distance debate

[Double Mocha Man]

5 minutes ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

Of course it’s king, it’s just gotten way out of hand. Nobody? What’s this thread about then?

 

Nobody was a reach.  there is you and SoCal...

[MattC555]

6 minutes ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

Of course it’s king, it’s just gotten way out of hand. Nobody? What’s this thread about then?

 

The overwhelming majority.  I've never encountered a person IRL that advocated for reducing distance.  Our tips are ghost towns.  They are the worst tee boxes, because the greens keeper doesn't think anybody uses them. 

[gvogel]

11 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

 

(Straight) distance is king.  Nobody wants even a slight rollback of the ball.  It's human nature.

Nobody?  Tiger Woods and Rory McIlroy have acknowledged that something should be done to roll back distance.

[Double Mocha Man]

2 minutes ago, MattC555 said:

 

The overwhelming majority.  I've never encountered a person IRL that advocated for reducing distance.  Our tips are ghost towns.  They are the worst tee boxes, because the greens keeper doesn't think anybody uses them. 

 

I hit off the back tees on occasion and I concur.

[TLUBulldogGolf]

7 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

 

Thanks.  But my technique is already maxed out.  Played high school golf and college golf at a high level, participated in two NCAA Championships.  Would you be okay at Popeye's or Denny's if they gave you 2% less food for the same price.  Oh, my bad, they already are.

 

The point being:  Nobody wants less after working their a** off to gain more.  

 

I'm right there with you. I was losing speed until I worked to gain it back. I'd honestly be fine with losing some, we are talking 10-12 yards carry with the ball change being floated, and 7200 yard courses are borderline short to me at this point, at least in summer conditions. I'm not going to shelve driver either as some suggest because no one is going to do that in a tournament so I'm not going to waste what little practice I get. 

Edited September 7, 2022 by TLUBulldogGolf

[Double Mocha Man]

1 minute ago, gvogel said:

Nobody?  Tiger Woods and Rory McIlroy have acknowledged that something should be done to roll back distance.

 

I'm speaking for probably 99.9% of the amateurs.  Not the pros.

[TLUBulldogGolf]

3 minutes ago, MattC555 said:

 

The overwhelming majority.  I've never encountered a person IRL that advocated for reducing distance.  Our tips are ghost towns.  They are the worst tee boxes, because the greens keeper doesn't think anybody uses them. 

 

I see similar, which is why I would prefer bifurcation. I've never once in this thread said average ams hit the ball too far. 

[clevited]

24 minutes ago, gvogel said:

I think that you minimize the experience of some extremely gifted golfers back in the persimmon days who were playing something much more advanced that wiffle ball.  Arnold Palmer and Jack Nicklaus were brought up to hit the ball has hard as possible, and then learned to control it as they matured.  Football player Hale Irwin was a developed athlete who had some success at golf.  There was definitely equipment that was made with X shafts and face angles to allow players to achieve maximum distance, given the limitations of persimmon and steel shafts.

 

The state of the art was perfected by extremely good players who shared observations with club makers.  They substituted their long time trial and errors of ball flight for launch monitor data.  Were those efforts as comprehensive as today?  No, club heads were smaller, and internal weighting systems, while developed, would pale in comparison to what is available internally in a 460 cc metal club head.  Certainly, today's versions of the graphite shafts in use are more stable than what was available in steel at the time.

 

But don't think for a minute that the fine players back in the 1960's through 1980's didn't develop without hitting the ball very hard by swinging fast, and that some were very fine athletes at the time.

