[Jerry Kluger]

They do have different rules for different levels of competition - rangefinders.  Rangefinders with slope are not allowed in competitions while those without slope are allowed.  However, at the top levels rangefinders are not allowed but that is kind of ridiculous.  They tell the player the distance from certain location to the front of the green and exactly how far onto the green the hole is located so they take 10 minutes figuring out the exact location which they could have gotten in a second if they had a rangefinder - but that would speed up the game too much.

[Rich Goodale]

Rich,

If you are right (and I think you are on this occasion), doesn't that mean that bifurcation will in hibit the growth of the game?  Joe Public may buy a set of TaylorMade AtomicRocketBallz clubs and play TaylorMade MegalongSuperspin balls and find he loves the game.  He may decide he enjoys it so much he wants to join a club.  He will then find that, in order to participate in club competitions he'll have to buy a second set of rolled back clubs and balls.  At which point he'll decide not to join the club after all and maybe take up unbifurcated crown green bowling.

Mark

Firstly, many thanks for the AITYA(R)OTO.  Such acts of kindness make my eyes well up as I type this....

Secondly, as one example (AOE) I recently threw ~100 golf clubs and 6 golf bags into the local skip (under strict orders from SWMBO), but I have ~100 remaining, including 10 drivers and 20 putters.  Should bifurcation come in my lifetime, you can be camned sure that I will (buy and) keep one or two TaylorMade AtomicRocketBallz clubs (or equivalent) and store several dozen TaylorMade MegalongSuperspin balls (or equivalent) in my world-class thermostatically controlled wine cellar (aka The Garage) until someone pries them from my cold dead hands, but I'll only use them to take the piss out of special people (e.g. Barney, the Mad Armenian, TE Paul, etc.) who deserve to be duped from time to time.

The rest of the time, I'll play my Masters Professional balls and hit them with my Tunamint (tm) Implements and putt with a normal length putter (using THE CLAW if and only if it is declared legal) and do so very happily.

I look forward to the time when Foxy is again a drive and a 4-iron for me (and a three shot hole for most of my opponents....).  This driver/sand-wedge shit just has to stop.

Rich

[Kris Shreiner]

Mr. King seems to have lost his way a bit on this one. There is a small part of the equation many in leadership positions within the game seem to side-step. When the technology and distance advances alter the confines needed to play the game to an ever LARGER amount of ground required...that's just flat out irresponsible. When the rest of the planet's inhabitants are advocating resource conservation, efficiency of "developed" space etc., where does golf's direction square with that logical approach. Dead wrong from my view.
 
A side point, but all that technology many are so enamored with comes at a tremendous environmental and societal price. Constant need for "upgrades" has the gadgets being replaced regularly. Spare me the recycle talk; we know all to well how many just end up in a landfill. The countless composites, plastics and other components are generally all made where? What's the production oversight and human health conditions on those production sites like? WEAK to be sure.

I'm not against technological advances, but the zeal needs to be tempered with a realistic look at how "great" they really are for society.
We have record depression, mental illness, suicide and a host of other ills today. If you look at other mammal species in the world, GREAT portions of their days, BESIDES sleep, are spent in a resting or relaxed state. This is especially true with the longer-lived mammals. Compare that reality to the madness our professional and "business" leaders expect from the workforce today. Sobering when you examine it clearly...and UNSUSTAINABLE. Society WILL beakdown. It's showing dangerous signs already.

Technology provides tools to assist us live our lives, but when a preoccupation with it drives an unhealthy way of living...it's time to take a step back. Don't just become a lemming. Just because someone tells you something is expected doesn't make it the right way to go.

The game NEVER owes the "industry" a profit center. The industry PROVIDES services and equipment for the various professions within golf. A healthy game spawns opportunity for those in the business community. Take care of the game and the rest follows.

Cheers,
Kris

[Mark Pearce]

Rich,

It is apparent that, in Mr King's world, there will be as much anticipation in waiting to see which combination of equipment you bring out for a game as there will be in looking forward to the game itself.  Imagine the joy(disappointment) of being classed in that heady grouping that gets to see the AtomicRocketBallz in action and the despair(relief) that would go with being amongst those plebs fortunate enough to see a master wield the Tunamint Clubs.

[JSlonis]

Jerry, Jamie, et., al.,

I think bifurcation would be a mistake, the unraveling of the game.

What amateur is going to want to hit balls that don't go as far with clubs that don't propel them as far when their golfing icons are using better performing products ?

