Is that a Tsunami forming on the distant horizon ?

[Glenn Spencer]

Patrick,

I think we are on the same page here. Lob wedges have taken away some of the importance of ball-striking. The fact that you can aim it right at the hole without as much fear has taken away from the importance of ball-striking. The fact that everyone is aiming at the pins and inevitably all will miss at some point, well that just places more emphasis on the short game, doesn't it? Tucked pins were easier to shoot at in 90, I remember starting a lot of shots in the middle and working them to the corners of my favored shot that day or just playing to the middle. Now, it is just flag, flag, flag. So, if you could work the ball in 90 better than your opponents, how are you making up for that lost advantage now? If you hit it 280 and straight in 90, how are you making up for that lost advantage now? I don't see how they do it? In fact, I knew a guy that was universally thought of as one of the best ball-stikers around, when he lost at the Amateur or Western the guys that were interviewed all stated that they were really surprised that they beat him because he was such a good player, familar comments I know, but these were said about him an awful lot. Now, his advantage is gone, the practice and effort of hitting those shots near perfection does him basically no good, because the guys today can all now accomplish what he can to some degree, but their short games are so much better because they knew that they didn't need to work on ball-striking as much. Do you think that most 12-year olds decide, I want to be able to hit it good or I want to have a great short game inherently and their practice is then somewhat tailored to those goals? I do, and I think that the guys that chose ball-striking as 12-year olds in 1985 are being severely hindered by that choice. This is through no fault of their own, just the technology.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick:

Do you even realize what my question to you on this thread is---which you continuously refuse to answer?

Well, I guess you've waited long enough.

It's Jim Vernon, Chairman of the USGA Equipment Standards Committee, along with Dick Rugge and the technical staffers at the USGA.

The  USGA has undertaken a project in an effort to understand the ramification of spin on distance and ball flight.
This began in 2005

While this project isn't the USGA's priority project, the groove and surface treatment project is, they hope to complete the spin project by the end of 2006.

Jim has stated that the results of the project will help the USGA determine whether or not new rules would be desirable.

I'm shocked that you didn't know this.[/color]

[Doug Siebert]

According to the WF preview issue, Rugge is looking at Grooves.

Feeling groovy...

JWK

Damn, so they are looking at spin rates, clubhead size and grooves?  Its probably too much to hope for, but if they fixed those three things we'd be pretty close to back where we were in the late 80s.   I know the purists will wish we went back even further, and I won't rehash my technological improvements for greater equipment consistency/cost versus making the game easier list, but I think this is just right.

I still think they need to make the ball slightly larger when they change the rules for spin rate so it is easier to tell them apart, making it affected more by the wind would counteract the computer designed dimple patterns that have minimized the wind and make putting just a tiny bit harder to counteract those goofy high MOI putters (if I'm making putters illegal I'm going for the long pendulum type before I take on the three ball putters)