distance debate

[BIG STU]

On 7/18/2022 at 5:55 PM, munichop said:

The issue at the highest levels of sport are to balance the entertainment aspect of the competition with the integrity of the competition so you can promote the sport and somehow make money from it.  There is now a whole generation of golfers who have never used anything but the the latest tech equipment and have no idea how much more challenging it was to shoot near or below par on a full length golf course. 

2 weeks ago I shot my career best 65 on a course I have played for 20 years.  It beat the 66 I shot when I won the northern amateur  18 years ago- from the same tees.  But I have lost 15 mph clubhead speed on my driver, my eyes are worse plus all the other aging issues that pop up affecting my ability to score.  There is no way the recent 65 was better than the older 66.  The equipment has shortened the course for all the players at the highest levels.  They regularly play courses over 1000 yards shorter than they should but everyone thinks they are so good.  The reality is they are not tested the way players once were.  Give all the mlb hitters aluminum bats and watch the home run records fall.  But don't tell me they are better hitters.

I said this in another thread--- At my course some of the over 70 crowd still hits the driver good--- They were discussing that the other day---- I told them and this is myself included that the modern equipment balls and drivers made it possible--- I told one of them Want a dose of reality? Here as I handed him my persimmon driver hit this. Now I am not going to lie when playing seriously or in the scrambles the sorta modern firepower is in the bag. But when I am doing the dewsweeper rounds ( as in this morning in a few Lord willing) I move up one set of tees and play my vintage stuff. Honestly I do it not to prove any point but because I want to and it is fun for me.

We have several younger members that bomb it. The other week I teamed with a guy and his son on the Shootout. That guy is in his late 30s and bombs it out there. His kid asked me if I was that age did I bomb it like his Dad? I said no because of the equipment. His Dad is versed in golf and told me one day to let the kid hit one of my drivers with a wound or balata ball.

Now I have no illusions and no problems golf has evolved. These days we have better knowledge of the swing and the equipment and also dynamics of the human body. 

[Titleist99]

4 hours ago, Pastit said:

Seems a bit of a quandary though to be moving up tees in majors whilst decrying equipment advances. I don’t have an issue with making one short par 4 a little shorter. In a Major though, on the last hole ?  Complete joke in the Evian - watered down the hole !! Ha ha. 

Golf keeps stats on everything, but I can't find the one for total course yardage per round.

Tee box adjustment happens all the time due to a number of things.

 

LOL!.....Evian wanted to up the entertainment factor.....

[clevited]

4 hours ago, BIG STU said:

I said this in another thread--- At my course some of the over 70 crowd still hits the driver good--- They were discussing that the other day---- I told them and this is myself included that the modern equipment balls and drivers made it possible--- I told one of them Want a dose of reality? Here as I handed him my persimmon driver hit this. Now I am not going to lie when playing seriously or in the scrambles the sorta modern firepower is in the bag. But when I am doing the dewsweeper rounds ( as in this morning in a few Lord willing) I move up one set of tees and play my vintage stuff. Honestly I do it not to prove any point but because I want to and it is fun for me.

We have several younger members that bomb it. The other week I teamed with a guy and his son on the Shootout. That guy is in his late 30s and bombs it out there. His kid asked me if I was that age did I bomb it like his Dad? I said no because of the equipment. His Dad is versed in golf and told me one day to let the kid hit one of my drivers with a wound or balata ball.

Now I have no illusions and no problems golf has evolved. These days we have better knowledge of the swing and the equipment and also dynamics of the human body. 

 

 

"These days we have better knowledge of the swing and the equipment and also dynamics of the human body." 

 

We certainly do imo.  We have a better understanding of what is ideal as far as performance and what isn't.  Back then, nobody really was aware of the fact they spun a club too much to get the most out of it.  I remember just judging the ball flight.  If it ballooned it was bad, if it didn't balloon, it was good.  Today we know exactly what is bad and what is good so that we can maximize the traits we want.  Desire stability and control?  Well, make it so your driver spins in the high 2000s and launches a little lower.  Desire maximum carry?  Well, make it so you can launch at 15* and spin in the low 2ks.  Back in the day, the naturally fast guys had the artificial disadvantage of not having equipment that suited them readily available.  Today, we now have an even playing field such that the truly fast and athletic guys can actually utilize their talent. 

 

Yes, the ball changed too such that you didn't have to choose between a low spin solid core ball that was tough to work around the greens and spinnier and less durable wound balls.  That to me is a good thing, not a "ball goes too far" thing.  The speed specs for a golf ball haven't changed in decades I don't think, nor has the distance requirement changed much if at all in that time I don't think. 

