The never-ending love/hate relationship with distance

[TEPaul]

The other day someone told me he almost drove a 300 and something par 4 and he'd never remotely done something like that. He was clearly proud of himself for doing it but just damned technology and distance increases in the next breath.

Have you ever noticed how many of those who damn technology and this distance increase in golf are the same ones who have the latest and greatest of everything available to produce maximum distance?

I was down at PV at something called the Baily Cup the other day and there were a pretty good number of "purists" down there who were all complaining about how this increased distance is spelling the end of the world for classic architecture and such. These same guys would talk in the next sentence about every possible combination of the latest distance enhancing ball, club and shaft out there. And you should see them out there playing---with the latest wrinkle in ProVxs, enormous headed drivers, the latest electric blue shafts etc.

What do we have here---a world of golfing schizophrenics or hypocrites---or both?

If they hate distance increase that much then why buy all this expensive stuff it takes to produce it? I'm not sure we should be hearing the old excuse anymore--"If I don't have it I'm gonna get beat by those who do have it."

If they hate distance increase all that much they should begin to take the first step and refuse to buy the stuff. But that will obviously never happen.

The manufacturers hear this too and they are as aware as anyone of this love/hate relationship with distance. And they obviously also know it may never end---and that encourages them to be intransigient to cooperatiing on a distance solution once and for all.

Admit it fellows, raw distance is probably the single biggest seductress in the entire game of golf. It's always been that way, it's that way now, and it probably always will be.

The only possible answer to this seduction, is for someone, perhaps many people to start talking about the seduction of "relative distance", meaning golfer against golfer and not raw distance anymore. If that case can ever be intelligently made there may be a better chance here that something will be done. A good question to start the issue off is to ask--"Are we really having more fun with golf then our dads and granddads did?

[wsmorrison]

That's it Tom.  I'm dusting off the old Persimmon Izett woods; I can find them now since I just cleaned out the garage.  And I'm going to Rolling Green today and use them.  Forget about that 460cc monster I've been using (I still almost miss the ball once in a while).  I'll have to stop at your house and pick up Slazenger balatas since all I have are Pro-V1 and Pro-V1x.  If you're out working the fields, just leave a box for me by the front door.  

[Tom_Doak]

Tom:

I tend to agree.  The love of raw distance is the reason all the well-intentioned talk about executive-length courses and par-3 courses never translates into anything.

What this means is that golfers are not going to voluntarily give up distance any more than Russia is going to dismantle its nuclear stockpile.  The only way it's going to happen is if EVERYONE is forced to give up that equipment, so that relative distance still holds based on the golfers' abilities.  In other words, it's only going to happen if the USGA (or the PGA Tour) does something about it.

Wayne:

According to a friend of mine who should know, a Pro-V1 isn't going to be any better off your Persimmon than the old Top-Flite was ... they're basically the same ball, solid as a rock.  The Pro-V1 has been optimized to respond just a little bit for the split second it's being sprung forward by the face of your metal driver, but that's not going to help at all against the hard face of the wood.

[TEPaul]

"I'll have to stop at your house and pick up Slazenger balatas since all I have are Pro-V1 and Pro-V1x.  If you're out working the fields, just leave a box for me by the front door."

Sorry, Pal, I love you like a brother but I'm saving those balls for people who are really serous about this---those people who've actually made the investment in hickory clubs and play with them regularly---people like Ran Morrissett. They need those kinds of old high spinning balata balls to get a fuller effect of what the "playabilities" of golf really were back then.

I'll give you an example of how serious Ran Morrissett is about this stuff. I was following him around last summer while he was playing Merion West with Merion green Chairman Bill Greenwood as super Matt Shaeffer and I walked around and watched. Ran had his little bag of hickories and he'd just hit another good brassie up the hill on the 8th hole. He was standing there for a long time eyeing the approach shot into the green and I happened to spot a sprinkler head with a yardage marker on it---and so I said; "Ran you have about 52 yards." Well, that broke his concentration and he said; "Thanks a lot, you've just ruined this shot for me!"

That's being serious about the way golf used to be played!    

[wsmorrison]

Thanks, Tom.  I recently started using the Pro-V1x and it is a club longer with my irons (dated Hogan blades) than the Pro-V1.  

I think its significantly longer with the driver as well though my driver swings aren't very repetitive these days.  At Merion I was 90 yards from the 18th green (gotta thank Matt Schaffer for the firm and fast conditions through the green) but on 12 I was 90 yards off the tee.  I should've been 110 but the rough was pretty long.

Tom Paul might have been the only district amateur that used the old Top Flite rocks in competition back in the balata days.  I guess that's why he still has a bunch of balatas.  Those Main Line Quakers don't throw anything out!

[TEPaul]

"What this means is that golfers are not going to voluntarily give up distance any more than Russia is going to dismantle its nuclear stockpile.  The only way it's going to happen is if EVERYONE is forced to give up that equipment, so that relative distance still holds based on the golfers' abilities.  In other words, it's only going to happen if the USGA (or the PGA Tour) does something about it."

TomD:

You're right. I realized as soon as I wrote this thread that is so much the only answer that any other response to this thread is relatively meaningless.

[TEPaul]

"Tom Paul might have been the only district amateur that used the old Top Flite rocks in competition back in the balata days.

The only other one was Mike Rose a very fine player for years from Philmont. We were truly the only ones for years---we both used Slazenger "rocks" for about 20 years. For some reason, probably just coincidence we seemed to get paired together a lot in tournaments, and we always used to say; "I see you're still using those rocks". We really were the only ones and the real irony was the both of us had about the best short games out there!

