distance debate

[Nard_S]

3 minutes ago, c7015 said:

What would stop me , nothing but it would be annoying. 

Do you compare your Pro V to your competitor's Noodle?

Do you give strokes for TX shaft?

Your call to play an old MB or persimmon in modern era, your call to play amateur gear or TI.

What on God's Earth are you talking about? Makes zero sense.You built your own prison.

I play TI irons, my bad to do so but I enjoy them. Would not use driver built for DJ, not in a million years.

[KennyP]

4 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

Doesn't that happen every time that Titleist rolls out a new version of the ProV?  Or TM puts a new driver out there?  You don't think that the pros are not already playing equipment that are not available to the retail golfer? 

 

 

Bespoke tour issue equipment may be available to the best, but my club pro uses off the shelf stuff and so does the club champion. 

 

What happens when they play competitively? Where do you draw the line for using the restricted ball?

 

If they're going to make a change it's got to be for everyone.

 

Edited February 22, 2022 by KennyP

[oikos1]

On 2/21/2022 at 9:54 AM, freddi22cl said:

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/tiger-woods-distance-debate-add-spin-to-golf-ball

 

2000- one player averaged over 300 yds , J Daly

2022- so far : 98 with 4 averaging 320. Driver/wedge show every week 

 

 

Golf’s governing bodies have been studying increases in distance for years and, in February 2021, laid the groundwork for potential rule changes.

“We’re entering into the solution phase from an equipment-standards standpoint,” Thomas Pagel, the USGA’s senior managing director of governance, said in a statement. “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. 

 

To clarify Tiger's position, as well as Nick Faldo, they both suggested during an interview at the Genesis, and prior to mentioning a ball with more spin, that the driver head size should be reduced and...wait for it...this should apply only to the professional game.  Let the ams have the 460 toasters on a stick.

 

Hmmm, that sounds like the dreaded bifurcation talk.

[c7015]

36 minutes ago, Nard_S said:

Do you compare your Pro V to your competitor's Noodle?

Do you give strokes for TX shaft?

Your call to play an old MB or persimmon in modern era, your call to play amateur gear or TI.

What on God's Earth are you talking about? Makes zero sense.You built your own prison.

I play TI irons, my bad to do so but I enjoy them. Would not use driver built for DJ, not in a million years.

 

Do I compare them, no they are from the same set of conforming standards, were talking about a situation where the margin of difference would be much larger than the difference between two brands or styles of balls.

 

If we're playing for money and you want to use equipment that advantages you (like a cheater ball) or disadvantages me (like playing with a gutta percha ball) I want to be compensated for that. 

[Soloman1]

There’s a simple solution to the debate. Eliminate all of the club and ball conforming rules.

 

Let the genie out of the bottle.

[gvogel]

23 minutes ago, Soloman1 said:

There’s a simple solution to the debate. Eliminate all of the club and ball conforming rules.

 

Let the genie out of the bottle.

While you're at it, might as well play on hundreds of acres of wide open grass, with no hazards or bunkers.

[bladehunter]

4 hours ago, khalespace said:

If the drivers and golf balls are limited by COR is low spin the only reason distance keeps getting longer? Why aren't we seeing amateurs getting longer?

 

Maybe pro golfers today are just hitting longer. If they are hitting 9 iron 180 yards is it becausethey are stronger than yesterday's pro golfers? There has not been many changes in these blade irons.

Honestly.  In the upper ends they are.  I played with a 35 year old who plays at state level and does very well last Saturday.  He had no more than pw into any par 5s  (6800 yard course ) .  If  I had to guess I’d say he averages 310-315 and I know one drive was 340 ish.  And he doesn’t hit it crooked.    I my self continue to gain distance. I’m 42.   But most of mine is fitment and refining techniques. ie practice.  
 

people who are older or aren’t refining their action , maybe at a wall. But the ones who are still grinding are getting longer. 

[anser85029]

This debate has been raging for over 40 years and will never end.

 

Why not just eliminate par 5s off every scorecard?   They now are par 4s on the card.  Par 72 courses with (4) par 5s are really par 68 courses.  Just a thought.

