distance debate

[buckeyefl]

4 minutes ago, gvogel said:

IF you think that 4 driveable par 4's at the Home of Golf is your idea of modern golf, we have a serious difference of opinion.

 

Maybe in your world, a golf course should consist of 18 par 3 holes.

 

reposting in case you missed it and are playing a different game.

 

The game fits into all courses now, yesterday and every day in the future. "Hit ball into hole with as few stroke as possible." Yep its alive and well with a bright future.

 

BTW 18 par threes is a golf course as is 9 holes, 27 holes 6 holes or 12 holes, see above definition.

 

 For one interested in rolling things back you sure forgot your history awfully quickly. Weren't we just recently discussing a venue whos original layout was 22 holes? Was that Old Course not a golf course? What would your former playing partner Mr. Morris think of such blasphemy?

 

Also what's "modern golf?" It's all golf unless you are talking about something like Top Golf which is a completely different animal.

[TLUBulldogGolf]

3 hours ago, Simpsonia said:

 

It's not about golf though. I'm trying to get a baseline understanding. Honestly because I think rollbackers and non-rollbackers are just approaching this from two completely different sides, and will never see eye to eye. 

 

Non-Rollbackers care about who wins at the end of the day, who had the lowest score to par over 4 days, which racer had the lowest times and who crossed the finish line first, which tennis player won the most sets, regardless of how they did it. 

 

Rollbackers don't care about the competition or who wins at the end of the day, they care about HOW the game/sport is played. They don't care that the fastest driver wins the race, or how many sets Nadal wins by. They care that the race car took certain turns at a certain speed as designed by the now long dead course designer, or that Roche and Laver never really left the court and frequently played up to the net. They dislike that Nadal et al now often play 8 feet behind the back of the court. They hate the fact that the freakishly athletic John Isner has an obscene amount of Aces (points off of a serve without being hit by the opponent, for you non tennis people). 

 

At the end of the day, it's about control, or maybe the the lack of control that they fear. 

‘I’m trying to get a baseline understanding’…proceeds to go on bad faith rant.

[MattC555]

37 minutes ago, Pastit said:

Effectively, I think there was a lap time constriction in F1, memory fails me but it may have been in the V8 3.5 ltr formula when the lap times became dangerous.

 

I assume you know that the “ formula “ is changeable ? Lower engine capacity turbo era. Also, ground-effect was banned, Nicki Laura’s “ reverse hovercraft “ design, Tyrell 6-wheel cars and so on. 

 

While F1 does regulate the overall speed of the cars for safety purposes, modern cars are by and large the fastest. 

 

https://f1.fandom.com/wiki/Lap_Record

[Singletrack1]

1 hour ago, beckk10 said:

The golf ball is broken for sure. It hardly curves, flies really high an far with minimal spin, still great around the greens. 

 

I think there may be a couple alternate universes out there. Both Callaway's and Titleist's "curve" to the left off my driver and 3w sometimes! 😆

[TLUBulldogGolf]

14 minutes ago, MattC555 said:

 

While F1 does regulate the overall speed of the cars for safety purposes, modern cars are by and large the fastest. 

 

https://f1.fandom.com/wiki/Lap_Record

Because they have crazy downforce. Notice Monza is still held by a V10 era car, though the modern cars are faster in qualifying.

Edited July 26, 2022 by TLUBulldogGolf

[Pastit]

40 minutes ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

Because they have crazy downforce. Notice Monza is still held by a V10 era car, though the modern cars are faster in qualifying.

Was the V10 in the traction control era, later banned I think ? Actually, it’s probably a good argument for additional gear regs in golf when the technical development outstrips the tracks. 

Edited July 26, 2022 by Pastit

[Simpsonia]

10 minutes ago, Pastit said:

Was the V10 in the traction control era, later banned I think ? Actually, it’s probably a good argument for additional gear regs in golf when the technical development outstrips the tracks. 

 

That's safety related. Not a lot of safety concerns in golf. 

[clevited]

8 minutes ago, Simpsonia said:

 

That's safety related. Not a lot of safety concerns in golf. 

 

I have heard that touted as a reason to roll back distance before, just you wait 😆

[roger99]

2 hours ago, buckeyefl said:

Tell us about all of the tennis courts that change size.

 

if they hadnt changed the ball instead, theyd have to change court dimensions, definitely. cheers.

[roger99]

2 hours ago, buckeyefl said:

 

No that would be skill. Nice try though.

 

BTW what evil, demon spawn new age equipment are you playing these days?

 

then why does every major sport I can think of continue to produce extreme outlier athletes.. except golf? Brady, Messi, Federer, Root, Mayweather ARENT skilful?? Really?

Edited July 26, 2022 by roger99

[roger99]

2 hours ago, buckeyefl said:

 

No that would be skill. Nice try though.

 

BTW what evil, demon spawn new age equipment are you playing these days?

 

I have to play by the rules for handicap purposes (or just not play any competitions). But Id far prefer if all scratch ams and better, and pro's were treated like grown ups. Its time to bifurcate.

