Geoff Shackelford quoted in NY Times

[Dale_McCallon]

Doug,

About the only thing that I understand out of that diatribe of yours was screw the classical courses--I don't care if they hold another major or not.  I can assure you, the huge majority of golfers coudn't care less either about Merion or any other of these courses.  So few people watch tourney because of the course.  They could have the US Open at some TPC course and people will still come out in droves.  ANGC is the only course in the world people care to see a major contested on.

Your attitude about just wishing people would give up the game is insane.  Why do you care if someone has the latest, greatest (soon to be outdated) clubs/balls?  Distances for hackers may have gone up, but scores haven't gone down, so is the technology really hurting?

I'm sorry that you are offended by hitting a big drive.  If it is so upsetting to you, hit a 3 iron off the tee all day long.  For most people golf is a once a week hobby--and they want to give it a rip.

Have I gotten longer?  My drives go farther, but my irons are probably shorter than in the past.  I still can't putt with any type of ball, so what has all this technology done for me, the average joe?

[David Druzisky]

After al that, it still camr down to missed putts and a great pitch shot!  

[Doug Siebert]

Craig,

We ruin the game by eliminating skill, variety and shotmaking.  You don't work the ball around a dogleg or protruding fairway bunker now, you hit it over whatever is in the way.  Very good quality contact isn't required to keep the ball straight into a stiff wind, the low spin ball and big headed driver take care of that for you.  If you've been playing the game since you were 9, and never hit the ball further than you do now, surely you must agree that the equipment is responsible, unless you are taking steroids or something because at 53 you aren't at your physical peak.

I don't understand your attitude that if the ball goes shorter you'll have to hit woods to reach the greens on those long par 4s, or be unable to reach a 585 yard par 5.  Because you can do it now, it is your god-given right?  Would it be terrible if the ball didn't go as far, and you either couldn't do that anymore, or moved up a set of tees 500 yards closer where you could use the same clubs to the green you do now?  Or does your ego require you play from the tips?  Would your ego still require that if your course installed new tees that lengthened those par 4s to 505 yards and that longest par 5 to 650?

You seem to be saying that all that is happening is that we are advancing the equipment.  What if the equipment in 10 years allowed you, as a 63 year old man, to reach that 585 yard par 5 with a 4i instead of the 3w you use today?  Is that still a good thing or would you start to think maybe things are going too far?  If your course was lengthened and new equipment came out that let you hit the same clubs you do now into those longer holes, and the USGA tried to stop them, would you be angry at the USGA for denying that equipment to you?

I know the party line of the naysayers at this point is to claim that technology has done at all it can in terms of additional distance and therefore we needn't worry about the future, but I can still think of plenty of possible advances in the next 20 years, even if the ball doesn't change one bit (fat chance)  Shafts will be made of carbon nanotubes, and be solid and probably about the width of a cocktail drinking straw.  I suspect there's more yards to be wrung out of a shaft that's atomically engineered than Frank Hannigan believes.  Pros will have their shafts custom made and fitted to their swing, so that they'll lag during their downswing and then whip through at the moment of impact with tremendous added force.  Those without a very good repeating swing and repeating tempo won't get any of this advantage, but who cares so long as we can watch Tiger Woods tear up the senior tour with drives that carry 375 yards!

The hosel will be constructed of a nanotube composite as well, and be so small on irons that the rough will no longer cause the clubface to close, making recovery from the rough far easier and requiring much less strength and skill.

Having such a strong material (100x stronger than steel) available will allow weight distribution that can only be dreamed of today using that very strong material sparingly in the impact area and providing maximum weight where desired with a conventional heavier material, so that a shot 1" or more off the center of your very large iron head will act just like it was struck on the sweet spot.

But who cares about losing more skill and challenge so long as technology is allowed to advance, right?  I mean, golf still won't be EASY, and so long as that's true we should allow any technological advance that makes the game easier, right?  Or at least that's what the naysayers seem to be saying here.



Dale,

I never wished people would just quit the game.  I was trying to say that if the naysayers are correct, and making drives go less far (by whatever means, making a less lively ball, changing the spin rate, what have you) is going to cause people to give up the game, that those people will quit the game eventually anyway once they realize that hitting 300 yard drives in the trees doesn't make their iron play, short game or putting any easier.  Golf still has some challenges left in those places, and they'll get frustrated and quit anyway if they are so weak-minded that making their 300 yard drives go 270 is going to be it for them.  Like I said, I don't think that's the case, but if that's really their attitude, I won't be sorry to see them go.  Are you saying that you would?

[Tommy_Naccarato]

Doug,
Thanks for saying what needed to be said. I'll golf with you anytime.