Edited February 22, 2022 by anser85029

[bladehunter]

47 minutes ago, anser85029 said:

This debate has been raging for over 40 years and will never end.

 

Why not just eliminate par 5s off every scorecard?   They now are par 4s on the card.  Par 72 courses with (4) par 5s are really par 68 courses.  Just a thought.

It’s never been about the score number. It’s about cheat codes for course design.  When you see old growth trees ignored by 5ft 9 guys , there’s issues.   Then the 6-7 guy comes along and hits a 2 iron 290 off the tee.  ( that guy exists now from the European tour ).      Golf used to be played inside the trees.  Only the gods of the game ( 1-5 players on tour ) played above them regularly.  Now. Every player on tour plus top level ams do this. Thanks to the ball , and the big driver and hybrid clubs ( all types of hybrid irons and woods ).    If Jack came along today.  He’d be john Rahm. Ish.    Great. But not Jack great.  The equipment has leveled it up. 

[milesgiles]

6 hours ago, ThinkingPlus said:

If they bifurcate, the OEMs will sue.  That's why the RBs are treading so carefully.  A legal war would deplete everyone's cash reserves and just benefit the lawyers no matter the outcome.  If they don't bifurcate, we all lose.  Golf gets harder, handicaps go up, fewer people play, etc.... .

 

ams in a scratch comp and pro's use the smaller driver head.

 

Handicap ams use what they like (lets face it the average amateur bag would be half full of non conforming clubs anyway)

 

what is the basis for a legal challenge? who is losing out?

Edited February 22, 2022 by milesgiles

[jordan2240]

Maybe someone already noted this, as I didn't read all the comments:

Tom Hoge driving rank - 111

Luke List driving rank - 8

Scottie Scheffler driving rank - 34

Joaquin Niemann driving rank - 59

 

Current Top 5:

Cameron Champ

Matt Wolff

Joseph Bramlett

Cameron Young

Jonh Rahm

 

So I wonder, why is there even a debate?

[smashdn]

3 hours ago, KennyP said:

 

Bespoke tour issue equipment may be available to the best, but my club pro uses off the shelf stuff and so does the club champion. 

 

What happens when they play competitively? Where do you draw the line for using the restricted ball?

 

If they're going to make a change it's got to be for everyone.

 

 

I think you leave it up to the committee.  Similar to how there are events with persimmon, events with pre-1980 clubs, events for hickory.  It would just be something the committee putting on the event decides and publicizes ahead of time.

 

I don't think it is all that big of a deal.  The range I use most often has 15% knocked off those balls as it is a short range.  You just factor that in as you hit balls.  The spin I think might be easier to deal with honestly.  Once you grooved a swing for it.  You would just need to be careful back home if you were playing someone you made sure which ball you were using (and they were using).

[me05501]

13 minutes ago, jordan2240 said:

Maybe someone already noted this, as I didn't read all the comments:

Tom Hoge driving rank - 111

Luke List driving rank - 8

Scottie Scheffler driving rank - 34

Joaquin Niemann driving rank - 59

 

Current Top 5:

Cameron Champ

Matt Wolff

Joseph Bramlett

Cameron Young

Jonh Rahm

 

So I wonder, why is there even a debate?

 

Tiny data sets are meaningless. 

 

[bladehunter]

16 minutes ago, jordan2240 said:

Maybe someone already noted this, as I didn't read all the comments:

Tom Hoge driving rank - 111

Luke List driving rank - 8

Scottie Scheffler driving rank - 34

Joaquin Niemann driving rank - 59

 

Current Top 5:

Cameron Champ

Matt Wolff

Joseph Bramlett

Cameron Young

Jonh Rahm

 

So I wonder, why is there even a debate?

Explain to us dumb people what that means ?  
 

are you saying there’s no correlation to length and winning ?  
 

 

[smashdn]

Guy I know aced this hole with a 3-wood during a comp.  310 up and over the trees.  Trees are very tall.  If you get over to the left behind them with a bad lay up you are blocked out.  Can't hit it high enough to get over.  I have no idea how he did it but it was well witnessed.