It won't work.

It has to be a unified effort with the USGA, PGA, PGA Tour, R&A, Europian Tour, etc., etc.

Bifurcation sounds good, but in practice, would be an abject failure.

Pat,

I'm not sure I understand your statement here...

**"What amateur is going to want to hit balls that don't go as far with clubs that don't propel them as far when their golfing icons are using better performing products ?"**

Perhaps you meant something different, but I don't see how that applies.  With bifurcation, Amateur players wouldn't be playing with clubs/balls that were shorter while the pro's played better.

If people really wanted to get technical about this issue, the fact is, the everyday average golfer is not really playing with the same equipment that the pro's are playing now.  The off the rack stuff might look the same on the outside but tour drivers and fairway woods are now individually customized to each player even beyond the adjustability now offered, wedges are custom ground to each players specs & the list could go on.

[Bryan Lewis]

http://scoregolf.com/blog/rick-young/2013/january/taking-a-stand

"SG: So what needs to happen?

King: "If I were running the PGA of America I would write my own set of rules. I'd do it with the PGA Tour. Right so then what would happen with the U.S. Open and those 11 tournaments? They would follow suit because they would have no choice. Because if they don't have any players they don't have any tournament and if they don't have any tournament they don't have any money."

and

SG: You sound scared for the future of the game. Are you?

King: “No not yet. But the conversations are intensifying. If we don't do something different and new and creative then the game is in trouble. If we weren't having these conversations right now then I would say yes, it’s in trouble. Here's a prediction: the USGA within 10 years will be a non-entity, they will be a non-factor in golf because they are choosing to be on the outside and no one is signing up for what they represent. The industry is going to move away from them and pass them. They're obsolete. I hate to say that but that's their behaviour.”

and

 "If they roll the ball back we're not going to roll our ball back. We will for a tournament ball but we’re still going to sell you a ball you can play. Like I said, two sets of rules are coming."

So...

It looks like the this manufacturer wants either 1)  No rules on equipment or 2) Bifurcation.  I get it:  his job is to sell new equipment every year.  But I don't see how that is sustainable. 

Do I need any more evidence?  As I've said before, the equipment manufacturers are bullies.

Bryan

[Paul OConnor]

David Feherty made a comment at the tournament this past weekend about the "arrogance of the game of golf."  He suggested that no other game requires such vast amounts of space, 200+ acres, consumes so many resources, specifically water, and can be so expensive, demanding ever more of it's players treasure to enjoy.  And generally, the powers in the game could really give a shit.

It seems both Mr. King and the USGA have plenty of their own arrogance here.  A sensible rollback of the ball seems in order, but like a lot of seemingly sensible ideas these days, those who continue to profit from the status quo will fight like hell to prevent any change of trajectory. 

[jeffwarne]

Mark King's comments trouble me.
Many comments on this thread trouble me.

The 5 hour round is a result of someone in front of you, no matter how fast YOU play or what tees YOU play.

In front of you is someone who may or may not be an expert, walking back to new tees, then forward, driving into the same cooridor that you are from 215 yards.
That corridor is probably narrower than it was 75,50, or 25 years ago due to someone's misguided attempt to protect par, as a result of hotter equipment and/or some Buy.com tour player shooting 61 and driving 2 par 4's when he was there.
There's probably been some native grass, trees, bushes, or internal OB inserted to protect a home or players on another tee that are now within reach. Additionally, the rough has been grown to combat bomb and gouge.

The problem is that group in front of you is trying to hit that (now smaller than it used to be) corridor from 270-310 yards, not 225-250 like  they used to.
Sometimes they hit it, but their odds go down significantly due to their distance away from it.
Now you get to wait while they hit provisionals and hunt for their balls, then figure out if their rangefinder is hitting the pin or a tree behind the green.
Then wait while they grind over three footers because they are "protecting par at the green" with superfast, yet "receptive" greens at the other end.

Hot drivers and balls ENLARGE the corridors required for the game-It's that simple-and the fact that the corridors are getting smaller, and the overall distances being walked, rewalked, and played, slow down the game.
Two things would reduce the distance elite players hit it. The COR on woods/irons and the ball.
All the other modern "improvements" need not go away, and anyone hitting it 225 or less (90% of golfers) would not notice.

If technology made the ball never fly off line as many claim, why is it the top player/players in the game can't find the planet, even when running away from the field in an event.

