specify how often for either nor do they specify, underhand throws or forward passes, etc.. Golf has rules that make sure that every player plays by the same rules and the player with the fewest strokes win. There's no rule that say a player must hit Driver to start the game or that every player must be equal in club distance off the tee box......the object of all the games is to win within the parameters given.

Edited October 16, 2020 by Titleist99

[clevited]

7 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

So why the CT test on driver faces ?  Why not unlimited driver size and length ? 
 

why no anchoring with putter ? 
 

why no removable alignment aides ? 
 

why no adjusting of clubs during a round.  
 

I can go on.  

 

Man, I could go on and on about this subject and I really don't want to get into it in this thread.  We can do that over on the other one that is actually about distance and not a tour players controversal comments if you would like though.  Be happy to there.  I think you know what to expect from me though, I have much to say about all of this.

 

[clevited]

39 minutes ago, Nard_S said:

Isn't the point of baseball to score runs?

So if they use Ti bats that works right?

If they bring in the fences that works right?

When they had a steroid  issue, that worked right? 

Well apparently MLB did not think so.

 

Golf is the only major sport that does not bifurcate. Think about that one.

 

Football, basketball, hockey & baseball bifurcate. Golf with all it's pretense and empty rhetoric of respect for the game, not only does not bifurcate it steam rolls tradition and history. All so Joe EE Fats moves the ball 15 yards further down the fairway, which allows Protein Boy to launch the game over the trees and out of the arena of play. Thereby leaving the "fan" getting wet in the crotch over "bombs" that annihilate the original intent and design aspect of the course. So Augusta, it was nice,  but your days are numbered. Amazing to think a guy who played gutta & hickory designed that beauty.

 

I'll get off my soap box from here, cheers. 

 

 

 

-Baseball has rules, rules that have been around for a long time.  Runs are being scored within those rules.  Lots of homeruns are being hit these days largely due to a change in strategy.  The shift is a change in strategy to help a team defend better against a hitter.  I don't see baseball rolling back bats, or balls or making thier stadiums bigger.  Look at the Yankees, they seemingly created a home run hitting park on purpose long ago and have always built their teams to be homerun monsters.

 

-Steroid use is a pretty unanimious no go in all athletic sports, including golf.

 

-Golf is unique in so far as what wins is the least amount of strokes wins the tournament or game.  Whatever way players go about doing that within the rules of the game, is perfectly acceptable.  Changing the game based on an aesthetic that less than half of the golfing population (including elite players) share, is just an illogical thing to do.  Especially when you actually sit down and consider how big of a change that would mean.  

 

-If you go play a golf course with Bryson for instance, you can tell him to hit 4 iron only off the tee and he will still beat you so badly due to all of his other immense skills, not forgetting about his putting on stupid fast greens that you will probably become the biggest Bryson fan ever.

[bladehunter]

18 minutes ago, Titleist99 said:

Every game has parameters that the participants follow in general. The specifics are usually generic in order to identify the best players or individual. Take basketball for instance, we know a jumper is worth two point but the rules don't specify how far from the basket a player must shoot. Take football, we know that there's running and passing but the rules do not specify how often for either nor do they specify, underhand throws or forward passes, etc.. Golf has rules that make sure that every player plays by the same rules and the player with the fewest strokes win. There's no rule that say a player must hit Driver to start the game or that every player must be equal in club distance off the tee box......the object of all the games is to win within the parameters given.

 

10 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

Man, I could go on and on about this subject and I really don't want to get into it in this thread.  We can do that over on the other one that is actually about distance and not a tour players controversal comments if you would like though.  Be happy to there.  I think you know what to expect from me though, I have much to say about all of this.

 

This games equipment rules are not generic. They’ve been specific and have Been changed many times throughout the years. 
 

you’re arguments would hold water if the rules had been unlimited for years and now we wanted a rollback change. But that’s not the case.  They’ve been fluid since day 1.  Asking for a change again whne there’s clear precedent to do so , isn’t crazy talk.  

[clevited]

7 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

 

This games equipment rules are not generic. They’ve been specific and have Been changed many times throughout the years. 
 

you’re arguments would hold water if the rules had been unlimited for years and now we wanted a rollback change. But that’s not the case.  They’ve been fluid since day 1.  Asking for a change again whne there’s clear precedent to do so , isn’t crazy talk.  

 

But there isn't clear precident.

