USGA and R&A announce proposal to limit golf ball performance for elite level competition

[smashdn]

19 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

You just brought up one reason.  They also have to toe the line on what the public is willing to accept.  I really do not think that they can just make up any rule they want and it be abided by unconditionally.  

 

For instance, if they came out and said we are going back to persimmons and no wedge loft greater than 50*, they would have a mutiny of golfers and lose any credibility to continue to be that governing organization.  They govern in as much as we consent for our games to be governed by them.  There are great gobs of people, dare I say most, who don't play by The Rules.  If non-conforming clubs were more mainstream and provided a clear advantage over those that do conform, I would suspect we would see more people going that route.

 

We have already seen that the idea of bifurcation, though arguably less intrusive on most golfers, was not a palatable change.

 

16 hours ago, GoGoErky said:

No you said as much as the public is willing to accept.

 

16 hours ago, GoGoErky said:

quoting your words

 

I'll quote my own words for you so you don't miss it this time.

[Chunkitgood]

As I understand it the USGA governs not by your consent but because it is the association of the people who own golf courses, who give you limited permission to go on the their land to play golf.  The rules they make have to be considered in light of its membership’s long term interest in remaining economically viable.

 

Businesses with obsolete infrastructure tend not to remain economically viable, hence the members of the USGA who perceive that their courses are threatened with obsolescence have reacted with a rule.

 

You can rebel all you want but the same people will still own the courses and if they were all replaced they would have the same basic economic interests.

[Mudguard]

9 minutes ago, Chunkitgood said:

You can rebel all you want but the same people will still own the courses and if they were all replaced they would have the same basic economic interests.

I mean it would be interesting to see what could happen. All it would take is a few clubs to say, you know what, we disagree with the slow ball or whatever it will be called. We won't be paying our association fees. 

 

In New Zealand it theoretically could be possible, as most golf is played by members of golf clubs. The NZ Golf Association which oversees the game here could in theory be deprived of their funding (I'm not sure the exactly breakdown, but a small portion of a membership is paid to the the governing body). 

[gvogel]

On 3/21/2024 at 6:55 PM, Chunkitgood said:

As I understand it the USGA governs not by your consent but because it is the association of the people who own golf courses, who give you limited permission to go on the their land to play golf.  The rules they make have to be considered in light of its membership’s long term interest in remaining economically viable.

 

Businesses with obsolete infrastructure tend not to remain economically viable, hence the members of the USGA who perceive that their courses are threatened with obsolescence have reacted with a rule.

 

You can rebel all you want but the same people will still own the courses and if they were all replaced they would have the same basic economic interests.

I am a member of the USGA, and I do not own a golf course.  The people who own golf courses find it convenient to use the USGA rules when defining hazards and out of bounds, and conducting tournaments.  But that's like saying that writers find it convenient to use correct grammar and punctuation (unless you are a poet).  The people who write books on grammar do not own the vehicles where correct grammar is used, or not used (LIKE HERE!).

 

Sometimes individuals own courses, sometimes the members own their course, and sometimes a public entity owns the course.  Those owners have varied interests in operating their courses, but the USGA is only useful for handicaps and rules.  There are so many other facets of operating a golf course that to make the statement that the USGA is the association of the people who own golf courses is asinine.

[maamold]

Recalling a conversation in this thread regarding equipment we play vs what the pro's get. Fun video.
 

 

[GoGoErky]

Nothing in that video shows they play equipment different than what we play or that we can get. The OEMs digitally measure heads and market them for the tour staff fitters so as was shown in the video they could dial in specs and fitting.

 

Want a digitally measured tour head they can be bought. Just a matter whether someone wants to pay the money for one.

 

Will sells them

https://thepeoplesclubs.com/products/tour-clubs/tour-drivers.html

 

Want hot melt, club builders can do that for you, or you can buy a hot melt kit and do it yourself.