 

The drivers did get a little hotter, and bigger but they also got longer and lighter.  Longer adds more dispersion, lighter can actually add more dispersion as it can be hard to time if it is much lighter feeling than your other clubs.  I do however think all of these things should have been prevented at the time and since they have been allowed to live for so long at all levels of golf, they should not be changed.  Instead, the RBs should just further refine their limits and react sooner when something pushes the distance limits further than they like.  Lighter and lighter shafts come to mind and thus the RBs could be forward thinking and put a limit on overall club weight or shaft weight or something.  They could also retro react as long as it is within something reasonable like a year or two and hasn't yet been mass adopted.  

 

Just a bit of a ramble on my part there, but that part of your post really struck me.

[roger99]

we should reset ball and club bring some skill back into it 

[Double Mocha Man]

39 minutes ago, clevited said:

The drivers did get a little hotter, and bigger but they also got longer and lighter. 

 

Just an aside. Do you suppose there is research and development out there that could immediately, if implemented, give us 50 extra yards on our drives? While still having the driver look like a driver and be no longer than 46 inches?  And the head no bigger than 460cc?

 

 

 

 

Edited July 25, 2022 by Double Mocha Man

[gvogel]

31 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

 

Just an aside. Do you suppose there is research and development out there that could immediately, if implemented, give us 50 extra yards on our drives? While still having the driver look like a driver and be no longer than 46 inches?  And the head no bigger than 460cc?

 

 

 

 

You could shave the driver face and get more yards, but you have to be careful because at some point it will fail.  The big change would have to be the ball, and I do not work for Titleist so I cannot answer that question.

[cardia10]

We can all thank COVID for basically saving amateur golf as courses around the country were drying up prior. As we discuss rolling everything back, I immediately think make tougher. Hard to keep people interested if all they do is beat their head against a wall playing a game you can't improve at because of a ruling body that wants to shape a game for .01% of the population.

[PorkChopExpress]

doesn’t matter how far the ball goes, still got to get the ball into the hole

 

ain’t no equipment helping with that

 

just ask Will Z

 

 

Edited July 25, 2022 by PorkChopExpress

[Double Mocha Man]

11 minutes ago, cardia10 said:

We can all thank COVID for basically saving amateur golf as courses around the country were drying up prior. As we discuss rolling everything back, I immediately think make tougher. Hard to keep people interested if all they do is beat their head against a wall playing a game you can't improve at because of a ruling body that wants to shape a game for .01% of the population.

 

Well said.

[clevited]

59 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

 

Just an aside. Do you suppose there is research and development out there that could immediately, if implemented, give us 50 extra yards on our drives? While still having the driver look like a driver and be no longer than 46 inches?  And the head no bigger than 460cc?

 

 

 

 

 

Not within the rules of golf as they currently are no.  You can certainly find 50 yards that a ignorant player is losing from playing badly fit equipment, and improving their  swing though.

 

If we are talking outside the rules of golf, possibly yes.  I think achieving a COR closer to theoretical maximum is doable, making clubs as long as 50 inches is certainly doable, making clubs lighter while stiff and durable enough to take the abuse and launch the ball well is doable.  Aside from shafts getting lighter while still being stiff enough for a fast player to swing, and the heads getting slightly more forgiving, we haven't really achieved much in the past 15 years.  Limits have made sure of that.

Edited July 25, 2022 by clevited

[clevited]

15 minutes ago, cardia10 said:

We can all thank COVID for basically saving amateur golf as courses around the country were drying up prior. As we discuss rolling everything back, I immediately think make tougher. Hard to keep people interested if all they do is beat their head against a wall playing a game you can't improve at because of a ruling body that wants to shape a game for .01% of the population.

 

Yep. I have introduced many people to the game, only a few have kept playing it.  Reason?  Two of them actually, the image of the game being uppity/snobby/expensive and the game being way too hard.  This is all with modern equipment.  No need to make it any harder.  As I have said before, the USGA's mantra of growing the game, and rolling back equipment are mutually exclusive.

[So_Cal]

30 minutes ago, cardia10 said:

We can all thank COVID for basically saving amateur golf as courses around the country were drying up prior. As we discuss rolling everything back, I immediately think make tougher. Hard to keep people interested if all they do is beat their head against a wall playing a game you can't improve at because of a ruling body that wants to shape a game for .01% of the population.

I don’t think anyone wants to roll equipment back for the average Joe.  I wouldn’t mind seeing a ball in the majors that makes the players think more and use ever club in the bag, especially if the decision makers want to go back to St Andrews and Merion in the future. 

[BIG STU]

44 minutes ago, gvogel said:

You could shave the driver face and get more yards, but you have to be careful because at some point it will fail.  The big change would have to be the ball, and I do not work for Titleist so I cannot answer that question.

