distance debate

[TLUBulldogGolf]

1 minute ago, clevited said:

 

Don't most courses that did decide to lengthen primarily do it via further back tee box?  If that is true, doesn't that mean that the quantity of playing surface really hasn't changed for most courses?  If sustainability means they can't grown their grass, then the future of golf is artificial turf!  

 

What? I specifically said they should grow the fairway grass longer. Sustainability relates to watering the course so much that the ball doesn't roll. Stop arguing against points I haven't made. 

[gvogel]

9 minutes ago, Titleist99 said:

Yesterday the players had no trouble missing fairways.

TPC Avenal is a very difficult golf course.  Somewhat narrow fairways bordered by forest.  No miss areas.  Lot's of 3 woods in play off the tee.

 

That's one kind of golf, but not enjoyable, which is why so many of the top 20 skipped the event.  But for anyone who says narrow the fairways and grow the rough, or make bunkers/water hazards where the pros hit it - you got your wish this past weekend.

[MUNIGRIT]

39 minutes ago, Golferpaul said:

Good point, but the NBA has never raised their rim height despite the huge increase in players ability to dunk the ball.

 

Rolling back the golf ball would be like the NBA raising the rim to eleven feet.

They did jack with 3 pt line distance. 

[Golferpaul]

6 minutes ago, MUNIGRIT said:

They did jack with 3 pt line distance. 

Right, but that didn't change the game like raising the rim to 11 feet would.

[clevited]

25 minutes ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

 

What? I specifically said they should grow the fairway grass longer. Sustainability relates to watering the course so much that the ball doesn't roll. Stop arguing against points I haven't made. 

I am basically trying to say the sustainability aspects is a joke because if it is really a problem, then the future of our courses is artificial turf.  I agree with your grow the grass, I am just refuting any need to point out the sustainability thing.  

 

In other words, I am not really arguing with you, just pointing a flaw I see in the often mentioned sustainability arguement so many tend to use.

Edited May 9, 2022 by clevited

[Titleist99]

48 minutes ago, gvogel said:

TPC Avenal is a very difficult golf course.  Somewhat narrow fairways bordered by forest.  No miss areas.  Lot's of 3 woods in play off the tee.

 

That's one kind of golf, but not enjoyable, which is why so many of the top 20 skipped the event.  But for anyone who says narrow the fairways and grow the rough, or make bunkers/water hazards where the pros hit it - you got your wish this past weekend.

And clearly it stifled driving distance , had players hitting a multitude of irons into greens and kept the scores in single digits.......clearly, clearly the way to go instead of 8000 yard golf courses and the insane strategy of buying land.

 

Not to mention the destruction of the suggestions of little head drivers. 

[Titleist99]

1 hour ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

 

So you saw some guys miss fairways and that negates my point or?

No, that was in addition to your point.....Soggy fairways or firm fairway should be tested before any equipment change. Wouldn't you agree?

[TLUBulldogGolf]

7 minutes ago, Titleist99 said:

No, that was in addition to your point.....Soggy fairways or firm fairway should be tested before any equipment change. Wouldn't you agree?

Tested for what? It’s a trivial point that softer fairways are easier to hit regardless of what happened yesterday. Fairways/greens should only be soggy if it dumps rain.

[Titleist99]

1 minute ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

Tested for what? It’s a trivial point that softer fairways are easier to hit regardless of what happened yesterday. Fairways/greens should only be soggy if it dumps rain.

You Sir, are entitled to your opinion but I respectfully disagree. It wasn't raining Sunday at the Wells Fargo. What was proven is the fact that moist fairways retard 50 yard of roll out......hardly trivial to me.

 

Undeniable IMO.

[milesgiles]

8 hours ago, clevited said:

 

If they did, it would take more than a fairway wood sized driver to accomplish anything that fixes the "problem".  It would have to be an extensive, purposeful de-engineering of golf clubs as we know then today to produce the desired result.

 

 

based on.. no credible source whatsoever. pure speculation.

[milesgiles]

6 hours ago, Simpsonia said:

The other thing that needs to be kept in mind, and get's confused, is that there are really two distinct categories of rollbackers.

 

The first are those concerned purely with the historical courses. Both Jack and Tiger have expressed some willingness to have some sort of rollback to protect older courses from becoming too irrelevant. However, it must be noted that the only suggestions coming out of this camp is surrounding a limited flight ball, that would take 10-15% distance off everyone's shot. This would keep historical fairway features still relevant, but otherwise keep the game pretty much exactly the same. I can actually get on board with this to a degree. Ideally, this would be venue controlled, ie if a short course like Pebble comes out with a "Pebble" ball that takes 10% off flight for tour events there. 

 

The second category of rollbackers are those who are obsessed with the past, and think that if you aren't hitting a hickory shafted 3-iron blade as your approach on every par-4, then you aren't playing real golf. Hence this invention of dumb terms like "toaster on a stick".  They probably also report you to the marshal if you aren't wearing a tucked in collared shirt (tie optional, this is 2022 afterall). 

 

I am neither of those 

[milesgiles]

6 hours ago, clevited said:

 

But when you take into account that the object of the game is just to get the ball in the hole in as few shots as possible, that golfers have different capabilities that allow them to tackle a course much more differently vs another and it is unrealistic to think you can design a course that makes everyone have to hit feathered 3i into a par 4 green, you understand that the whole "courses forced to be longer" talking point is a load of bull and therefore not a point at all.

