[Niall C]

All this chat about bifurcation reminds me of about 35 years ago I used to caddy in my youth (yes I know, shame on me) for one of my dads pals in the annual two round event for first class players at the club. My dads pal was getting on a bit but still played a good game off a single figure handicap. Each year I would be eager to see whether he brought his old set of irons which at the time were 45 years old or whether he brought his new set which were only 35 years old. Of course he was a class act and could have got it round with a broom handle.

I, on the other hand, remember well learning the game with cut down hickories, leather strap grips and and a rusty headed blade head. What I graduated on to wasn't much better and I still recall how my hands stung after most shots. I'm not too proud to say that if it wasn't for game improvement clubs I wouldn't be playing the game today.

Niall

[Jerry Kluger]

I don't believe that anyone has the facts to back up their claims nor do I believe that one person's preference is necessarily the answer to the question.  However, I do believe that if you were to now reverse all the technological innovations of the past 30 years and had every golfer play with the old balls and clubs you would kill the game of golf.  You might feel that you wouldn't be adverse to that happening but I don't think that you could say with a straight face that any significant percentage of golfers would agree with you.

[Garland Bayley]

I don't believe that anyone has the facts to back up their claims nor do I believe that one person's preference is necessarily the answer to the question.  

Do you deny that the clubs have been getting longer? Do you deny that it is harder to hit the ball with a longer club? What set of "facts" do you operate with?

However, I do believe that if you were to now reverse all the technological innovations of the past 30 years and had every golfer play with the old balls and clubs you would kill the game of golf.  

Sorry, but we have one difference with 30 years ago in balls. The three piece replaced that balata. But the majority of golfers were probably never playing the balata ball. Most of those are playing the same technology they were 30 years ago. I know I am.

You might feel that you wouldn't be adverse to that happening but I don't think that you could say with a straight face that any significant percentage of golfers would agree with you.

Golfers play golf to be playing golf. They don't play golf to examine the minute and inperceptible differences in golf technology. If you don't love golf, then quit! We need fewer golf haters, and more real golfers.

[Sean_A]

...
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.

Do you mean the wrench is only as good as the worker uses it?  I still don't know what you are on about, but don't worry.  We disagree.  I think power lies with the consumer/golfer and you think it lies elsewhere.  I guess you are right if folks can't be bothered to accept responsibility, but I still have hope that people, when pushed hard enough, will not only accept responsibility for their actions - in the case of the so called problem of distance in creating the problem by buying the equipment and agreeing to alter and play courses that accommodate the distance problem - but, also take steps to rectify the situation.  I will always believe golfers are ultimately responsible for how the game is played because they have choices and I don't accept that manufacturers or ruling bodies can take those choices away. 

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.

Do you mean the wrench is only as good as the worker uses it?  I still don't know what you are on about, but don't worry.  We disagree.  I think power lies with the consumer/golfer and you think it lies elsewhere.  I guess you are right if folks can't be bothered to accept responsibility, but I still have hope that people, when pushed hard enough, will not only accept responsibility for their actions - in the case of the so called problem of distance in creating the problem by buying the equipment and agreeing to alter and play courses that accommodate the distance problem - but, also take steps to rectify the situation.  I will always believe golfers are ultimately responsible for how the game is played because they have choices and I don't accept that manufacturers or ruling bodies can take those choices away. 

Ciao

I mean the golfer is not the hypocrite you make him out to be. Is the person who buys audio reproduction (stereo) equipment that is capable of performance the ear cannot hear a hypocrite? Do you blame him for the excess use of earth's resources in the production of something he cannot use? In my view, the person is busy, takes the salesman's advice, and gets on with his life. There are better things to do in life than trying to avoid being called a hypocrite by you.

[Sean_A]

...
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.