 

Want to adjust the front or rear weight, you can buy weight kits, or just use some lead tape on the sole

[Simpsonia]

10 hours ago, maamold said:

Recalling a conversation in this thread regarding equipment we play vs what the pro's get. Fun video.
 

 

 

Even if we're being charitable and say that pros are playing different equipment, which they are not as @GoGoErky points out, bifurcation died for a completely different reason which makes the whole line of reasoning a red herring. Bifurcation via the MLR died because it would have created an impossible logistical nightmare for all competitive golf that isn't PGAT/Korn Ferry, ie state/local/collegiate competitive golf that don't have the same enforcement resources as professional golf. 

[maamold]

2 hours ago, GoGoErky said:

Nothing in that video shows they play equipment different than what we play or that we can get. The OEMs digitally measure heads and market them for the tour staff fitters so as was shown in the video they could dial in specs and fitting.

 

Want a digitally measured tour head they can be bought. Just a matter whether someone wants to pay the money for one.

 

Will sells them

https://thepeoplesclubs.com/products/tour-clubs/tour-drivers.html

 

Want hot melt, club builders can do that for you, or you can buy a hot melt kit and do it yourself.

 

Want to adjust the front or rear weight, you can buy weight kits, or just use some lead tape on the sole

 

2 hours ago, Simpsonia said:

 

Even if we're being charitable and say that pros are playing different equipment, which they are not as @GoGoErky points out, bifurcation died for a completely different reason which makes the whole line of reasoning a red herring. Bifurcation via the MLR died because it would have created an impossible logistical nightmare for all competitive golf that isn't PGAT/Korn Ferry, ie state/local/collegiate competitive golf that don't have the same enforcement resources as professional golf. 

You guys are touchy. I was just posting a fun video showing the detail that goes into building a club for one of their players. 

[smashdn]

On 3/23/2024 at 8:32 AM, gvogel said:

I am a member of the USGA, and I do not own a golf course.  The people who own golf courses find it convenient to use the USGA rules when defining hazards and out of bounds, and conducting tournaments.  But that's like saying that writers find it convenient to use correct grammar and punctuation (unless you are a poet).  The people who write books on grammar do not own the vehicles where correct grammar is used, or not used (LIKE HERE!).

 

Sometimes individuals own courses, sometimes the members own their course, and sometimes a public entity owns the course.  Those owners have varied interests in operating their courses, but the USGA is only useful for handicaps and rules.  There are so many other facets of operating a golf course that to make the statement that the USGA is the association of the people who own golf courses is asinine.

 

Like saying FIFA is not necessary for playing a soccer/football match.  

[stinger_gc]

Saw Bryson’s video recently where he played with a rollback ball and I honestly think a rolled back ball would make the most to game more interesting. More long irons and the ball was spinning like crazy 

[ThinkingPlus]

16 minutes ago, stinger_gc said:

Saw Bryson’s video recently where he played with a rollback ball and I honestly think a rolled back ball would make the most to game more interesting. More long irons and the ball was spinning like crazy 

What about the ball made it spin like crazy?

[stinger_gc]

1 hour ago, ThinkingPlus said:

What about the ball made it spin like crazy?

The core of the ball was a lot softer then the modern ball causing more spin. 

[dwboston]

2 hours ago, ThinkingPlus said:

What about the ball made it spin like crazy?

 

It was a Nike One Tour ball from more than a decade ago.  His first drive with it he hit 182 ball speed and 317 carry with 2700 spin.

 

Biggest issue he had was the unpredictability of the spin.  Ball was spinning more off the irons and flying a little shorter.  He mentioned 5-6% less carry with the irons vs. his current ball, the Left Dash Pro V1x.

Edited March 29 by dwboston

[GoGoErky]

9 hours ago, stinger_gc said:

Saw Bryson’s video recently where he played with a rollback ball and I honestly think a rolled back ball would make the most to game more interesting. More long irons and the ball was spinning like crazy 

What makes it more exciting?