Now remember if you shave a driver face and like you said then durability will be a issue then especially with a young hitter with tons of SS. Then again you will exceed the COR limits which the USGA has had in place for some time. Manufacturers are pushing the limits now with the things they are doing. 

[BIG STU]

1 hour ago, clevited said:

 

 

"These days we have better knowledge of the swing and the equipment and also dynamics of the human body." 

 

We certainly do imo.  We have a better understanding of what is ideal as far as performance and what isn't.  Back then, nobody really was aware of the fact they spun a club too much to get the most out of it.  I remember just judging the ball flight.  If it ballooned it was bad, if it didn't balloon, it was good.  Today we know exactly what is bad and what is good so that we can maximize the traits we want.  Desire stability and control?  Well, make it so your driver spins in the high 2000s and launches a little lower.  Desire maximum carry?  Well, make it so you can launch at 15* and spin in the low 2ks.  Back in the day, the naturally fast guys had the artificial disadvantage of not having equipment that suited them readily available.  Today, we now have an even playing field such that the truly fast and athletic guys can actually utilize their talent. 

 

Yes, the ball changed too such that you didn't have to choose between a low spin solid core ball that was tough to work around the greens and spinnier and less durable wound balls.  That to me is a good thing, not a "ball goes too far" thing.  The speed specs for a golf ball haven't changed in decades I don't think, nor has the distance requirement changed much if at all in that time I don't think. 

 

The drivers did get a little hotter, and bigger but they also got longer and lighter.  Longer adds more dispersion, lighter can actually add more dispersion as it can be hard to time if it is much lighter feeling than your other clubs.  I do however think all of these things should have been prevented at the time and since they have been allowed to live for so long at all levels of golf, they should not be changed.  Instead, the RBs should just further refine their limits and react sooner when something pushes the distance limits further than they like.  Lighter and lighter shafts come to mind and thus the RBs could be forward thinking and put a limit on overall club weight or shaft weight or something.  They could also retro react as long as it is within something reasonable like a year or two and hasn't yet been mass adopted.  

 

Just a bit of a ramble on my part there, but that part of your post really struck me.

You and I are on the same wavelength--- Thank you for explaining in detail you did an excellent job

[cardia10]

4 minutes ago, So_Cal said:

I don’t think anyone wants to roll equipment back for the average Joe.  I wouldn’t mind seeing a ball in the majors that makes the players think more and use ever club in the bag, especially if the decision makers want to go back to St Andrews and Merion in the future. 

I do think if we have a rollback, it will be for everyone. Look at the groove rule. Doesn't even effect the pros yet they stand by it like it was the greatest decision ever. Proximity to the rough has been basically unchanged for 20 years on tour. You know what makes a pro shake, a tough course. There is a reason the pros complain so much about the conditioning at a US open, because it is hard and they can't shoot 66 every round. If anyone did the USGA distance survey they sent, they can see how the answers only let you say that distance was a problem. Their biased survey was the problem.

Edited July 25, 2022 by cardia10

[Simpsonia]

7 minutes ago, So_Cal said:

I don’t think anyone wants to roll equipment back for the average Joe.  I wouldn’t mind seeing a ball in the majors that makes the players think more and use ever club in the bag, especially if the decision makers want to go back to St Andrews and Merion in the future. 

 

Just 20 pages ago you were advocating for shrinking the game because you couldn't get a tee time or join a reasonably priced club in SoCal. Just distancing yourself from the unpopular opinion now?

 

Quoted for posterity's sake. 

On 6/24/2022 at 5:50 PM, So_Cal said:

There could be nothing better than shrinking the game.  Way too popular now. 

 

Quote

No I’m serious.  Can’t join a decent club or get a tee time at even lower tier courses in my area. 

 

Edited July 25, 2022 by Simpsonia

[PorkChopExpress]

I’m in the club of wanting those Covid golfers to go away

 

Don’t care if it’s a dying sport, golf will always be around

tennis is already dead but somehow still more popular than golf by a mile 

[BIG STU]

4 minutes ago, So_Cal said:

I don’t think anyone wants to roll equipment back for the average Joe.  I wouldn’t mind seeing a ball in the majors that makes the players think more and use ever club in the bag, especially if the decision makers want to go back to St Andrews and Merion in the future. 