Edited October 16, 2020 by clevited

[Titleist99]

26 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

My point was that no.  The game is not only fewest strokes wins. There are equipment parameters by which this must be achieved.  Those for a rollback are arguing for those parameters to be changed.  
 

you can’t dumb down the game to just “ fewest shots wins “.  

It appears that your Idea of fairness is to give all players the same manufacturers clubs and balls, make the same length clubs mandatory and restrict each player to the same time for work outs and finally only allow players that's six feet tall to play the game of golf.....(almost sarcasm).

[mahonie]

2 hours ago, Titleist99 said:

My point is that golf is not about playing the way the architect planned it or hitting long irons into par fours or hitting greens in two on par fives.....golf is strictly about getting around any golf course be it nine, eighteen or twenty two holes in the fewest strokes....now that's the object of the game.....IMO

 

An enduring foundation of golf is that success in getting a ball from the tee to the hole in the fewest strokes should depend on using many different skills and judgments, rather than be dominated by only one or a few.

[gvogel]

57 minutes ago, Nard_S said:

Isn't the point of baseball to score runs?

So if they use Ti bats that works right?

If they bring in the fences that works right?

When they had a steroid  issue, that worked right? 

Well apparently MLB did not think so.

 

Golf is the only major sport that does not bifurcate. Think about that one.

 

Football, basketball, hockey & baseball bifurcate. Golf with all it's pretense and empty rhetoric of respect for the game, not only does not bifurcate it steam rolls tradition and history. All so Joe EE Fats moves the ball 15 yards further down the fairway, which allows Protein Boy to launch the game over the trees and out of the arena of play. Thereby leaving the "fan" getting wet in the crotch over "bombs" that annihilate the original intent and design aspect of the course. So Augusta, it was nice,  but your days are numbered. Amazing to think a guy who played gutta & hickory designed that beauty.

 

I'll get off my soap box from here, cheers. 

 

Nard, I like your post, but Bobby Jones never played gutties.  The wound ball came into being in 1903 when Jones was 1 years old.

 

I suppose McKenzie might have played some guttie golf, but by 1931 when he and Jones got together to lay out Augusta National, gutties were history.

[physasst]

Didn't DJ hit Jack Nicklaus's old driver with a carry of 290. Keeping in mind that it wasn't like he had time to optimize his swing for it. 

 

 

[Frankensteins Monster]

1 hour ago, jmck said:

Nah.  This is like watching Nike create magical rocket shoes which increase everyone's vert by 24", then insisting that everything's fine with the NBA despite the magic shoes and anyone who says otherwise--or dares suggest that the rim should be raised!--is just being a complainer. 

 

Bryson could keep going until he looks like a young Schwarzenegger, but take modern equipment away from him and he's SOL with his current swing/game plan.  The equipment is the chicken here, Bryson is the egg.

I get what you're saying even though I don't agree, but it's not remotely close to what this thread is about.

Everybody has access to all the same equipment. Fitzpatrick is whining because someone is working harder, working smarter, planning smarter, is bigger, and is obviously more talented, thus far.

[Titleist99]

10 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

 

This games equipment rules are not generic. They’ve been specific and have Been changed many times throughout the years. 
 

you’re arguments would hold water if the rules had been unlimited for years and now we wanted a rollback change. But that’s not the case.  They’ve been fluid since day 1.  Asking for a change again whne there’s clear precedent to do so , isn’t crazy talk.  

LOL!.....I think that deep, deep down inside ......You know it's crazy talk.

Just kidding! I could go for a bigger ball though, maybe  1.68-1.70 ozs.

[gvogel]

19 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

But there isn't clear precident.

In 1931 the USGA changed the specs for the ball - they made in lighter.  It didn't go as far.  Problem was, it was also more difficult to play in the wind.  Because of feedback from both pros and amateurs, they decided to go back to the previous specs the next year.

While the change didn't work, there is precedent for changing the ball.  Next time they will probably test the new specs pretty intensely before adopting them.

[clevited]

7 minutes ago, gvogel said:

In 1931 the USGA changed the specs for the ball - they made in lighter.  It didn't go as far.  Problem was, it was also more difficult to play in the wind.  Because of feedback from both pros and amateurs, they decided to go back to the previous specs the next year.

While the change didn't work, there is precedent for changing the ball.  Next time they will probably test the new specs pretty intensely before adopting them.