 

If that type of golf is more exciting then why isn’t the viewership way up for rh LPGA where it’s long irons and hybrids into greens and shorter drives? The LPGA game is something that many on the internet refer to as more relatable than the pga tour because of the distance the ladies hit the ball?

 

 

[ThinkingPlus]

8 hours ago, stinger_gc said:

The core of the ball was a lot softer then the modern ball causing more spin. 

Actually the balls with most spin tend to be the firmest. Also, how does he know a 10 year old Nike ball meets the new "rollback" criteria? Finally, we are talking slightly more spin (a few hundred RPM or maybe as much as 500 for an iron) not balata level spin. It would impact iron distance a bit and be a little harder to control.

 

BTW, the new rollback balls will likely only be slowed down. The OEM engineers are not going to design something that is wildly spinnier. They can't do too much with a urethane cover that hasn't already been done. They will slow down the core to meet the speed requirement then tune the spin to player profiles/preferences.

[GoGoErky]

2 hours ago, ThinkingPlus said:

Actually the balls with most spin tend to be the firmest. Also, how does he know a 10 year old Nike ball meets the new "rollback" criteria? Finally, we are talking slightly more spin (a few hundred RPM or maybe as much as 500 for an iron) not balata level spin. It would impact iron distance a bit and be a little harder to control.

 

BTW, the new rollback balls will likely only be slowed down. The OEM engineers are not going to design something that is wildly spinnier. They can't do too much with a urethane cover that hasn't already been done. They will slow down the core to meet the speed requirement then tune the spin to player profiles/preferences.

He doesn’t know if that meets the criteria, he basically states that it some of the balls that supposedly does.

 

One of the comments that stuck out to me is that he would have to redo his whole setup to play that ball. Which some here denied pros would have to do.

 

he hates the “rollbakced ball” during the video 

 

 

[gvogel]

21 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

He doesn’t know if that meets the criteria, he basically states that it some of the balls that supposedly does.

 

One of the comments that stuck out to me is that he would have to redo his whole setup to play that ball. Which some here denied pros would have to do.

 

he hates the “rollbakced ball” during the video 

 

 

So he's already made his mind up before testing the 2028 ball offerings.

[maamold]

20 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

He doesn’t know if that meets the criteria, he basically states that it some of the balls that supposedly does.

 

One of the comments that stuck out to me is that he would have to redo his whole setup to play that ball. Which some here denied pros would have to do.

 

he hates the “rollbakced ball” during the video 

 

 

So let me get this straight...

Tiger Woods played this ball in ~2010

People say the ball isn't any faster than in 2004 when the USGA regulated the ball
His -ProV1 is 5-6mph faster
And....It's not the equipment, it's the athlete?

Did I miss anything?

[stinger_gc]

12 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

He doesn’t know if that meets the criteria, he basically states that it some of the balls that supposedly does.

 

One of the comments that stuck out to me is that he would have to redo his whole setup to play that ball. Which some here denied pros would have to do.

 

he hates the “rollbakced ball” during the video 

 

 

This was a cool video. I understand that he hates it and the effect it has on his game

[Titleist99]

4 hours ago, GoGoErky said:

What makes it more exciting?

 

If that type of golf is more exciting then why isn’t the viewership way up for rh LPGA where it’s long irons and hybrids into greens and shorter drives? The LPGA game is something that many on the internet refer to as more relatable than the pga tour because of the distance the ladies hit the ball?

 

 

Yep, there's this faction that wants men's professional golf to look like women's golf and senior golf, yet those tours are seldom watched by the viewership.

 

So, why change men's professional golf? Obviously, it's the golf courses and the setups.

West Coast swing you had birdie fests, Florida swing not so much.

[stinger_gc]

9 minutes ago, maamold said:

So let me get this straight...