I have said this before on the subject of rolling the ball back. Right now if they came up with rules limiting distance whether balls or drivers or both. How many rank and file recreational golfers would buy the stuff? I mean there are billions of balls meeting todays standards already out there and the same for drivers I would suspect. Maybe not billions of drivers but you get my drift. The average recreational player is not going to spend money on equipment that will stifle their distance. Especially an old fart like me I need all the help I can get. It would cut the manufacturers sales more than half. Now you would have a certain contengent of amateurs that play stipulated events etc go to that type of equipment, One of the reasons I am for birufaction of the rules. Frankly I could care less how far the pros hit it. I would say 99% of all folks playing this game worldwide could care less what the USGA the R&A or the PGA say and do. My .02 FWIW

[BIG STU]

11 minutes ago, cardia10 said:

I do think if we have a rollback, it will be for everyone. Look at the groove rule. Doesn't even effect the pros yet they stand by it like it was the greatest decision ever. Proximity to the rough has been basically unchanged for 20 years on tour. You know what makes a pro shake, a tough course. There is a reason the pros complain so much about the conditioning at a US open, because it is hard and they can't shoot 66 every round. If anyone did the USGA distance survey they sent, they can see how the answers only let you say that distance was a problem. Their biased survey was the problem.

I agree 110% and anyone who knows me on here and the other site I go on will tell you I am the biggest USGA detractor around--- 

[PorkChopExpress]

While we’re here, can we get rid of the groove rule too

[Simpsonia]

4 minutes ago, BIG STU said:

I have said this before on the subject of rolling the ball back. Right now if they came up with rules limiting distance whether balls or drivers or both. How many rank and file recreational golfers would buy the stuff? I mean there are billions of balls meeting todays standards already out there and the same for drivers I would suspect. Maybe not billions of drivers but you get my drift. The average recreational player is not going to spend money on equipment that will stifle their distance. Especially an old fart like me I need all the help I can get. It would cut the manufacturers sales more than half. Now you would have a certain contengent of amateurs that play stipulated events etc go to that type of equipment, One of the reasons I am for birufaction of the rules. Frankly I could care less how far the pros hit it. I would say 99% of all folks playing this game worldwide could care less what the USGA the R&A or the PGA say and do. My .02 FWIW

 

The issue is whether the OEMs would want to even bother making equipment that is non-conforming. As a reminder, there is literally nothing at all stopping any of the big OEMs from making a 600cc driver and marketing it to the average weekend hacker as the "most forgiving and longest driver ever made"(TM), as you say they don't care about conforming equipment necessarily. The reason they don't is multi-fold. First, the big dollar advertising from sponsored players (Rory et al) can't play them, so they lose all of the value from sponsoring tour pros. Second, it's incredibly expensive to maintain two completely separate R&D and manufacturing lines. 

Edited July 25, 2022 by Simpsonia

[So_Cal]

2 minutes ago, BIG STU said:

I agree 110% and anyone who knows me on here and the other site I go on will tell you I am the biggest USGA detractor around--- 

I don’t think viewers would even notice if there was a rollback in majors.  Frankly I don’t care how far the pro drives go, but I do want to see something other than driver wedge.  

[golfer07840]

We're still doing this? 

[BIG STU]

1 minute ago, PorkChopExpress said:

While we’re here, can we get rid of the groove rule too

That is what got me started on the USGA tirade--- but then again I am retired frm the Mini Tours and do not keep a stipulated handicap or play stipulated events anymore so I play what I darn well please. No one I play with gives two rips what someone plays

[PorkChopExpress]

1 minute ago, golfer07840 said:

We're still doing this? 

Yup

and it’s Great

[golfer07840]

1 minute ago, So_Cal said:

I don’t think viewers would even notice if there was a rollback in majors.  Frankly I don’t care how far the pro drives go, but I do want to see something other than driver wedge.  

Ah yes, because every player on every hole hits driver/wedge. 

 

 

[golfer07840]

14 minutes ago, PorkChopExpress said:

I’m in the club of wanting those Covid golfers to go away

 

Don’t care if it’s a dying sport, golf will always be around

tennis is already dead but somehow still more popular than golf by a mile 

The COVID golfers have gone away here in northern NJ. Can pretty much play at anytime you want now. 

[Double Mocha Man]

6 minutes ago, golfer07840 said:

We're still doing this? 

 

We're fighting for our rights until the OEM's add 50 yards to our drivers.  😁

 

What do we want?  Longer drivers.  When do we want them? Now!  (holding up protest sign)

Edited July 25, 2022 by Double Mocha Man

[Double Mocha Man]

14 minutes ago, BIG STU said:

No one I play with gives two rips what someone plays

 

I bought a non-conforming driver once, just for some brief fun, and my golfing buds at the time thought it was a criminal capitol federal offense.  Though they all wanted to try it out.

Edited July 25, 2022 by Double Mocha Man

[PorkChopExpress]

1 minute ago, golfer07840 said:

The COVID golfers have gone away here in northern NJ. Can pretty much play at anytime you want now. 

Have ya played Mcullough Emerald?