distance debate

[TLUBulldogGolf]

14 hours ago, MUNIGRIT said:

Let's make the OEM make a different club and balls for less than a few hundred people in the world who don't even pay for equipment. Makes sense to me.

Umm, this literally already happens?

[iGolf67]

I read somewhere that many venues cut and roll the fairways so the players will hit prodigious drives (makes for good TV?). It was interesting to see yesterday at the Wells Fargo most drives were only going 255-265 yards. 

 

So instead of rolling back the ball, or making equipment adjustments, just soak the fairways, lol. 

[TLUBulldogGolf]

7 minutes ago, iGolf67 said:

 

I read somewhere that many venues cut and roll the fairways so the players will hit prodigious drives (makes for good TV?). It was interesting to see yesterday at the Wells Fargo most drives were only going 255-265 yards. 

 

So instead of rolling back the ball, or making equipment adjustments, just soak the fairways, lol. 

Rain takes them out of their comfort zone. Soak it before the tournament starts and if it gives way to good weather you will have a shootout every time. Can’t just soak the fairways only with the sustainability push. I think they could raise the grass height if anything.

[MUNIGRIT]

42 minutes ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

Umm, this literally already happens?

Oh so they already make rolled back clubs/balls for just the pros huh? How many amatuers are lining up to buy neutered balls and clubs? Can you post a link to these clubs? What is all the complaining and whining about distance in this thread about then? 

Edited May 8, 2022 by MUNIGRIT

[Golferpaul]

On 5/6/2022 at 3:07 PM, smashdn said:

 

What is better, being 120 yards away from the green in US Open rough or 160 yards away from the green in US Open rough?

 

If you narrow the fairways to the point it becomes a crap shoot whether your ball stays in them or not, why not swing for the fences and at worst be in the rough closer to the green than the rest of the field.  If you do come up with a fairway drive so much the better as you now should have a decided advantage over the field and a chance at scoring.

 

That is why I think the "just grow the rough out" (amongst other course and set up "fixes") is not a fix either. 

 

Great point.

[So_Cal]

On 5/7/2022 at 8:13 AM, Titleist99 said:

Sure, they could do that.....modify the ball and clubs to make them go shorter distances and just move all touring pros to the ladies tee. Great, let the pros play the same game every club golfer in the country play every Saturday morning. Good luck with growing the game and keeping a watered down version of the modern game on television......

 

If everyone play the same course and the lowest score wins.....why would anyone need to build tees further back? Play what you got ........

Why all the way to the ladies tee?

[So_Cal]

On 5/7/2022 at 8:13 AM, Titleist99 said:

Sure, they could do that.....modify the ball and clubs to make them go shorter distances and just move all touring pros to the ladies tee. Great, let the pros play the same game every club golfer in the country play every Saturday morning. Good luck with growing the game and keeping a watered down version of the modern game on television......

 

If everyone play the same course and the lowest score wins.....why would anyone need to build tees further back? Play what you got ........

 

16 hours ago, Titleist99 said:

The appeal of golf is the fact that we can play thee same equipment and play the same courses as the Pros do......

 

I don't think little head drivers would speed the game up an y,,,,,, seven hour rounds. LOL!

Amateurs imitate pros.

The appeal of golf to you is playing the same equipment as the pros?  For me it’s the challenge and variety of the game.  The equipment is far down the priority list.  I have no problem with bifurcation at the top level.  Yes at the US Open I want to see: drivable par 4s, drive and pitch par 4s, drive and mid-iron par 4s and drive and long iron par 4s.  I love the variety and making the winner have a complete game.  I understand not everyone cares about that though.  

[Titleist99]

3 minutes ago, So_Cal said:

Why all the way to the ladies tee?

You know, so they can eliminate that land behind the ladies tee ......save on a couple gallons of water......save on fertilizer.....save on maintenance, right!?! (sarcasm)

[Titleist99]

6 minutes ago, So_Cal said:

 

The appeal of golf to you is playing the same equipment as the pros?  For me it’s the challenge and variety of the game.  The equipment is far down the priority list.  I have no problem with bifurcation at the top level.  Yes at the US Open I want to see: drivable par 4s, drive and pitch par 4s, drive and mid-iron par 4s and drive and long iron par 4s.  I love the variety and making the winner have a complete game.  I understand not everyone cares about that though.  