 

ETA - The bunker on the right is in the lay-up area.  Past the bunker the fairway slopes hard towards the pond.  If you try to go down the left side of fairway and go too far, you can roll into the pond.  Big slope upwards behind the green and over the path that you can barely see is OB.

 

Edited February 24, 2022 by smashdn

[Nard_S]

3 hours ago, c7015 said:

the margin of difference would be much larger than the difference between two brands or styles of balls.

 

My greater point is bifurcation exists and has always existed. In Tour 100 days, most amateurs never used them. Too expensive, too easily damaged. That's bifurcation on somewhat under radar scale and near what the great Tiger suggests. A tour ball? Don't have to use them. Get paid, you do. Simple. 

[sittingbull]

Just dawned on me instead of balls_ driver heads _rough changes just make the hole smaller...duh that will keep the scoring down

[vandyfan]

It's definitely the ball. I love the Webb Simpson comments that are like "we need more doglegs and longer rough". Dude, you are sponsored by a ball company, we know you can't actually think that is the best solution. Longer rough and tighter fairways obviously hurts the shorter hitters because they will also miss fairways and then just be 50 yards back. On the ball front, make a tournament ball that has to operate a certain way under robot testing. Certain amount of spin and reduction of overall carry. For me, the distance skill is getting more and more outsized versus other skills on tour. That's what I don't like. 

 

On another note, it is interesting that the driver testing is not done for every driver at every tournament. My understanding is the CT machine is mostly optional. If you have the machine, just test every driver right before the first tee of every round. That's an obvious thing the tour could and should be doing. 

[djmohab2]

7 minutes ago, blackbdmillsaps said:

It's definitely the ball. I love the Webb Simpson comments that are like "we need more doglegs and longer rough". Dude, you are sponsored by a ball company, we know you can't actually think that is the best solution. Longer rough and tighter fairways obviously hurts the shorter hitters because they will also miss fairways and then just be 50 yards back. On the ball front, make a tournament ball that has to operate a certain way under robot testing. Certain amount of spin and reduction of overall carry. For me, the distance skill is getting more and more outsized versus other skills on tour. That's what I don't like. 

 

On another note, it is interesting that the driver testing is not done for every driver at every tournament. My understanding is the CT machine is mostly optional. If you have the machine, just test every driver right before the first tee of every round. That's an obvious thing the tour could and should be doing. 

Yep. The Jon Rahms will just hit 3-iron as far as Luke Donald hits driver, to avoid the doglegs and longer rough. Then they'll hit 3 less clubs into the green from the same spot.

[jordan2240]

1 hour ago, bladehunter said:

are you saying there’s no correlation to length and winning ?

I'm saying that until the bombers start winning the majority of tournaments, there is nothing to debate.  Now, if you have one 'bomber' winning a lot (like Rahm for instance), then perhaps that simply means he's better in all aspects of the game than many others.  Morikawa is certainly no bomber, yet one of the more consistent top performers on tour.  And then there's Langer...

[bladehunter]

6 minutes ago, jordan2240 said:

I'm saying that until the bombers start winning the majority of tournaments, there is nothing to debate.  Now, if you have one 'bomber' winning a lot (like Rahm for instance), then perhaps that simply means he's better in all aspects of the game than many others.  Morikawa is certainly no bomber, yet one of the more consistent top performers on tour.  And then there's Langer...

That’s the issue though I’m my opinion.  You’re taking the longer players advantage and redistributing it to the short guys. Colin would be one of the few exceptions that could survive , his iron play makes up the difference.  A lot of these guys aren’t as good at approach as the modern driver makes them look.  If they suddenly had 7 irons where they had pw or less. They’d struggle.  Some would practice and overcome. Some wouldn’t have work.  
 

this has always been my gripe.  We will never see another tiger or jack.  Why ?  Equipment evens the fields up.  It’s a putting contest now mostly.  You’ll have 7-10?guys hitting it good enough each week. And the one who putts.  Wins.      

[jordan2240]

1 hour ago, me05501 said:

Tiny data sets are meaningless. 