[Sean_A]

I agree with Dale and Craig, so long as they are not referring to the pro/top amateur game.  If folks are so worried about the integrity of the game, why wait for the USGA to control technology?  Each individual has the choice which clubs to play.  Don't play woods if you think the fun of the game is reduced by using new woods.  For that Matter, you can sell your fancy lob wedges as well.  While you are at it, start hitting Rock Flights, sure, they go a long way, but you can't control them.  One's beliefs don't have to impact all players.  Stick to your convictions and enjoy the game.  

I do agree with Doug in that manufacturers are always going to find ways to improve the equipment.  If they don't, they are out of business.  Consequently, the USGA is always going to be behind the gun trying to control manufacturers.  

As for the pros, I don't care a hoot what they do.  It is none of my business.  I believe, like many, that they will need to react somehow to the long ball problem or a decline in viewers may possibly happen.  What is the ultimate result of this?  Less money for pros.  It is their choice.  

I don't know the solution, but my approach would be advocating  less clubs (8 max) and a narrower band for loft (something like 15-50 degrees) precisely because I don't think the USGA can keep up with the technology battle.  My solutions are easily policed by the USGA without trying to compete with the manufacturers.  Sure, there will be some companies stamping false degrees on clubs, but I would guess very few of the major companies would even contemplate this Tricky Dick stuff.

Ciao

Sean

[Craig Sweet]

Doug, I thought the point of the fairway bunker was to give be a strategic risk/reward situation...play safe around the bunker..or try and bang it over...I thought that was the reason for the dogleg...bite off more than you can chew and you're in jail...

I see higher handicap players at my course who have no strategic  options because they can't hit the ball far enough...even with new equipment...to bring the fairway bunker into play...the new equipment might help them hit it straighter, but the distance is not improved for them.

Having a ball for the "higher swing speed" guys is not the answer unless its confined to the pro's.  Shall we set up swing monitors on the first tee and have the customers swing speed checked before determining which ball they can ball that day?

And lasty, this all gets back to the fact that for 99% of the golfers out there, the new equipment is not making them such long and straight hitters that they have rendered their course absolete.

[Kelly Blake Moran]

Generally, I see no improvement in the game of the average player, nor do I see the type of power exhibited on the PGA tour being exhibited on the average course.  I do think that the focus on power, on technology, and on the tremendous distances pros hit the ball has translated into the average club or course in the form of players attemting mighty shots and hitting the ball in all sorts of directions making the game unsafe for other players and for home owners.  There does seem to be a tendency for players to try to over power the ball in hopes of achieving great distances from their equipment and that has made the game more unsafe.  Furthermore, when discussing angles into the green from the fairway I find myself adding that really it does not matter to the very best player, that I am only refering to the average player who might want to take advantage of a wide landing area by placing the ball in a certain spot where the green opens up, so I would say in large part I have abandoned the idea that the very best players will play the angles.

I think it would be a sad day if the older courses were abandoned and the very best players were never seen playing competatively on those tracks.  Not saying that will happen, but some seem to dismiss that possibility as no big deal things advance and we need to accept it.  I have been to a few ball parks but none, not even the retro parks can match a Fenway Park.  It will be a sad day for the game when Boston no longer plays there.  Advancement, keeping up with the times, the main changes I saw at the park were the addition of more advertising signs, and seats on top of the Green Monster, both advancements in many eyes, but I thought it diminished the park.  I expected a big tall green wall, and while other parks do not have such a feature, I was disappointed to see people sitting on top of it, and like the Alamo, it just did not look quite as tall as I expected or remember in old pictures.  Building a new park of the Red Sox, even a retro park is in the future, it must be done, we must advance many will say, but there is no way it will evoke the same feelings and excitement as what I expereinced watching the very best players in their sport play in that old park.  I know nothing about ball park design, and I am not an expert in the game but I could have sat in that stadium and watched games all day, and most of that had to do with where the game was being played, in the quality of the stadium, as much as anything else.  We can say that the majors can be played at TPC courses and people will come in droves, but I am certain that the feelings, emotions, the elevation of the persons senses to the very highest levels will not happen at the TPC courses, as compared to what would happen if they attended the majors at the older courses like Merion.  Yes they will come, but they will not be completely satisfied.  Certainly, the interest in baseball has not diminished because the drug users are no longer staging these mega home run derbys, Bonds, Giambi, Sosa, even though the homerun races are much more modest now, the game of baseball seems to be as popular as ever.  Certianly, when I grew up in the game I was absolutely captivated by the game, it clearlyu was the best sport in my eyes and that all happened while hitting perssimon woods, forged irons, and balata balls, the game advance during that era, there was no diminishment of the game because of the equipment.