[Nick Campanelli]

I knew that comment would draw up more discussion!

Greg, I agree with you.  Garland hit on my point with his comment regarding courses with five or six sets of tees (and i know tees boxes are only part of the equation).  Modern designs have adapted to new technologies by providing what some people think is an overabundance of tees boxes on each hole.  I see these additions as the opposite, a way for the architect to bridge today's advancements with the game of the past.  As Garland also mentioned above, youngesters are hitting the ball longer.  That wont be a trend that goes away.  While most architects attempt to site these multiple tees to meet the varying skills with equal strategic play, not all courses succeed.  The ones that do, in my opinion, will be the ones that serve as the model going forward.    

Embrace the technology rather than designing for the sake of beating it....moving forward, not backwards...

P.S.  I also agree that there are others ways to adapt to advances.  Adding tee boxes is not the only answer. 

[Tom_Doak]

While it would cost less to build and maintain courses, resistance to the roll back would likely come from the thousands of golf clubs worldwide that have spent millions renovating their courses to keep up with technology.  A ball roll back would render their courses too long by 10-15%. 

Also, do you think the USGA could handle a US Open venue with par 4's only reaching 450yds? 

Nick:

That is b.s.  There would be little to no resistance from GOLF CLUBS, only from players, with prodding from the equipment companies.

As Pete Dye said to me 25 years ago, there is always room to make a new forward tee if you need to.

[Greg Murphy]

Nick, thanks for stirring the pot a bit.

Tom, I think it is true GOLF CLUBS won't resist. But isn't what's needed is for clubs to band together (maybe even create an association) to help create a market for a rolled back ball. Start with even a few really influential clubs/courses actively requesting the option to sell a rolled back ball. If there is a market ... the manufacturers will sell into it. But the clubs probably have to create the market, because the manufacturers can't. The USGA handicappers could rate courses for the new ball, and the next thing you know, only the luddites will be playing the old balls from the tips.

As Tom Paul noted in his post, the technology already exists. All that's needed is a market to support it.

[Garland Bayley]

While it would cost less to build and maintain courses, resistance to the roll back would likely come from the thousands of golf clubs worldwide that have spent millions renovating their courses to keep up with technology.  A ball roll back would render their courses too long by 10-15%. 

Also, do you think the USGA could handle a US Open venue with par 4's only reaching 450yds? 

Nick:

That is b.s.  There would be little to no resistance from GOLF CLUBS, only from players, with prodding from the equipment companies.

As Pete Dye said to me 25 years ago, there is always room to make a new forward tee if you need to.

And Pete has a consultant that will help you pick the perfect place for it.

[Garland Bayley]

...

As Tom Paul noted in his post, the technology already exists. All that's needed is a market to support it.

The technology has existed for a long time. GCA Bill Diddel developed and patented a ball to go less far a long time ago. I am guessing at least 50 years ago.

[Garland Bayley]

Garland,

Sorry I called you Melvin.

What I meant to say is that the average golfer would wince at the thought of losing ten yards or more off of his drive, I just assumed that almost all courses have one really long par 4 that is tough for most to reach in two.

Do you know many non-GCA guys who would vote for a rollback?  I asked a few gus at my club and they looked at me like I was nuts!

Is that the average golfer that plays the tony NE club that doesn't allow "trolleys"?
As far as I can tell the average golfer mostly plays the balls he finds, and has no idea of their effect on his game. Furthermore, he does not follow the regs. However, if he is a ball buyer, and TopFlite produces "The Longest Legal Ball", in all likelyhood he will buy that.

[Ulrich Mayring]

I'd put the burden squarely on Augusta National. They can do whatever they please with their tournament and if they would make a rolled-back ball mandatory for the Masters, then who could do anything about that? I'm completely at a loss for the reasoning behind them always lengthening their course JUST FOR THE MASTERS. Why not simply roll back the ball for this one tournament?

Many others would follow, the regulatory bodies would gladly yield to the pressure, but someone influential has to make the start. And there's no other candidate, who hosts a major every year on the same course.

Ulrich

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()