Do you mean the wrench is only as good as the worker uses it?  I still don't know what you are on about, but don't worry.  We disagree.  I think power lies with the consumer/golfer and you think it lies elsewhere.  I guess you are right if folks can't be bothered to accept responsibility, but I still have hope that people, when pushed hard enough, will not only accept responsibility for their actions - in the case of the so called problem of distance in creating the problem by buying the equipment and agreeing to alter and play courses that accommodate the distance problem - but, also take steps to rectify the situation.  I will always believe golfers are ultimately responsible for how the game is played because they have choices and I don't accept that manufacturers or ruling bodies can take those choices away. 

Ciao

I mean the golfer is not the hypocrite you make him out to be. Is the person who buys audio reproduction (stereo) equipment that is capable of performance the ear cannot hear a hypocrite? Do you blame him for the excess use of earth's resources in the production of something he cannot use? In my view, the person is busy, takes the salesman's advice, and gets on with his life. There are better things to do in life than trying to avoid being called a hypocrite by you.

GJ

If there are better things to do than please move on, but move on with the knowledge that bitching about something doesn't do a damn bit of  good.

Ciao

[Garland Bayley]

GJ

If there are better things to do than please move on, but move on with the knowledge that bitching about something doesn't do a damn bit of  good.

Ciao
[/quote]

You mean like bitching about hypocritical golfers.

[Sean_A]

GJ

If there are better things to do than please move on, but move on with the knowledge that bitching about something doesn't do a damn bit of  good.

Ciao

You mean like bitching about hypocritical golfers.

[/quote]

I spose I could do something, but then I don't want to rot in a Montana jail.  I definitely have better things to do.

Ciao

[Kirk Moon]

I think it's interesting to read these comments that if the equipment were rolled back it would "kill the game of golf".

I honestly don't understand this kind of thinking.

Who is going to quit the game if they can no longer hit a 340 yard drive and have to settle for 285? 

Who is going to quit the game if they can no longer hit a 9 iron 170 yards?  Or a flip wedge into practically every par four.  Or routinely get on every par 5 in two? 

Are duffers going to quit because they lose some yardage?  Geez.  We've got bigger fish to fry.  Like staying in the fairway and out of the bunkers.

How many people playing now are "good" only because of the hot ball and hot faced clubs?  Not many, I would venture.

IMHO, good golfers will remain good golfers with equipment constrained to keep distances within the design parameters of existing golf courses.  As long as we are all playing with the same equipment (in other words, FORGET ABOUT bifurcation), relative wonderfulness is maintained. 

If some golfers would quit because the equipment is rolled back, I would say "good riddins".  There will be others to fill in the void.  And golf would be restored to the game that it was designed to be.  Tournaments would be MUCH more interesting than the bomb and gouge routine seen on tour today.

The main losers in this scenario would be the equipment manufacturers, who have become the tail that wags the dog.  They could no longer advertise that their clubs are "longer" than the competition.  TOUGH LUCK.  Equipment manufacturers will just have to find other "differentiators" to lure consumers.  I'm sure they can come up with something.  And if their profitability declines, so be it.  The game isn't run for the benefit of the manufacturers. (Or at least it shouldn't be.)

[Richard Choi]

This is pretty silly. This whole arms race is over nothing - to protect the "par". If USGA did not care about par, then NONE of this matter. Who cares if the course is 6500 yards? Do you think Tiger and Rory are still not favored to win any tournament on those courses?

Basketball height was set when an average player height was around 6 feet and nobody played above the rim. Who cares now that we have guys flying all over the rim? If NBA followed USGA, we would have a 14ft rim by now. Why participate in the pointless pursuit of "par" when it is just a number? Who cares if PGA guys can drive the 400 yard holes? We are still talking about a very small percentage of overall population who can do that. Why modify the game to suit those freaks?

Just leave the courses like Merion alone and just designate it as par 67 if you want the final scores to be close to 0. IT IS JUST A NUMBER!!!

USGA should just stop fighting this pointless war. You missed the chance to reign it in a long time ago. Just adjust your expectations and deal with the changing game.