I'd like to see technology SOLVE some of the dilemnas plaguing the game,not create more.
Golf balls that fly farther require more space, and corridors for safety at least must be larger.
In a world of shrinking resources, that's irresponsible and impractical.

I'd like to see leading CEO's be problem solvers during their short run in the sun (which history tells us it will be)
not use their self appointed power to bully the stewards of the game(who admittedly do need a good wake up call) rather than do harm to the game in the interest of profit.
I am a Taylormade Staff member-Taylormade is a great company who takes good care of Club Pros.
I may be reevaluating that position depending on further developments.

[Garland Bayley]

I have read all the opinions of the various posters and while I think King is over stating his reaction to the USGA.  Mark my words, their is a battle going on at this very moment between the PGA Tour, PGA of America and the USGA.  The PGA Tour is very unsure about banning anchoring, they are a business and their brand is build on Americans, two of which are Keegan Bradley and Webb Simpson.  ...

If they are basing their brand on two of the most boring golfers in the world, then I hope they get what they deserve. These guys have me yelling in anger at the TV.

A brand based on Sneds and Bubba is something I can go all in for.

Besides, why do they need Keegan and Webb when they have Tiger?

[Garland Bayley]

I absolutely believe that bifurcation is the answer. Players who are not at the very top level of the game will no doubt try the equipment being used by those at that level and quickly realize that they would not enjoy the game as much if they used that equipment; end of story.  ...

This is BS. I am a high handicapper, I play blades, and I enjoy the game immensely. I even win grudge matches against Kalen playing blades much to the surprise of Richard Choi among others who thought I was nuts for going up against someone with a handicap 4 or 5 strokes lower with what they thought were inappropriate tools.

TaylorMade and the rest of the big name companies are in the business of brainwashing golfers, pure and simple!

We can do without em.

[Mark Pearce]

I absolutely believe that bifurcation is the answer. Players who are not at the very top level of the game will no doubt try the equipment being used by those at that level and quickly realize that they would not enjoy the game as much if they used that equipment; end of story.  ...

Strangely, I enjoyed playing with blades, woods with tiny heads and balls that got chewed up.  A generation before golfers of all abilities enjoyed the game with wooden woods.  Modern equipment has not increased and will not increase enjoyment of the game.  The suggestion that it has is just one more part of the equipment manufacturers' marketing spiel.  That so many sane golfers have bought into that myth is sad.

[Rich Goodale]

Rich,

It is apparent that, in Mr King's world, there will be as much anticipation in waiting to see which combination of equipment you bring out for a game as there will be in looking forward to the game itself.  Imagine the joy(disappointment) of being classed in that heady grouping that gets to see the AtomicRocketBallz in action and the despair(relief) that would go with being amongst those plebs fortunate enough to see a master wield the Tunamint Clubs.

Is that any different to today, Mark?

[Howard Riefs]

And what does the USGA have to say about Mr. King's comments?


TOM O'TOOLE JR.:  Well, unfortunate Mr. King has that point of view.  I'm sorry to have read those remarks.  As you know when we suggested the proposed ban on anchoring, we said that we would have a comment period until the end of February, and the USGA has maintained that we would not speak during that comment but listen, and we've done that, not just Mr. King's remarks but from a variety of mediums, and we'll hold pat until the end of February and then we'll along with our partners at The R&A have some response.  But that's our position at this juncture.

JIMMY ROBERTS:  I think a bigger question, though, is there any concern about bifurcation, two sets of rules?

TOM O'TOOLE JR.:  Well, that bifurcation has been a discussion around the golf game for a long time.  I think you know and many know that it's a difficult thing to govern the game, and it's not popular, and our position has been that the game would not be benefitted by bifurcation, and that's still our position.

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2013/1/28/usga-unfortunate-mr-king-has-that-point-of-view.html

[Jason Thurman]

We've always been told that the equipment boom has helped make the game more enjoyable for high handicappers, as the ball is easier to hit straight and far than it's ever been before.

I can't help noticing, though, that the number of rounds played has decreased steadily pretty much since 1995, when persimmon began completely disappearing from the game.

Did the equipment boom actually hurt golf? Was the added expense of needing new equipment to "keep up" too much for a lot of players to stomach?

I fear that golf may be in a can't-win position. Current equipment is too expensive, makes golf more expensive, and hasn't actually made the game measurably easier or more fun, resulting in a game that is shrinking. Rolled-back equipment would require buying MORE new stuff initially, resulting in players leaving. For those who keep playing, the following frustration of playing a game suddenly made more difficult will cause more players to leave. And bifurcation will only serve to add an air of illegitimacy to scores shot by anyone playing anything but the most extensively regulated equipment.