No matter what you do to the ball/equipment, there are players who will be able to outdrive other players consistently, and they are probably the ones who do it now.  Nonetheless, the major winners last year were not even in in the top 40 in driving distance, other than Rahm, who has plenty of other skills.  Two of them weren't even in the top 100.

[jordan2240]

6 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

You’re taking the longer players advantage and redistributing it to the short guys.

But what's going to keep the longer players from still being longer?  Unless you somehow max out the distance, and keep it reachable by everyone, it's going to be tough to put everyone on equal footing.  Every sport has superior players, and with current balls and equipment, everyone has the capability to hit the ball longer and straighter if they work at it.  But someone will always be the longest, and unless they are doing long drive competitions, they need much more than that to be consistent performers on the PGA tour.

[storm319]

1 hour ago, Nard_S said:

 

My greater point is bifurcation exists and has always existed. In Tour 100 days, most amateurs never used them. Too expensive, too easily damaged. That's bifurcation on somewhat under radar scale and near what the great Tiger suggests. A tour ball? Don't have to use them. Get paid, you do. Simple. 

As previously stated, bifurcation is in reference to the actual regulation, not differences in equipment choice/ availability. In your example, tour issued equipment still conforms to the same regulations as retail equipment so it is not an example of bifurcation. An actual example of equipment bifurcation would be the groove rule but that is temporary as a single regulation will be fully implemented come 1/1/2024.

[bladehunter]

8 minutes ago, jordan2240 said:

But what's going to keep the longer players from still being longer?  Unless you somehow max out the distance, and keep it reachable by everyone, it's going to be tough to put everyone on equal footing.  Every sport has superior players, and with current balls and equipment, everyone has the capability to hit the ball longer and straighter if they work at it.  But someone will always be the longest, and unless they are doing long drive competitions, they need much more than that to be consistent performers on the PGA tour.

That’s just it.  I don’t want them to be on equal footing.  I’d like the superior athlete to win more often.   Let’s see who can control long irons , and who can control a small driver at speed. 

[storm319]

2 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

ams in a scratch comp and pro's use the smaller driver head.

 

Handicap ams use what they like (lets face it the average amateur bag would be half full of non conforming clubs anyway)

 

what is the basis for a legal challenge? who is losing out?

How do you account for transition up to the next level of competition? Are those aspiring to compete at the next level SOL if they don’t have access to the necessary equipment they would need to develop their game for that level of play? Depending on the scope  of the rolled back, it sounds like a potential barrier to future professional development. 

[storm319]

15 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

I did say, leave the amateurs equipment and courses alone. Thats not the issue.

 

Neither is the scores of the pro's

 

The issue is the extreme  bombing ie carry off the tee. With the 460 its too easy for too many to crash it over all the trouble. 250cc clubhead, for pros and scratch amateurs, almost no one will risk swinging hard enough to carry everything, and if they do good for them

This is the what I have a problem reconciling. The object of the game is to get the ball in the hole in as few strokes as possible within the rules, period. If there were other qualifiers, they would be stated in the rules. 
 

So if scores are not the concern, then it sounds like your gripe is with the optics of how the ball gets from tee to hole. My question is who cares if the end result is the same? 

[Nard_S]

/

Edited February 23, 2022 by Nard_S

[jordan2240]

19 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

 I’d like the superior athlete to win more often.

I would like to see more long irons come into play as well, so from that respect, some distance control might be warranted.  But in terms of who is winning consistently, I'm not sure driving distance is something that needs to be addressed, at least not based on typical results from week to week.

[bladehunter]

15 minutes ago, storm319 said:

This is the what I have a problem reconciling. The object of the game is to get the ball in the hole in as few strokes as possible within the rules, period. If there were other qualifiers, they would be stated in the rules. 
 

So if scores are not the concern, then it sounds like your gripe is with the optics of how the ball gets from tee to hole. My question is who cares if the end result is the same? 

Well who cares what the score is ?   Some care about that. Some care how it gets there.  One opinion doesn’t weigh more.  Some love it as is. Also a equally weighted opinion. 
 

 

im of the mind that they aren’t going to do the right thing , so I hope they leave it alone.