 

Tell me what the precident is, and what the factual concerns are.  The course lengthening thing has never been a real argument btw.  Lots of info out there disproving the need for longer courses.  Pace of play is also not factual.  The entire reasoning for this push for a rollback is because courses aren't being played as architects intended them and golf isn't being played how a realitively small group of people, who do not represent golf as a whole in reality FEEL.  

 

If they can put down some hard, undeniable facts that are worrysome for the lasting legacy of the game that has anything to do with distance, I am all ears.  Last I checked, people don't play the game because kids ain't got time for that crap, not because anyone hits it too far or skill in the game has diminished at all.

[Nard_S]

7 minutes ago, gvogel said:

Nard, I like your post, but Bobby Jones never played gutties.  The wound ball came into being in 1903 when Jones was 1 years old.

 

I suppose McKenzie might have played some guttie golf, but by 1931 when he and Jones got together to lay out Augusta National, gutties were history.

Thank you I stand corrected. 

 

 

[bladehunter]

38 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

But there isn't clear precident.

Sure there is.  Anchor ban . Groove rule . CT measure CC limit etc

[bladehunter]

29 minutes ago, physasst said:

Didn't DJ hit Jack Nicklaus's old driver with a carry of 290. Keeping in mind that it wasn't like he had time to optimize his swing for it. 

 

 

There’s a huge difference  between 290 and 378.  

[Titleist99]

1 hour ago, clevited said:

I know you didn't ask me this question, but I really can't help myself.  The rules dictate certain perameters to play the game by.  You are allowed to have a bag full of 14 tools to accomplish the lowest score possible.  The performance of these 14 tools has been set in stone for quite some time, as has the ball.  The object is to get the ball in the hole in the fewest number of strokes with these 14 tools.  There are no rules about how many times you must use a certain club, or the type of shot you must hit.  There are no rules saying you have to have a LW, SW, PW 9i-3i etc, you can have any mix you want.  You don't even need to use a putter if you don't want.  Everyone's tool set is different based on the course they are trying to "take apart" in the least moves as possible.  It is a puzzle in so far as how you go about using the tools you have and the skills you possess to beat the other dozens of guys or gals on a tournament weekend.  There is no true right or wrong way to play the game.  Even changing a ball or rolling back equipment isn't going to magically make the best player win every week.  What makes the best player is completely subjective.  I would argue that no one tournament can ever dictate who that is.  The best players are the ones that win frequently and under immense pressure on Sunday.  To me, dealing with the pressure alone is a HUGE skill that might outway almost every other golf skill their is.  Tiger had that, Jack had that, lots of these up and coming guys are full of confidence and talent in that department.

 

As has been said a million times, sports evolve.  Football used to be all about running, but the overwhelming successful strategy of the passing game was discovered and exploited.  It is a different game but entertaining all the same.  Hockey, used to be about enforcers smacking guys all over the place and a handful of great puck handlers dancing through the big slow enforcers.  Now, speed is the game and structure.  That was found to be effective, and later on, something else might be found more effective.  Baseball, the shift, and the change to going much more often for the long ball, need I say more?      

  

Thanks for a well thought out message. Should be required read for every GOLFWRXer.

[clevited]

4 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Sure there is.  Anchor ban . Groove rule . CT measure CC limit etc

 

There is clear precident in putting a limit on something that can indeed fundamentally change the game a lot, whether it might be good or bad.  (Change has a lot of unknowns I am sure you are aware, especcially big changes).  Limits are in place, and have been in place for a long time.  The talk is about rolling back limits in some way, and quite a lot.  It will be a major change in a direction that will piss off a lot of people or it will end up being just like the other changes that didn't have precident (groove rule, anchor ban).  

 

I have said this before, and I will say it again.  All this wasted time and money the USGA/R&A spent/are spending discussing and pissing and moaning about distance could have been better spent thinking of ideas to attract younger players and keep the game alive.  It also would be better spend being forward thinking in so far as catching equipment changing aspects that could come up in the future.  I can name many they already missed the boat on, things I actually have been thinking about for years and are now becoming more and more prevalent.

 

-CG location

-Hollow Iron heads

-Shaft/club overall weight

-Shaft characteristics

-MOI

 

These are all things they also missed the boat on, and some like the further lightening of driver shafts and the hollow headed irons are pretty recent missed opportunities to limit.  Nobody gets mad about limits being put on things, but hardly anyone loves the ol nerfbat when it comes to anything.

[clevited]

15 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

There’s a huge difference  between 290 and 378.  