One time down at Gulf Stream the guy I was playing with said to me on the 15th hole that I just had to try the balata so he gave me one of his Slazenger balatas and I hit a good drive out there with it on that short hole, had a wedge left in to the tilted green over the pond. I said if these things really do spin (since I always did pretty much hit down on short irons) I guess I better try to hit it to the very back and spin it back to the pin. And that's just what I did---hit that Slazenger balata to the very back--it checked once and came zooming back about 30 yards right past the pin and right into the pond!

Never used one of those damn things again. There's enough to think about in golf and I don't want to worry about something like that again!  

[A_Clay_Man]

Interesting how the word force is used by a designer who's made his name NOT forcing.

Watching Ran spin his Callaway HX Black off his hiickories and a back stop at Dye Fore, I couldn't help but realize that simulating the experiences of past generations is near impossible. Greenspeeds alone make it onamonopeeish (sp?).

Force seems contrary to the freedom the sport symbolizes.

[Tony_Chapman]

Tom - This is a great thread. I remember the big lawsuit thread from last year and Paul Richards was saying how he just could understand hitting wedge into some of the holes he does at Beverly and he sometimes doesn't like that. I asked him why he does it. Go hit 5-wood off the tee if you want to 7 or 8-iron into a green. Nobody is forcing you to hit driver off the tee or use the new Taylor Made R7.

I'm glad to see Ran is playing hickories. When we were out at SP Elks last summer and he had his big Titleist driver he uttered the funniest thing on 18 when he slapped a shot out in the fairway. "If I'd been using persimmon, I'd have missed it." Good stuff.

I still, though, think it's funny that the average amateur thinks this length helps their game. Most still have an awful short game, yet all I see most of my buddies do is bang the driver on the range for hours at a time while I am usually on the putting green. I don't think the length is ruining the game for the average guy. Now, they hit it 30 yards by me most of the time, but they still can't get it in the hole at the end of the day.

"The man who can chip and putt is a match for anyone."
-Harvey Penick

[Craig Sweet]

I play occasionally with a retired railroad worker. He swings like a baseball player,(manny mota) only harder. This guy bought his clubs at Shopko. He hits Dunlop DDH golf balls, and he routinely hit's the ball 290-310 yards.

His clubs are crap "knock offs" of Wilson Deep Red's, the balls are not ProV1's, yet he is very long. So either the cheapest equipment out there is better than the best equipment from 15 years ago, or he's pumped up on steroids.

[A_Clay_Man]

, think it's funny that the average amateur thinks this length helps their game. Most still have an awful short game, yet all I see most of my buddies do is bang the driver on the range for hours at a time while I am usually on the putting green. I don't think the length is ruining the game for the average guy.

Tony- Since the entire golf course industry seems to be delicately balanced on the 5-7 rounds a year that the average player plays. Why would anyone thnk they know the right solution to solve a problem that may not be a problem to the masses? And isn't just risky enough, that if the USGA does start forcing, the outcome may not be what all the rollback proponents think it will be?

[Tom Dunne]

Do you guys think there would still be a market for the current lines of golf balls if a slightly-modified scaled-back "Tournament" ball were to be introduced? I'm ultimately in favor of consumer choice when it comes to this topic. I could see it being a real badge of honor for a golfer to walk into, say, the Lodge at Bandon Dunes, pull up at the bar and share some of the details of his round with others.

"What'd you shoot, Bill?"

"75. It was great!"

"With a regular ball or Tournament?"

"Tournament."

*admiring nods*


I don't have a problem with handicap golfers having their fun, as long as there is something out there, as T. Doak says, that produces distance relative to a golfer's abilities. All that said, I think one could also contend that the current ProV1 and other premium balls already do that. They're designed to really kick in at clubhead speeds of 115 MPH and up, so while amateurs definitely see more distance, the pros see exponentially more. I realize there's more to the equation than the ball alone, but just wanted to throw out that question.

[Tony_Chapman]

, think it's funny that the average amateur thinks this length helps their game. Most still have an awful short game, yet all I see most of my buddies do is bang the driver on the range for hours at a time while I am usually on the putting green. I don't think the length is ruining the game for the average guy.

Tony- Since the entire golf course industry seems to be delicately balanced on the 5-7 rounds a year that the average player plays. Why would anyone thnk they know the right solution to solve a problem that may not be a problem to the masses? And isn't just risky enough, that if the USGA does start forcing, the outcome may not be what all the rollback proponents think it will be?

Adam - I don't quite get what you are asking (disclaimer: I am a dunce!!), but if it's something on the lines of do we really need a rollback, I say no. I think this has been your contention all along, please correct me if I am wrong.

Handicap numbers in the US, don't really seem to support it I don't think. I would, however, support a "tournament ball" with specifications that all manufactuers could produce (ie. Tiger still gets his Nike, Phil his Callaway and Ernie his Titleist) for the professional game. Just leave the game how I play it alone. I still have my fun a few times a year.

I just sometimes don't think we ask great golfers to hit enough feel shots when they are out there. The are too dialed into a number and just swing. We can fix this with ideal conditioning that won't make the ball stop as soon as it hits something. Best way to battle the ball in my opinion is to make it bounce.

[A_Clay_Man]

Tony- You're no dunce. My contention has not been a contention, really, its just the freedom to do what you choose.
You can be a course builder, and you can decide to go to 10k yards. Or Not.
You can be a player, and choose the specific equiptment you want to use. Of course under the rules.
The USGA can change the rules, modify a numerator or a denominator here or there, but don't you think the golfers of the future will overcome whatever the USGA does to those variables? Always able to obtain the allusive distance just around the bend in the road.

Who knows? Maybe it was the ball change that JV wrote about in his "Balloon Ball" piece that caused the stock market to crash in 29'. What will this one do?