[buckeyefl]

7 minutes ago, roger99 said:

 

I have to play by the rules for handicap purposes (or just not play any competitions). But Id far prefer if all scratch ams and better, and pro's were treated like grown ups. Its time to bifurcate.

Was that an answer? It sure didn't sound like one but maybe you can point out where the answers were located.

[buckeyefl]

11 minutes ago, roger99 said:

 

then why does every major sport I can think of continue to produce extreme outlier athletes.. except golf? Brady, Messi, Federer, Root, Mayweather ARENT skilful?? Really?

And top golfers aren't skillful? You're talking yourself in circles. 

[buckeyefl]

16 minutes ago, roger99 said:

 

if they hadnt changed the ball instead, theyd have to change court dimensions, definitely. cheers.

Again that's not an answer. Also it's not a definitive conclusion but just another opinion. Do you also believe par three courses aren't golf courses like your comrade?

[beckk10]

1 hour ago, Singletrack1 said:

a

 

1 hour ago, Singletrack1 said:

 

I think there may be a couple alternate universes out there. Both Callaway's and Titleist's "curve" to the left off my driver and 3w sometimes! 😆

I find the new golf balls fly very straight and it takes me a lot of effort to move the ball much at all in any direction!!

[The Aspidistra in the Hall]

1 hour ago, Singletrack1 said:

 

I think there may be a couple alternate universes out there. Both Callaway's and Titleist's "curve" to the left off my driver and 3w sometimes! 😆

What you don't say is that if you were using a pre ProV1 Titleist golfball with the same swing, it wouldn't just curve left it would be off the planet left! lol.

[roger99]

42 minutes ago, buckeyefl said:

Was that an answer? It sure didn't sound like one but maybe you can point out where the answers were located.

 

I do apologise

 

yes I use a 460 and a pro v, because my competition does. Id prefer it if we didnt.

[roger99]

1 hour ago, buckeyefl said:

And top golfers aren't skillful? You're talking yourself in circles. 

 

I apologise again

 

you and others were telling us that the reason golf is no longer producing great players is that there is a bigger talent pool with better access to all the things that make golfers better.

 

I was pointing out that this also true of every major sport, most of which dwarf golf in participation and resources.. and yet they continue to produce extreme outliers such as those Ive mentioned.

 

So one must surmise that there is something different about golf. The only thing I can think of is that its been dumbed down and thus too hard for a great ball striker to significantly use his advantage.

 

If you have an alternate hypothesis Im sure we'd all love to hear it, we all enjoy your informative contributions enormously.

 

Do let us know if you are confused still and need more explanation.

Edited July 26, 2022 by roger99

[clevited]

44 minutes ago, beckk10 said:

 

I find the new golf balls fly very straight and it takes me a lot of effort to move the ball much at all in any direction!!

 

That means you have a pretty neutral "good" swing.  Not hard to hit it straight once you nail that part down! I assure you, that ball can be bent almost as easily as the wound balls in my experience.  

[golfer07840]

4 hours ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

Because they have crazy downforce. Notice Monza is still held by a V10 era car, though the modern cars are faster in qualifying.

Monza, what a great track. Along with Red Bull Ring and Spa. 

[farmer]

9 hours ago, gvogel said:

IF you think that 4 driveable par 4's at the Home of Golf is your idea of modern golf, we have a serious difference of opinion.

 

Maybe in your world, a golf course should consist of 18 par 3 holes.

Context, G, context.  The Old Course was burned out and hard as a rock.  There was some speculation that the fairways were faster than the greens.  DJ damn near topped a ball off the 18th tee with an iron, carried less than 100 yds and wound up at 280.  It was warm and not much wind.

[Pastit]

10 hours ago, roger99 said:

 

if they hadnt changed the ball instead, theyd have to change court dimensions, definitely. cheers.

I’ve often wondered if restricting serving in tennis to one attempt would provide a better challenge as the power serve would be “ risk-and-reward “ ?

[Pastit]

11 hours ago, Simpsonia said:

 

That's safety related. Not a lot of safety concerns in golf. 

In your opinion but not totally. Some tracks can be improved and some can’t e.g. Monaco. 

[buckeyefl]

13 hours ago, roger99 said:

 

I apologise again

 

you and others were telling us that the reason golf is no longer producing great players is that there is a bigger talent pool with better access to all the things that make golfers better.

 

I was pointing out that this also true of every major sport, most of which dwarf golf in participation and resources.. and yet they continue to produce extreme outliers such as those Ive mentioned.

 

So one must surmise that there is something different about golf. The only thing I can think of is that its been dumbed down and thus too hard for a great ball striker to significantly use his advantage.

 

If you have an alternate hypothesis Im sure we'd all love to hear it, we all enjoy your informative contributions enormously.

 

Do let us know if you are confused still and need more explanation.

 

The only thing that one should surmise is that you people are tilting at windmills. Your theory is just that and has more holes in it than a giant block of Swiss cheese.  Let me know if that's clear enough.

[roger99]

51 minutes ago, buckeyefl said:

 

The only thing that one should surmise is that you people are tilting at windmills. Your theory is just that and has more holes in it than a giant block of Swiss cheese.  Let me know if that's clear enough.