 " I understand not everyone cares about that though."  

This ^^^^Right here.... 

[So_Cal]

22 minutes ago, Titleist99 said:

 " I understand not everyone cares about that though."  

This ^^^^Right here.... 

Titleist,

 

You’re obviously very passionate about this subject.  Would you kindly list the reasons for this passion?  I’m genuinely curious.  Thanks  

[Golferpaul]

1 hour ago, So_Cal said:

Yes at the US Open I want to see: drivable par 4s, drive and pitch par 4s, drive and mid-iron par 4s and drive and long iron par 4s.  I love the variety and making the winner have a complete game.  I understand not everyone cares about that though.  

 

I agree with the variety being necessary for entertainment value.  However, I don't care what the call par.  I suggest they have a few 150-yard holes, 200-yard holes, 300-yard holes, 400-yard holes, 500-yard holes, and 600-yard holes.  Forget par.  It's the variety that challenges a player to hit every club in the bag.  Par is meaningless.  

 

And then I would vote for the easiest solution of all regarding distance;  just grow the fairways to a stimp of 5 and keep them soft.  That would reduce drives by 30 to 50 yards and doesn't require any equipment changes.  It's also free other than a little water.

[Titleist99]

28 minutes ago, So_Cal said:

Titleist,

 

You’re obviously very passionate about this subject.  Would you kindly list the reasons for this passion?  I’m genuinely curious.  Thanks  

I'm just a golf fanatic, that's all. I want to see golf evolve and don't want to see any sport devolve for nostalgic reasons......

 

If anyone can give me a logical reason how a rollback will grow the game and make it more exciting at the same time, I'm all ears.

Television golf is just fine to me and changing it because a tiny few believe that they're hitting too many wedges into greens is not something that I agree with.

 

In my mind, longer straight drives should be rewarded with shorter clubs into the green and visits to the rough should be penalized.

 

The object of the game to me has always been.....everybody plays the same course and the lowest score wins. That works for any length course, anywhere....

[TLUBulldogGolf]

2 hours ago, MUNIGRIT said:

Oh so they already make rolled back clubs/balls for just the pros huh? How many amatuers are lining up to buy neutered balls and clubs? Can you post a link to these clubs? What is all the complaining and whining about distance in this thread about then? 

Remarkably obtuse. ‘Think of the OEMs!’ should be among the last reasons not to do it.

[So_Cal]

1 hour ago, Titleist99 said:

I'm just a golf fanatic, that's all. I want to see golf evolve and don't want to see any sport devolve for nostalgic reasons......

 

If anyone can give me a logical reason how a rollback will grow the game and make it more exciting at the same time, I'm all ears.

Television golf is just fine to me and changing it because a tiny few believe that they're hitting too many wedges into greens is not something that I agree with.

 

In my mind, longer straight drives should be rewarded with shorter clubs into the green and visits to the rough should be penalized.

 

The object of the game to me has always been.....everybody plays the same course and the lowest score wins. That works for any length course, anywhere....

Great response.  I respect what you said.  Modern golf is like the NBA playing on eight foot rims IMO.  I’m okay with a rollback for the top level only (I assume you’re not on the PGA Tour).  Everyone else gets to keep their hot balls and sticks.  It wouldn’t bother me.  Good conversation 

[Titleist99]

I am in search of some information.....I know that they moved the tees up due to weather.

Where would I find that info listed?  I know tournaments move tees up for a variety of reasons and seeing as how the PGATOUR keep stats on everything any direction would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

 

 

[milesgiles]

5 hours ago, MUNIGRIT said:

Oh so they already make rolled back clubs/balls for just the pros huh? How many amatuers are lining up to buy neutered balls and clubs? Can you post a link to these clubs? What is all the complaining and whining about distance in this thread about then? 

 

nobody said the pro's equipment was 'rolled back' 

[MUNIGRIT]

25 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

nobody said the pro's equipment was 'rolled back' 

This isn't even worth a response since you weren't in the convo and refuse/too dumb to pay attention. 