 

this is just a word salad 

[milesgiles]

5 hours ago, Simpsonia said:

 

So essentially an arbitrary line drawn in the technological sand, so to speak. If distance is your only concern, why draw your line around materials and club size, when distance reductions can most easily, most consistently, and most cost effectively be accomplished by changes to the ball alone. The only reason to change the other aspects of equipment, is if you think that hitting a golf ball is too easy, and that the game should be much harder for everyone who plays it (including amateurs). 

 

if it was as simple as changing the ball, it would have already been done 

[milesgiles]

4 hours ago, clevited said:

 

Don't most courses that did decide to lengthen primarily do it via further back tee box?  If that is true, doesn't that mean that the quantity of playing surface really hasn't changed for most courses?  If sustainability means they can't grown their grass, then the future of golf is artificial turf!  

 

what?

[milesgiles]

3 hours ago, Titleist99 said:

No, that was in addition to your point.....Soggy fairways or firm fairway should be tested before any equipment change. Wouldn't you agree?

 

making fairways softer further negates driving skill. 

[MUNIGRIT]

No matter what you do the long guys will still be long and short guys will still be short and always at a disadvantage.

[Titleist99]

57 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

making fairways softer further negates driving skill. 

What do you mean by that? Do  tell.......

Never mind, I know .....read the thread....LOL!.

Edited May 9, 2022 by Titleist99

[farmer]

Back in the day, every single member of PhiSlammaJamma could dunk, including the ball boys.  Also back in the day, fairways were routinely cut at 1/2 inch, and clubs would water so the course would look good on TV.  Longer grass is  easier to maintain than very short grass, and doesn't require any more water.

[TLUBulldogGolf]

1 hour ago, Titleist99 said:

What do you mean by that? Do  tell.......

Never mind, I know .....read the thread....LOL!.

If the ball sticks where it lands (or doesn’t roll out much) your landing zone to hit the fairway grows by a huge margin. Please explain how it wouldn’t be the case.

Edited May 10, 2022 by TLUBulldogGolf

[Titleist99]

24 minutes ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

If the ball sticks where it lands (or doesn’t roll out much) your landing zone to hit the fairway grows by a huge margin. Please explain how it wouldn’t be the case.

Based on what i saw during the Wells Fargo the fairways were drenched and the golf balls were not sticking as you say, just not rolling 50 extra yards.......shots still found their way to the rough. I would think that bringing the fairways in would be more than enough to cancel that out. If by chance they become wider so be it, they'll be wider for everybody.

[MUNIGRIT]

41 minutes ago, Titleist99 said:

Based on what i saw during the Wells Fargo the fairways were drenched and the golf balls were not sticking as you say, just not rolling 50 extra yards.......shots still found their way to the rough. I would think that bringing the fairways in would be more than enough to cancel that out. If by chance they become wider so be it, they'll be wider for everybody.

Still gives the longer hitters an advantage like they always will have.

[clevited]

4 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

 

based on.. no credible source whatsoever. pure speculation.

 

Hypocrite much?  You insist on something based on pure speculation.  At least I have put effort in to determine its viability which by the way, makes my opinion much more than speculation.  I will let you own that domain.

[clevited]

4 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

what?

 

Huh?

[clevited]

4 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

this is just a word salad 

 

Does that mean most of what you say is word fruit cake?

Edited May 10, 2022 by clevited

[clevited]

You either have slower/softer easier to hold fairways or you have firm and fast harder to hold fairways.  One gives you more of those feathery long irons people rave about, the other less of those and more shorter clubs.  Pick one rollbackers.  You can't have it all.

[milesgiles]

3 hours ago, clevited said:

You either have slower/softer easier to hold fairways or you have firm and fast harder to hold fairways.  One gives you more of those feathery long irons people rave about, the other less of those and more shorter clubs.  Pick one rollbackers.  You can't have it all.

 

Firm AND traditional size drivers gives you both. You can have it all. 

[milesgiles]

4 hours ago, MUNIGRIT said:

Still gives the longer hitters an advantage like they always will have.

 

And? 

[milesgiles]

3 hours ago, clevited said:

 

Hypocrite much?  You insist on something based on pure speculation.  At least I have put effort in to determine its viability which by the way, makes my opinion much more than speculation.  I will let you own that domain.

 

Your ‘efforts’ are laughable 

 

At the end of the day since you have never paid money to watch a tourney I don’t even consider you a stakeholder in the debate. You are irrelevant 

[clevited]

5 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

Firm AND traditional size drivers gives you both. You can have it all. 

 

Nope, pure speculation.  Sorry, try again.

[clevited]

5 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

Your ‘efforts’ are laughable 

 

At the end of the day since you have never paid money to watch a tourney I don’t even consider you a stakeholder in the debate. You are irrelevant 

 

Says the guy who trolls endlessly in these threads and refuses to actually have a conversation about his "idea".  Can't admit the flaws in his idea, and even after much coaching and patience from someone that generally has none for a person like you, still won't elaborate and consider he could be completely and utterly wrong.  The fact you try to dismiss me and continue your shtick with the tournament crap is laughable.  You are irrelevant. 

 

How about you add value to this thread instead of these short little attacks you do.  How about conversation?  How about contributing thought instead of drivel?  Give it a try, it makes these threads actually spawn new thoughts and ideas that way instead of turning into who can troll better threads which you seem to want it to become.

Edited May 10, 2022 by clevited