What does 290 downhill, downwind on 10 stimp fairways become?  Still a "problem".  No rollback would ever be enough and would just piss people off.  Only this time, way more people than groove rule and anchor ban I am sure of it.

[Titleist99]

1 hour ago, bladehunter said:

So why the CT test on driver faces ?  Why not unlimited driver size and length ? 
 

why no anchoring with putter ? 
 

why no removable alignment aides ? 
 

why no adjusting of clubs during a round.  
 

I can go on.  

No anchoring, no removable alignment aides, no club adjusting during rounds because that's cheating. No unlimited driver length because they do not want a 75" driver and players using it to take two club lengths from the penalty area...

[physasst]

28 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

There’s a huge difference  between 290 and 378.  

Well of course, but he didn't get a chance to maximize swinging it constantly.  Is there difference in equipment? of course there is.. but so what?

 

 I think what some of the pro rollback golfer's do not realize is that some of us want to see them hit 400 yd. drives.  I would love to watch a PGA tour pro demolish a course with 425 yd drives.

 

 While wearing a hoodie and black socks.  What I do not understand and what no one has convinced me of, is why a rollback is needed? Who cares if Bryson drives every par 4 green from now on. It's a problem that affects 0.00001% of golfers. Whether they are hitting 290 or 490 has NO impact on my game or my enjoyment of it. 

 

To be honest, you'd probably get more young people into golf if you had someone jacking drives into every par 4. I'd tune into watch. 

 

Edited October 16, 2020 by physasst

[gvogel]

44 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Sure there is.  Anchor ban . Groove rule . CT measure CC limit etc

Also this: COR was more generous under R&A rules at one time, but was rolled back to .830 so as to be the same as the USGA.

[gvogel]

16 minutes ago, physasst said:

Well of course, but he didn't get a chance to maximize swinging it constantly.  Is there difference in equipment? of course there is.. but so what?

 

 I think what some of the pro rollback golfer's do not realize is that some of us want to see them hit 400 yd. drives.  I would love to watch a PGA tour pro demolish a course with 425 yd drives.

 

 While wearing a hoodie and black socks.  What I do not understand and what no one has convinced me of, is why a rollback is needed? Who cares if Bryson drives every par 4 green from now on. It's a problem that affects 0.00001% of golfers. Whether they are hitting 290 or 490 has NO impact on my game or my enjoyment of it. 

 

To be honest, you'd probably get more young people into golf if you had someone jacking drives into every par 4. I'd tune into watch. 

 

Well, if there is sufficient demand for folks who want to see 400 yard drives, the PGA Tour could determine their own equipment specs which might make that possible.  Write Jay Monahan a letter.

[Nard_S]

1 hour ago, clevited said:

 

 

-Baseball has rules, rules that have been around for a long time. ........  I don't see baseball rolling back bats, or balls or making thier stadiums bigger.  

 

-If you go play a golf course with Bryson for instance, you can tell him to hit 4 iron only off the tee and he will still beat you so badly due to all of his other immense skills, not forgetting about his putting on stupid fast greens that you will probably become the biggest Bryson fan ever.

Yes, baseball has rules and they differentiate them from amateurs and professionals with an eye to keeping the game in context with it's history. On a gear level, they don't need to rollback, because they never really rolled all that much "forward" the way golf has. 

 

If Bryson played with Hogan's driver and hit Norman's ball and still did what he's doing I would be his biggest fan. He can't. 

 

The ignorance about what kind of game was being played 30 years ago compared to the game that is being played today is incredible. The fault for that chasm lies not with the public but with ruling bodies and stewards who are supposed to be looking out for the long term. Not all change is good, progress can take away as well as give, things can get lost or things morph and next thing you know you got less than what you started with. 

 

 

 

[mahonie]

13 minutes ago, Nard_S said:

Yes, baseball has rules and they differentiate them from amateurs and professionals with an eye to keeping the game in context with it's history. On a gear level, they don't need to rollback, because they never really rolled all that much "forward" the way golf has. 

 

If Bryson played with Hogan's driver and hit Norman's ball and still did what he's doing I would be his biggest fan. He can't. 

 

The ignorance about what kind of game was being played 30 years ago compared to the game that is being played today is incredible. The fault for that chasm lies not with the public but with ruling bodies and stewards who are supposed to be looking out for the long term. Not all change is good, progress can take away as well as give, things can get lost or things morph and next thing you know you got less than what you started with. 

 

 

 

The game used to be about playing shots, now it’s just about hitting the ball...only half the game it used to be.