[MUNIGRIT]

4 hours ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

Remarkably obtuse. ‘Think of the OEMs!’ should be among the last reasons not to do it.

You obviously don't understand business. Why don't you tell us how the OEM already make neutered clubs and balls for the pros? It is like you guys don't even realize that OEM, PGA tour and golf courses are businesses. 

[TLUBulldogGolf]

17 hours ago, MUNIGRIT said:

You obviously don't understand business. Why don't you tell us how the OEM already make neutered clubs and balls for the pros? It is like you guys don't even realize that OEM, PGA tour and golf courses are businesses. 

And you clearly didn’t understand my response. They already make a bunch of stuff just for the pros. Should I tell all the Titleist staffers they can’t play older model ProV1s or special models because it hurts the bottom line?

Edited May 9, 2022 by TLUBulldogGolf

[milesgiles]

10 minutes ago, MUNIGRIT said:

You obviously don't understand business. Why don't you tell us how the OEM already make neutered clubs and balls for the pros? It is like you guys don't even realize that OEM, PGA tour and golf courses are businesses. 

 

assume you are trolling

 

they dont make neutered clubs that isnt what he said. Read it again, he just said they make clubs for pro's that arent available to joe public. Come on youre better than that 

[farmer]

31 minutes ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

And you clearly didn’t understand my

response. They already make a bunch of stuff just for the pros. Should I tell all the Titleist staffers they can’t play older model ProV1s or special models because it hurts the bottom line?

Every club and every ball has to be approved.  The OEM's are not bring out some supercharged equipment for pros.  Titleist makes no money from the tour market, it's, well, us, that pays the bills.

[TLUBulldogGolf]

7 minutes ago, farmer said:

Every club and every ball has to be approved.  The OEM's are not bring out some supercharged equipment for pros.  Titleist makes no money from the tour market, it's, well, us, that pays the bills.

Not what I’m saying, the statement was about different balls and clubs for people that don’t pay for them. This already happens, I never said they were better or worse. Even saying that, I would probably only advocate for a ball change, if anything.

[clevited]

3 hours ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

Not what I’m saying, the statement was about different balls and clubs for people that don’t pay for them. This already happens, I never said they were better or worse. Even saying that, I would probably only advocate for a ball change, if anything.

 

First off,  from what I have observed, most of these clubs aren't that custom.  Second off, they are mostly still the same models that the consumer can buy except for R&D models from what I have observed.  With the exception of R&D models, I don't think OEMs are really spending much on "custom" clubs for pros that aren't also available to the public.  Its all about ROI.  

 

The point to remember is, what OEM is going to want to make clubs that don't help sell consumer models? From what I recall, a large part of what made pros switch to 460cc was exactly that.  They had smaller tour models for quite a few years i think and those slowly disappeared.

 

Anyone that actually has inside knowledge on all the details on this please share.   I am just basing the above on what little I have been able to gather over the years, and I could be completely wrong.  Don't think I am, but certainly wouldn't surprise me regarding this particular subject.

[Titleist99]

9 hours ago, clevited said:

 

First off,  from what I have observed, most of these clubs aren't that custom.  Second off, they are mostly still the same models that the consumer can buy except for R&D models from what I have observed.  With the exception of R&D models, I don't think OEMs are really spending much on "custom" clubs for pros that aren't also available to the public.  Its all about ROI.  

 

The point to remember is, what OEM is going to want to make clubs that don't help sell consumer models? From what I recall, a large part of what made pros switch to 460cc was exactly that.  They had smaller tour models for quite a few years i think and those slowly disappeared.

 

Anyone that actually has inside knowledge on all the details on this please share.   I am just basing the above on what little I have been able to gather over the years, and I could be completely wrong.  Don't think I am, but certainly wouldn't surprise me regarding this particular subject.

