[Jon Wiggett]

Who still remembers how it was to play the old small ball (1.63)? I came across one the other day in a box of old stuff I had in the garage and played a round with it the following day. I was stunned at how low that it flew and what a difference it made playing out of the rough.

That got me to thinking that the small ball was much better suited to a low running game. What difference would there be if it was still around and the big ball (1.68) was dropped for GCAs and course design?

[Melvyn Morrow]

Jon

IMHO the R&A and USGA agreement in May 1921 got it right with a ball of 1.62 inches (dia) and weight no more than 1.62 ounces. Then in the 1929 the USGA got it totally wrong by increasing the ball to 1.68 inches (dia) and weight of no more than 1.55 ounces – this was updated in 1932 to 1.68 inches with max. weight of 1.62 ounces. Sometime in the middle of WW2 the USGA introduced another requirement for the ball, velocity standard.

I believe that the USGA then allowed the 1.68 inch balls into all their competitions from 1968. It was about this time that the R&A in to hope of standardizing the size of the ball world wide suggested a compromise of the 1.65/1.66 inch balls, which was ignored by the USGA, resulting in the 1.68 inch ball being used in the 1974 Open. It was formally confirmed by the R&A in 1982 the 1.68 inch ball would become mandatory.

I just love a good compromise, don’t you? However I also believe that this was the start of our current problems. I sincerely believe that the USGA got it wrong and that the R&A showed its normal colours by doing absolutely nothing (as usual).

The ball debate is far from over but who has the balls to say they got it wrong. Will the R&A step up to the new challenge? Regrettable I do not believe that either party will actually do anything, leaving the architects and courses to struggle on regardless.

The Game and the poor old golfer being the looser, but then what's new? 

[TEPaul]

Although I'm an American, for a few years I used to play the small ball (I wish I could remember the brand). Frankly I liked it better than the larger ball. My recollection is how much better and more penetrating it was into the wind. Also, for me, and for reasons I probably can't exactly explain, the same ball gave me a lot more confidence, probably just because it was smaller.

[Paul_Turner]

Jon

If your 1.62 ball is a wound ball it will have lost a lot of "life"in the intervening years:  the rubber winds relax.

There were some scientific tests with the 1.62 ball vs the 1.68 in "Search for the Perfect Swing" and this is what they found:  the 1.62 ball went about 10 yards farther for the longest players.  this increased to about 15 yards into a 40feet/sec head wind.   The 1.62 deviated slightly less in a cross wind.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Paul

Interesting stats

[Ken Moum]

What difference would there be if it was still around and the big ball (1.68) was dropped for GCAs and course design?

The answer is really simple. all of our lamenting about the current long and straight balls and their effect on classic courses would be magnified dramatically.

When the 1.62" ball was allowed, it was both longer and straighter when only wound balata balls were being made. Imagine what it would be like with the ProV1's multi-layered construction.

IMHO, I think the USGA got it exactly right in 1930, but they did it about 60 years too soon.

K

[Melvyn Morrow]

K

You may be right, but I would like know how Jon
scored over 18 holes using both balls.

[Bob_Huntley]

I played the small ball in Africa for some years and felt that it produced better ball strikers. They were either Dunlop 65s or Slazengers and they did make it easier to combat strong winds.

On coming to America I felt that the larger ball seemed preferable on the putting surface.


Bob

[Matt Varney]

Sounds to me like a business opportunity.

Let the pros play the current USGA specs ball and let us all guys that want to just have fun playing golf play the smaller 1.62" ball.  Surely some golf ball company in the vast world still is making this size ball for some market outside the USA.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Try speaking to Alfie Ward, he is still around
 - expect you may get a repro Haskell ball

[JohnV]

See my article in the "In My Opinion" section on the Balloon Ball.  In general, the players loved the 1.68 diameter ball because of how well it sat up in the fairway.  They hated the light weight.  The USGA kept the diameter and went back to the weight of the old ball because of that.

The average golfer would probably be topping a lot more shots with the small ball.

[Bill_McBride]

Although I'm an American, for a few years I used to play the small ball (I wish I could remember the brand). Frankly I liked it better than the larger ball. My recollection is how much better and more penetrating it was into the wind. Also, for me, and for reasons I probably can't exactly explain, the same ball gave me a lot more confidence, probably just because it was smaller.

You were probably using Penfold spades like James Bond in Goldfinger!

[Mike Wagner]

Robinhood

[Jon Wiggett]

K

You may be right, but I would like know how Jon
scored over 18 holes using both balls.

K,

I didn't score to badly though I did notice that the 1.62 (got the size wrong before ) ball was a bit shorter. I thought this was due to the old fashioned technology but Paul was probably right too. I shot 3 over par for 17 holes but don't ask about the last

It was suprising how quick I got used to the size after so many years, it was great fun.

[Tony_Muldoon]

Dunlop 65s

I received a dozen of these in the post today still in their original wrapper and box.  Last weekend I saw them on eBay and I was reminded of buying my father just such a present for Christmas (1973?).

They now have pride of place on my bookshelves.  I'm tempted to try and get a couple more and see if I can hit the bloody things with his old Wilson’s.

[Andy Levett]

From memory, the Top-Flite came to the UK about the same time as the 1.62 was banned for amateurs. It was expensive (! how things change) but most people loved it because the 1.68 Top Flite flew into and across the wind like the old 1.62 balls and much better than the 1.68 incarnations of the Dunlop 65, Penfold Ace etc. The British balls also cut very easily. One mishit and you could see the rubber windings beneath the 'smiley'. The extra size of a 1.68 did give you more confidence.

[Mike Nuzzo]

I thought that we all agreed with David Ferehty and were going to propell the 1.75 ball as the future of golf.

It would fly shorter and be easier for the average player to hit in the center of their clubface.

Cheers

[Jim Nugent]

Did any of the top American pro's play the smaller ball in the Open Championship? 

[Bob_Huntley]

I thought I would bump this from last year.

The wrappings on the Dunlop 65 were very attractive.


See:

http://golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,30783.0.html


Bob

[Ken Moum]

Did any of the top American pro's play the smaller ball in the Open Championship? 

As far as I can remember they all did.

No one was going to give up the distance advantage on a links course.

IIRC, the R&A finally changed because there was a perception that Britain's best players were being held back by the habits they developed hitting the small ball.

Ken

[Jon Wiggett]

All good points but, would GCA have gone a different route if the 1.68 had been dropped. I would have thought it would have encouraged the running game.

[Michael Goldstein]

Gents,

I'm just seeking clarity on this. Is it legal to play with a 1.62 Dunlop 65? Have been using them the last few rounds and it's like a new game, they're entirely maneuverable.

M

[Andy Stamm]

No. They were outlawed in the Open pretty early on (60s or 70s) but were allowed for regular play fairly late (late 80s maybe?), but they've been not allowed under the rules of golf for 20 or so years now.

I've got a bunch, and the are great fun.

[David_Tepper]

"I'm just seeking clarity on this. Is it legal to play with a 1.62 Dunlop 65? Have been using them the last few rounds and it's like a new game, they're entirely maneuverable."

Michael Goldstein -

I think this answers your question (and the answer is the 1.62" British ball has not been legal since 1990):

http://golf.about.com/od/golfterms/g/british-ball.htm

DT

[Michael Goldstein]

Thanks guys. Very interesting. Good thing I lost both bets!

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()