Tiger Woods played this ball in ~2010

People say the ball isn't any faster than in 2004 when the USGA regulated the ball
His -ProV1 is 5-6mph faster
And....It's not the equipment, it's the athlete?

Did I miss anything?

The drivers are also crazy hot right now. The 2 drivers below are what Tiger played in 2000 vs 2019. 2000 Tiger and 2019 Tiger were driving it the exact same distance. One was the most athletic individual on the tour and the other was a 43 year old who’s had 4 back surgeries including a fusion + a reconstructed ACL. 

 

[bekgolf]

5 hours ago, GoGoErky said:

What makes it more exciting?

 

If that type of golf is more exciting then why isn’t the viewership way up for rh LPGA where it’s long irons and hybrids into greens and shorter drives? The LPGA game is something that many on the internet refer to as more relatable than the pga tour because of the distance the ladies hit the ball?

 

 

 

There you go again, making sense.

[GoGoErky]

2 hours ago, gvogel said:

So he's already made his mind up before testing the 2028 ball offerings.

Sounds that way as have many pga pros, other than the selfish ones like Rory who know that the long hitters will be at a bigger advantage than they are now which is supported by strokes

gained data which has been pointed out countless times in this thread 

[GoGoErky]

40 minutes ago, bekgolf said:

 

There you go again, making sense.

It’s not that hard.

[Ty_Webb]

2 hours ago, maamold said:

So let me get this straight...

Tiger Woods played this ball in ~2010

People say the ball isn't any faster than in 2004 when the USGA regulated the ball
His -ProV1 is 5-6mph faster
And....It's not the equipment, it's the athlete?

Did I miss anything?

 

Tiger played a ball that he knew nerfed him distance wise. He did that because he wanted more control around the greens.

[GoGoErky]

2 hours ago, maamold said:

So let me get this straight...

Tiger Woods played this ball in ~2010

People say the ball isn't any faster than in 2004 when the USGA regulated the ball
His -ProV1 is 5-6mph faster
And....It's not the equipment, it's the athlete?

Did I miss anything?

Per the USGA it’s the athlete. Ask them.

 

As he mentioned in the video the compression is different between the two balls and thus effects energy transfer, plus then Nike spins more.

 

The samething has been shown in the ball tests by the site that can be mentioned. All meet the current ODS yet based on their softness they fo shorter. Soft =slow. nothing new here it’s been shown in two different tests. Also many have pointed out that the statement about 30% of balls complying to the new ODS would be softer marshmallows which the Nike is

Edited March 29 by GoGoErky

[farmer]

IIRC, Tiger also played a Nike offering than spun more than the other Nike staffers.  In any case, it's no surprise that a 10 year old ball performs differently than a brand new just out of the sleeve ball.  From an OEM that's not Nike.

[maamold]

2 hours ago, Ty_Webb said:

 

Tiger played a ball that he knew nerfed him distance wise. He did that because he wanted more control around the greens.

Sounds like tiger has more skill than Bryson. it was more exciting watching Tiger.

[maamold]

1 hour ago, GoGoErky said:

Per the USGA it’s the athlete. Ask them.

 

As he mentioned in the video the compression is different between the two balls and thus effects energy transfer, plus then Nike spins more.

 

The samething has been shown in the ball tests by the site that can be mentioned. All meet the current ODS yet based on their softness they fo shorter. Soft =slow. nothing new here it’s been shown in two different tests. Also many have pointed out that the statement about 30% of balls complying to the new ODS would be softer marshmallows which the Nike is

So despite everything you just wrote ...it's the equipment.

[Ty_Webb]

29 minutes ago, maamold said:

Sounds like tiger has more skill than Bryson. it was more exciting watching Tiger.

 

That's true and not really discernible from what I posted. Tiger picked the equipment that he thinks gives him the best chance. Bryson does the same thing. Nothing in there inherently implies that Tiger is more skillful than Bryson. He is, but that's a different point.