You're pretty spot on. The public can buy and use the same equipment that  a touring pros uses. Some pros may have a proto type but it still must conform with the USGA. Pros have access to the touring trucks that's on property at most tournament events and will have their clubs bent, grinded and adjusted with the weights that come with most of todays drivers..... replacing LEAD tape, I guess. You're correct about the 460cc drivers, they were originally marketed for the general public and took a long time for touring pros to use but the smaller head drivers eventually faded out. When some ask "why wasn't the toasters on a stick stopped in 2004 ish" there's the reason.

 

In any case all clubs and balls must conform to specs prior to release by the USGA. Measures are in place to control the distance and performance of equipment by all manufacturing contrary to the belief of some of the posters on this fine  board. IMO

[milesgiles]

58 minutes ago, Titleist99 said:

You're pretty spot on. The public can buy and use the same equipment that  a touring pros uses. Some pros may have a proto type but it still must conform with the USGA. Pros have access to the touring trucks that's on property at most tournament events and will have their clubs bent, grinded and adjusted with the weights that come with most of todays drivers..... replacing LEAD tape, I guess. You're correct about the 460cc drivers, they were originally marketed for the general public and took a long time for touring pros to use but the smaller head drivers eventually faded out. When some ask "why wasn't the toasters on a stick stopped in 2004 ish" there's the reason.

 

In any case all clubs and balls must conform to specs prior to release by the USGA. Measures are in place to control the distance and performance of equipment by all manufacturing contrary to the belief of some of the posters on this fine  board. IMO

 

so are they an advantage or not? You skipped over that question.

 

Clevited says they make no difference worth worrying about, hes never actually watched any pro golf in person but his mate told him so

 

What about you? Does it make a difference? You two are the most vehement anti rollbackers here need to clarify your position and we can go from there..

[Titleist99]

15 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

so are they an advantage or not? You skipped over that question.

 

Clevited says they make no difference worth worrying about, hes never actually watched any pro golf in person but his mate told him so

 

What about you? Does it make a difference? You two are the most vehement anti rollbackers here need to clarify your position and we can go from there..

I've made my position clear. Golf is fine and the USGA should do what they're doing at this moment ,,,, NOTHING.

 

What make the 460cc drivers advantageous to use is not the size. The technology inside the modern drivers and the fact that you can move weights around is the real advantage which can be applied to any size driver. By the way did I mention that the USGA must make sure all equipment conform before released by the manufacturers.

 

Your continual spouting off about how the size of the club is a magical pill that automatically make a tour player world class is misguided at best.

 

Again, everyone has the same opportunity to play the same equipment ....the same golf course and the lowest score wins.

 

So, never let it be said that you don't know my position.

[milesgiles]

2 minutes ago, Titleist99 said:

I've made my position clear. Golf is fine and the USGA should do what they're doing at this moment ,,,, NOTHING.

 

What make the 460cc drivers advantageous to use is not the size. The technology inside the modern drivers and the fact that you can move weights around is the real advantage which can be applied to any size driver. By the way did I mention that the USGA must make sure all equipment conform before released by the manufacturers.

 

Your continual spouting off about how the size of the club is a magical pill that automatically make a tour player world class is misguided at best.

 

Again, everyone has the same opportunity to play the same equipment ....the same golf course and the lowest score wins.

 

So, never let it be said that you don't know my position.

 

Excellent. Therefore we can all agree to shrink it to 190cc max. You’re happy, clevited is happy, all us rollbackers are happy. 

 

I declare the thread closed! 

[clevited]

14 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

Excellent. Therefore we can all agree to shrink it to 190cc max. You’re happy, clevited is happy, all us rollbackers are happy. 

 

I declare the thread closed! 

 

Uhhhh no.  For reasons stated over and over.  Your solution is garbage.  Try again.  

[MUNIGRIT]

16 hours ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

And you clearly didn’t understand my

response. They already make a bunch of stuff just for the pros. Should I tell all the Titleist staffers they can’t play older model ProV1s or special models because it hurts the bottom line?

They aren't going to go out and make a 190 cc neutered club like many want on here. The current tour models aren't much different than what they are selling to the general public. There is nothing wrong with golf right now other than a bunch of whiners. 

[MUNIGRIT]

Yup smaller clubheads will fix everything. Why do a lot of pros grab a 3wd when struggling with driver like DJ did at Augusta this year?