 

I don't think I disagree with a word you said for once.  I may be misunderstanding but it looks like you and I are agreeing with the equipment side of things back then as well as effort given by the likes of Jack and company.  There were indeed low lofted, very stiff shafted wooden clubs back then that one could hit very far with much lower spin than I think people commonly attribute to that era of equipment.  That, along with swing method (Jack teed the ball up and hit up a bit from my observations when he wanted to bomb one), could make for some monster shots.  My comments to Mahonie were referring to his experience vs a pro's.  I dare say most would have experienced a wound ball and driver to be extremely spinny back then such that you couldn't really swing too hard.  I am saying that realty was that lower spin and longer drives could be had but most people didn't have access to the equipment that would get that for them.  Fast swingers, stuck with poor fitting clubs, just assumed they were an average knocker of the ball as they spun the ball up to the moon.  Today, everyone can maximize the gifts God gave them thanks to launch monitors, technology and club fitting.

 

Just a few months ago I ran into a 20 something kid (ex baseball player) that can swing as fast as I can but I blow it past him a mile.  I heard him swing once and new instantly his club was a poor fit for him.  He was spinning it like crazy with his downward attack and high lofted driver from the early 2000s.  I have helped turn his 270-300 yard drives into 320-350 just by helping him get the properly fitted equipment.

[clevited]

8 minutes ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

 

I see similar, which is why I would prefer bifurcation. I've never once in this thread said average ams hit the ball too far. 

 

As has been said before, I don't think bifurcation is good for the game first of all (USGA has said as much that they don't want to do that) and second of all, I think bifurcation will not hold and consumers of the game will practically be forced to use the bifurcated equipment in the near future following implementation.  By forced I am referring to the natural tendency for people to want what the pros play, and for manufacturers to want to keep their profits high.

Edited September 7, 2022 by clevited

[mahonie]

4 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

As has been said before, I don't think bifurcation is good for the game first of all (USGA has said as much that they don't want to do that) and second of all, I think bifurcation will not hold and consumers of the game will practically be forced to use the bifurcated equipment in the near future following implementation.  By forced I am referring to the natural tendency for people to want what the pros play, and for manufacturers to want to keep their profits high.

If the guy in the street cannot afford a sleeve of Pro V1s and has to play Pinnacles, is he not being bifurcated? He's just lost 20 yards and it's not his fault. If you think we've got access to all the gear the pros play, then I'm sorry to tell you we haven't, even if money was no object.

[TLUBulldogGolf]

8 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

As has been said before, I don't think bifurcation is good for the game first of all (USGA has said as much that they don't want to do that) and second of all, I think bifurcation will not hold and consumers of the game will practically be forced to use the bifurcated equipment in the near future following implementation.  By forced I am referring to the natural tendency for people to want what the pros play, and for manufacturers to want to keep their profits high.

Yes I’m well aware of your position. I don’t think the distance trend at the highest level is good for the game.

[ThinkingPlus]

19 minutes ago, mahonie said:

I'm not necessarily interested in a roll back, but...and it's a big but...make the ball spin off the driver so that only the best ball-strikers can get the ball out there. Anyone with a less than perfect contact is penalised in both distance and line. Bring some skill back into the game.

It can't really be done and achieve what you want.  If you limited the number of layers, you could get balls that spin a little more with driver, 3W, longer clubs..., but the OEMs would likely nullify the effect with CG manipulation.  Almost no value in going down that path.  That's one reason, I suspect, that the RBs have specifically mentioned they are not pursuing a spinnier ball.  Also, adding spin across all speeds is unachievable or compromises distance performance so badly it would be unplayable.

[ThinkingPlus]

Multiple post...deleted.

Edited September 7, 2022 by ThinkingPlus

[mahonie]

1 minute ago, ThinkingPlus said:

It can't really be done and achieve what you want.  If you limited the number of layers, you could get balls that spin a little more with driver, 3W, longer clubs..., but the OEMs would likely nullify the effect with CG manipulation.  Almost no value in going down that path.  That's one reason, I suspect, that the RBs have specifically mentioned they are not pursuing a spinnier ball.  Also, adding spin across all speeds is unachievable or compromises distance performance so badly it would be unplayable.

Balata balls were like that, but we learned to play them. Surely, we have the technology to replicate that?

[ThinkingPlus]

1 hour ago, So_Cal said:

2%.  Wow that’s practically nothing.  20% would bring pro golf back to the Big Bertha era. 