[Sean_A]

This is an endless parade.  How many of you that want equipment rolled back are actually using the old equipment?  How many of you haven't bought the new flashy gear in the past year, 2 years, 5 years, 10 years?  Its all talk until golfers actually take matters into their hands by changing their consumption habits.  If there is a problem, its you who are the problem because you buy the equipment.  Its also you who choose to alter courses to accommodate the equipment and or organizations that want it accommodated.  Golfers have no shame and  their hypocrisy knows no bounds. 

Ciao 

[Rich Goodale]

Speaking for myself, Sean, my driver and "woods" are all 5+ years old and of different makes; my irons are 5+ years old and my sand/lob wedge and putter are 25+ years old.  I manage.

[John Kavanaugh]

Speaking for myself, Sean, my driver and "woods" are all 5+ years old and of different makes; my irons are 5+ years old and my sand/lob wedge and putter are 25+ years old.  I manage.

Glad to see you bought new clubs after our partnership at Pasa.

[Mark Pearce]

Rich,

It is apparent that, in Mr King's world, there will be as much anticipation in waiting to see which combination of equipment you bring out for a game as there will be in looking forward to the game itself.  Imagine the joy(disappointment) of being classed in that heady grouping that gets to see the AtomicRocketBallz in action and the despair(relief) that would go with being amongst those plebs fortunate enough to see a master wield the Tunamint Clubs.

Is that any different to today, Mark?

I don't know, Rich.  I've only ever been fortunate to see you wield some potentially valuable museum pieces.

[jeffwarne]

This is an endless parade.  How many of you that want equipment rolled back are actually using the old equipment?  How many of you haven't bought the new flashy gear in the past year, 2 years, 5 years, 10 years?  Its all talk until golfers actually take matters into their hands by changing their consumption habits.  If there is a problem, its you who are the problem because you buy the equipment.  Its also you who choose to alter courses to accommodate the equipment and or organizations that want it accommodated.  Golfers have no shame and  their hypocrisy knows no bounds. 

Ciao 

Sean,
That sounds like an admirable position.
If you choose to play with inferior equipment than your opponent, it's reflected in your handicap, and his equipment is eflected in his.
Simply giving you more shots.

When I compete, I play against others who are playing the latest and greatest.
In my case, I haven't found much benefit from modern technology other than a driver and ball, so I play pretty old stuff because I resist change and don't see the benefit of the learning curve of the new stuff.
. Ironically, now my nearly 30 year old wedges are illegal, because they have square grooves, even though the grooves aren't what attracted me in the first place, and the faces are virtually worn smooth.

If I choose a driver with an inferior COR and can find a balata ball, I'm at a disadvantage, and don't get more shots given to me as you do if you raise your scores with inferior equipment.
EVERY competition course I play has been lengthened as a reaction to modern equipment (knee jerk or not)
I can hit 3 iron in or 8 iron, against younger, better competition who's hitting 9 irons and wedges.

The powers that be aren't going to listen to someone who's playing hickory and out of the competitive loop.

They might listen to someone who's in the middle of the fight, and makes money selling equipment, who's willing to speak up even if it costs them money.
Playing the semi-latest to stay relevant (in my case driver and balls), while lobbying for sanity from the governing bodies and equipment companies isn't hypocritical, it's logical.
Don't think for a minute that many players don't share my position, because they do, they're just better players than me, and have more to lose endorsementwise than I do if they speak out.

equipment has been exploding for 15 years while golf has been declining, so making it "more fun" isn't working.

[Garland Bayley]

...
Did the equipment boom actually hurt golf? Was the added expense of needing new equipment to "keep up" too much for a lot of players to stomach?
...

There are pros that believe that high MOI clubs stagnate the learning process, and keep people from achieving their best.

Furthermore, they have lengthened the clubs so they can advertise more distance. They make the game harder to play by doing that.

[Garland Bayley]

This is an endless parade.  How many of you that want equipment rolled back are actually using the old equipment?  How many of you haven't bought the new flashy gear in the past year, 2 years, 5 years, 10 years?  Its all talk until golfers actually take matters into their hands by changing their consumption habits.  If there is a problem, its you who are the problem because you buy the equipment.  Its also you who choose to alter courses to accommodate the equipment and or organizations that want it accommodated.  Golfers have no shame and  their hypocrisy knows no bounds. 