 

no thats brilliant, crystal clear you win cheers 

[beckk10]

14 hours ago, clevited said:

 

That means you have a pretty neutral "good" swing.  Not hard to hit it straight once you nail that part down! I assure you, that ball can be bent almost as easily as the wound balls in my experience.  

This might be true! I certainly swing it more square than when I was a teenager. 

[Simpsonia]

15 hours ago, roger99 said:

 

I apologise again

 

you and others were telling us that the reason golf is no longer producing great players is that there is a bigger talent pool with better access to all the things that make golfers better.

 

I was pointing out that this also true of every major sport, most of which dwarf golf in participation and resources.. and yet they continue to produce extreme outliers such as those Ive mentioned.

 

So one must surmise that there is something different about golf. The only thing I can think of is that its been dumbed down and thus too hard for a great ball striker to significantly use his advantage.

 

If you have an alternate hypothesis Im sure we'd all love to hear it, we all enjoy your informative contributions enormously.

 

Do let us know if you are confused still and need more explanation.

 

It might have been missed, but roger99 here is carrying on the same line of thinking that was espoused by the departed milesgiles (also his obsession with seeing once in a generation players). Essentially the contention is that only the best ball strikers (ie the guys who can hit their 4 irons the best) deserve to be the best golfers and win tournaments. The flip side is that guys who even the gap with their exceptional short game and on the green, don't deserve it, because nobody wants to watch a putting competition.  

 

The reality is actually kind of the opposite, the reason we don't have those kinds of outliers anymore is because despite there being some phenomenal ball strikers on tour (Rory, JT, Scheffler, Morikawa, etc) the modern short game, with lightning fast greens, is so much more difficult that only the guys who go on a heater have a chance of winning any given week. 

 

That begs the question, that it seems the miles, er roger, seems to want to dumb the game down to advantage the best ball strikers over everyone else. 

[roger99]

10 minutes ago, Simpsonia said:

 

It might have been missed, but roger99 here is carrying on the same line of thinking that was espoused by the departed milesgiles (also his obsession with seeing once in a generation players). Essentially the contention is that only the best ball strikers (ie the guys who can hit their 4 irons the best) deserve to be the best golfers and win tournaments. The flip side is that guys who even the gap with their exceptional short game and on the green, don't deserve it, because nobody wants to watch a putting competition.  

 

The reality is actually kind of the opposite, the reason we don't have those kinds of outliers anymore is because despite there being some phenomenal ball strikers on tour (Rory, JT, Scheffler, Morikawa, etc) the modern short game, with lightning fast greens, is so much more difficult that only the guys who go on a heater have a chance of winning any given week. 

 

That begs the question, that it seems the miles, er roger, seems to want to dumb the game down to advantage the best ball strikers over everyone else. 

 

no, you are misunderstanding and therefore mischaracterizing my argument. I am sure its not deliberate on your part, its not like you have done it before.

 

the short game is far more difficult AND ball striking has become far less important. A great ball striker has less chance of overcoming a guy on a heater now more than ever, and that cant be a good thing.

 

If we are trying to explain how there are no great golfers active right now, you are going to have to do better than 'luck'. Ronaldo  isnt lucky and neither was Tiger 1.0.

 

who is miles?

Edited July 27, 2022 by roger99

[ChipStrokes]

12 minutes ago, Simpsonia said:

It might have been missed, but roger99 here is carrying on the same line of thinking that was espoused by the departed milesgiles

good catch! 

 

this is round 3 for miles, miles2, roger. 

[gvogel]

18 hours ago, buckeyefl said:

 

reposting in case you missed it and are playing a different game.

 

The game fits into all courses now, yesterday and every day in the future. "Hit ball into hole with as few stroke as possible." Yep its alive and well with a bright future.

 

BTW 18 par threes is a golf course as is 9 holes, 27 holes 6 holes or 12 holes, see above definition.

 

 For one interested in rolling things back you sure forgot your history awfully quickly. Weren't we just recently discussing a venue whos original layout was 22 holes? Was that Old Course not a golf course? What would your former playing partner Mr. Morris think of such blasphemy?

 

Also what's "modern golf?" It's all golf unless you are talking about something like Top Golf which is a completely different animal.

Well, this will be fun.

 

My former playing partner, Old Tom, combined the first two holes and last two holes to come up with the present 18 hole course, because, get this: THEY WERE PAR 3's!

 

He didn't feel that they were proper golf holes, as the rest of the holes were two or three shotters, except for a couple of good ones out on the Loop.  So, out of a few short holes, Old Tom created the present 1st and 18th. 

 

The course that he finally improved, was played both counter-clockwise and clockwise for generations, each appreciating the challenge and the sport of playing over those links.  Now we have gotten to the point where many (but not you and Titleist) are coming to appreciate that the Old Course has lost some of the challenge and sport that previous eras came to appreciate.  Why?  Because former aerospace engineers were able to improve the ball and the driver immeasurable over the past 20 years.  Is this sustainable for the game?  The R&A and the USGA think not - and I agree.  I am glad to be on their side of the issue.