Fortunately it would be 4% for you.

[clevited]

17 minutes ago, mahonie said:

If the guy in the street cannot afford a sleeve of Pro V1s and has to play Pinnacles, is he not being bifurcated? He's just lost 20 yards and it's not his fault. If you think we've got access to all the gear the pros play, then I'm sorry to tell you we haven't, even if money was no object.

 

We have access to equally good equipment yes.  Pro's may have some special desires that a manufacturer will custom do for them but it isn't game breaking in their differences.  I know this for a fact.  Bifurcation, if done to the level required to make a difference or fix the "problem" will be severe.  Btw, there is generally little difference between a pinnacle and a prov1 with driver but there is a difference with iron and greenside spin.  If anything the player will gain distance with their irons because of the lower spin.

 

Edit: Corrected an error.

Edited September 7, 2022 by clevited

[Double Mocha Man]

39 minutes ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

... which is why I would prefer bifurcation.

 

I've said it before.  If there has to be bifurcation then remove all the restrictions for amateurs and take the restraints off the R&D guys/gals at all the OEM's.  Let the big dog have filet mignon and give us 25 more yards!

 

That'll friggin' grow the game!!!

 

 

 

Edited September 7, 2022 by Double Mocha Man

[TLUBulldogGolf]

8 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

We have access to equally good equipment yes.  Pro's may have some special desires that a manufacturer will custom do for them but it isn't game breaking in their differences.  I know this for a fact.  Bifurcation, if done to the level required to make a difference or fix the "problem" will be severe.  Btw, there is generally little difference between a pinnacle and a prov1 with driver but there is a difference with iron and greenside spin.  If anything the player will gain distance with their irons because of the lower spin.

 

Edit: Corrected an error.

Testing found a pinnacle range spins more off the irons, not to mention being completely worthless inside 70-80 yards (and I would argue even longer due to launch/spin issues off wedges where it flips and spins less). 
 

Anyway, you can hand wave away the point all you want but pros get specialized stuff already, of course they have to operate within the confines of the rules so it is more about very specific preferences being met. I’m not convinced heads needing to meet a MLR massively change the calculus.

[mahonie]

4 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

We have access to equally good equipment yes.  Pro's may have some special desires that a manufacturer will custom do for them but it isn't game breaking in their differences.  I know this for a fact.  Bifurcation, if done to the level required to make a difference or fix the "problem" will be severe.  Btw, there is generally little difference between a pinnacle and a prov1 with driver but there is a difference with iron and greenside spin.  If anything the player will gain distance with their irons because of the lower spin.

 

Edit: Corrected an error.

A friend of mine won a competition with a specific manufacturer a few years ago, part of the prize playing in the Frys.com pro-am with said manufacturer's tour players. Another part of the prize was getting fitted by the Euro Tour fitter into a full set of the OEMs clubs. My mate was a good 5 handicap at the time so no mug. Just by adding a shaft to the driver he was fitted into that was 'not available to retail,' he had an extra 20 yards of carry with his next swing. You cannot get that shaft and I cannot get that shaft...believe me I've looked for it.

 

We all know we would rather have the distance and be able to hold the green. Only the balls that cost £50 a box will give you that. 

[munichop]

We already have bifurcation with grooves, agronomy, bunker conditions, etc.  The governing bodies need to decide what balance in the skill sets they want the best players in the world to have.  The poor leadership they showed when leaving the persimmon-balata era has distorted the balance of skills and resulted in shorter careers from more significant injuries.  Few courses can force these guys to play with any fear.  It has become mundane.  I don't see any meaningful change from these organizations going forward.  They are spending more time conspiring to justify keeping LIV players from access to the major championships.

[JAMH03]

Quote

“This is the first step in re-engaging the manufacturing community in looking at possible solutions for the long-term distance challenges that the game is facing.”

 

 

.............

 

thoughts? 

 

seems Woods suggests adding spin to the ball as a solution. 