Ciao 

This is completely wrong. Most golfers have little or no knowledge about clubs. The club manufacturers are who they look to for information. The club manufactures "have no shame and their hypocrisy knows no bounds".

[Rich Goodale]

Speaking for myself, Sean, my driver and "woods" are all 5+ years old and of different makes; my irons are 5+ years old and my sand/lob wedge and putter are 25+ years old.  I manage.

Glad to see you bought new clubs after our partnership at Pasa.

You need to revise your Jr. High School math, Pajo.  I'm still putting with the 25+ year old Ping Anser that sunk that side-hill down hill putt on the 10th at Pasa for a par that saved your fat arse on that hole 12 years ago when you were communing with the half-pipe.

Best hole MacKenzie ever designed.

[Mark Pearce]

This is an endless parade.  How many of you that want equipment rolled back are actually using the old equipment?  How many of you haven't bought the new flashy gear in the past year, 2 years, 5 years, 10 years?  Its all talk until golfers actually take matters into their hands by changing their consumption habits.  If there is a problem, its you who are the problem because you buy the equipment.  Its also you who choose to alter courses to accommodate the equipment and or organizations that want it accommodated.  Golfers have no shame and  their hypocrisy knows no bounds. 

Ciao 

Rather like arguing that, if Formula 1 allowed turbocharged engines but you didn't believe they should be allowed you should continue to compete without them even though everyone else wasusing them,

[Sean_A]

This is an endless parade.  How many of you that want equipment rolled back are actually using the old equipment?  How many of you haven't bought the new flashy gear in the past year, 2 years, 5 years, 10 years?  Its all talk until golfers actually take matters into their hands by changing their consumption habits.  If there is a problem, its you who are the problem because you buy the equipment.  Its also you who choose to alter courses to accommodate the equipment and or organizations that want it accommodated.  Golfers have no shame and  their hypocrisy knows no bounds. 

Ciao 

Sean,
That sounds like an admirable position.
If you choose to play with inferior equipment than your opponent, it's reflected in your handicap, and his equipment is eflected in his.
Simply giving you more shots.

When I compete, I play against others who are playing the latest and greatest.
In my case, I haven't found much benefit from modern technology other than a driver and ball, so I play pretty old stuff because I resist change and don't see the benefit of the learning curve of the new stuff.
. Ironically, now my nearly 30 year old wedges are illegal, because they have square grooves, even though the grooves aren't what attracted me in the first place, and the faces are virtually worn smooth.

If I choose a driver with an inferior COR and can find a balata ball, I'm at a disadvantage, and don't get more shots given to me as you do if you raise your scores with inferior equipment.
EVERY competition course I play has been lengthened as a reaction to modern equipment (knee jerk or not)
I can hit 3 iron in or 8 iron, against younger, better competition who's hitting 9 irons and wedges.

The powers that be aren't going to listen to someone who's playing hickory and out of the competitive loop.

They might listen to someone who's in the middle of the fight, and makes money selling equipment, who's willing to speak up even if it costs them money.
Playing the semi-latest to stay relevant (in my case driver and balls), while lobbying for sanity from the governing bodies and equipment companies isn't hypocritical, it's logical.
Don't think for a minute that many players don't share my position, because they do, they're just better players than me, and have more to lose endorsementwise than I do if they speak out.

equipment has been exploding for 15 years while golf has been declining, so making it "more fun" isn't working.

Jeff

Well, you gotta start somewhere.  One would think that after bitching about something for long enough without results, the another tact should be tried.  If one can't start with himself, why should I listen to him tell others about what should happen?  I just want to see somebody do something.  The bitching has gone on long enough. 

Mark

When you are trying to make a living from golf I will take your analogy seriously. 

If folks think playing a poxy club event is important enough to trade up equipment, I don't want to hear them whinge about the ball going too far.   

GJ wrote " Most golfers have little or no knowledge about clubs."

What is your point?  Is it that consumers are stupid?  Manufacturers are in business to make money?  Or something else? 

Ciao

[Garland Bayley]

...
GJ wrote " Most golfers have little or no knowledge about clubs."

What is your point?  Is it that consumers are stupid?  Manufacturers are in business to make money?  Or something else? 

Ciao

No, most consumers are too busy to research the details so they listen to the sales pitches and make their choices. Manufacturers may be in the business to make money, but falsely faking high functionality of what they sell in order to increase the amount they make is hypocrisy.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()