My question would be why would you go to the equipment manufactures for solutions that seems as backwards as can be?

For what it's worth adding spin to the balls probably does solve most of the problems in the simplest fashion

 

[ThinkingPlus]

1 hour ago, mahonie said:

Balata balls were like that, but we learned to play them. Surely, we have the technology to replicate that?

Yes.  You would use balata.  Not sustainable and comes will all the durability downsides.

[TLUBulldogGolf]

1 hour ago, JAMH03 said:

My question would be why would you go to the equipment manufactures for solutions that seems as backwards as can be?

For what it's worth adding spin to the balls probably does solve most of the problems in the simplest fashion

 

It’s not like the ruling bodies can manufacture clubs. The OEMs can provide feedback on potential rules and if they would actually achieve what they are meant to achieve. They also need buy-in or else they will face lawsuits or simply be ignored. 

[Double Mocha Man]

1 hour ago, munichop said:

Few courses can force these guys to play with any fear.  It has become mundane. 

 

Let the touring pros play with the unraked traps we experience.  You will see steam coming out of their heads...

[clevited]

3 hours ago, mahonie said:

A friend of mine won a competition with a specific manufacturer a few years ago, part of the prize playing in the Frys.com pro-am with said manufacturer's tour players. Another part of the prize was getting fitted by the Euro Tour fitter into a full set of the OEMs clubs. My mate was a good 5 handicap at the time so no mug. Just by adding a shaft to the driver he was fitted into that was 'not available to retail,' he had an extra 20 yards of carry with his next swing. You cannot get that shaft and I cannot get that shaft...believe me I've looked for it.

 

We all know we would rather have the distance and be able to hold the green. Only the balls that cost £50 a box will give you that. 

 

I can tell you right now that is a load of bunk.  There is no magic shaft that does that.  He was poorly fit before, plain and simple.    

[farmer]

Hale Irwin "had some success"?  Good one, G.

No one today would buy or tolerate a balata ball.  They were good around the green, otherwise, they sucked.  Went out of round, cut at any excuse and the material requires hand labor, so $$$$.  

[ThinkingPlus]

@mahonielet me expand on the ball spin stuff.  My answer was terse at best.  To first order, spin of a golf ball is driven by the coefficient of friction between the ball cover material and the face material and surface roughness of the club.  The surface area of the contact patch as the ball flattens on the face matters as well, but doesn't vary a huge amount with different balls (probably how different ball layers affect spin).

 

Ball cover materials need to be soft for higher CoF (oversimplification,  but fine for the purposes of this discussion), but need to also be durable (hit once and throw away is no good).  Softness and durability tend to be opposing features.  Softer is typically less durable.  More durable is typically harder (less soft).  Urethane seems to be a sweet spot material.  Much softer than urethane and durability starts becoming compromised (like balata).  More durable and you get Surlyn and other ionomers (not very spinny).

 

So discovering or creating a cover material softer (higher CoF) than urethane, but just as durable might be possible.  It is just highly unlikely.

[kasting333]

2 hours ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

It’s not like the ruling bodies can manufacture clubs. The OEMs can provide feedback on potential rules and if they would actually achieve what they are meant to achieve. They also need buy-in or else they will face lawsuits or simply be ignored. 

Why do they have to buy-in to a rule change? The OEMs have been playing by the rules. Not their fault there’s a perceived problem from a small sect at this point. 

[bekgolf]

5 hours ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

Yes I’m well aware of your position. I don’t think the distance trend at the highest level is good for the game.

 

The game benefits from more viewers, sponsors benefit from more viewers, high level golfers benefit from more viewers.

 

Viewers want to see the long ball or the crash and burn when it fails. 

[TLUBulldogGolf]

1 hour ago, bekgolf said:

 

The game benefits from more viewers, sponsors benefit from more viewers, high level golfers benefit from more viewers.

 

Viewers want to see the long ball or the crash and burn when it fails. 

Ratings absolutely do not reflect this.

Edited September 8, 2022 by TLUBulldogGolf