[William_G]

This is pretty silly. This whole arms race is over nothing - to protect the "par". If USGA did not care about par, then NONE of this matter. Who cares if the course is 6500 yards? Do you think Tiger and Rory are still not favored to win any tournament on those courses?

I don't think Tiger and Rory would be favored, there would be more parity...

[jeffwarne]

This is pretty silly. This whole arms race is over nothing - to protect the "par". If USGA did not care about par, then NONE of this matter. Who cares if the course is 6500 yards? Do you think Tiger and Rory are still not favored to win any tournament on those courses?

Basketball height was set when an average player height was around 6 feet and nobody played above the rim. Who cares now that we have guys flying all over the rim? If NBA followed USGA, we would have a 14ft rim by now. Why participate in the pointless pursuit of "par" when it is just a number? Who cares if PGA guys can drive the 400 yard holes? We are still talking about a very small percentage of overall population who can do that. Why modify the game to suit those freaks?

Just leave the courses like Merion alone and just designate it as par 67 if you want the final scores to be close to 0. IT IS JUST A NUMBER!!!

USGA should just stop fighting this pointless war. You missed the chance to reign it in a long time ago. Just adjust your expectations and deal with the changing game.

When did the usga START fighting?
cause grooves and long putters aren't limiting a lot of distance........

[Kirk Moon]

This is pretty silly. This whole arms race is over nothing - to protect the "par". If USGA did not care about par, then NONE of this matter. Who cares if the course is 6500 yards? Do you think Tiger and Rory are still not favored to win any tournament on those courses?

This isn't so much about "protecting par" as it is about keeping golf course architecture relevant.

[jeffwarne]

This is pretty silly. This whole arms race is over nothing - to protect the "par". If USGA did not care about par, then NONE of this matter. Who cares if the course is 6500 yards? Do you think Tiger and Rory are still not favored to win any tournament on those courses?

This isn't so much about "protecting par" as it is about keeping golf course architecture relevant.

To say nothing of safety and the acreage consumed by newer courses
when drives are going 400 yards(offline) there could be a problem

[Mike_Young]

We better listen.  He is correct in is prediction IMHO.  
The USGA really doesn't care about public golf other than lip service and "feel good" promotions for corporate America.
The game is hard.  We have made our courses too difficult for people to learn the game.  Yes, TMAG wants to sell equipment and the average golfer wants to buy it.  They could care less if a  iron is delofted.  
I still say this new putter ruling will never take place and the Tour will never put it in play at the least.  
It's just an opinion but I will take my chances with Mark King.  Dawson, R&A and USGA have reached the tipping point...

[jeffwarne]

We better listen.  He is correct in is prediction IMHO.  
The USGA really doesn't care about public golf other than lip service and "feel good" promotions for corporate America.
The game is hard.  We have made our courses to difficult for people to learn the game.  Yes, TMAG wants to sell equipment and the average golfer wants to buy it.  They could care less if a  iron is deloftedthis new putter ruling will never take place and the Tour will never put it in play at the least.  
It's just an opinion but I will take my chances with Mark King.  Dawson, R&A and USGA have reached the tipping point...

Mike,
Wouldn't you say courses got harder partially as a misguided respose to equipment?
I'll take a 6750 yard back tee  Athens or Augusta CC with a wooden driver and balata over a fescue lined, lake filled, 7300 yard modern beast with hot equipment any day .
and when you say, we better listen.. What does that mean?

[Mike_Young]

We better listen.  He is correct in is prediction IMHO.  
The USGA really doesn't care about public golf other than lip service and "feel good" promotions for corporate America.
The game is hard.  We have made our courses to difficult for people to learn the game.  Yes, TMAG wants to sell equipment and the average golfer wants to buy it.  They could care less if a  iron is deloftedthis new putter ruling will never take place and the Tour will never put it in play at the least.  
It's just an opinion but I will take my chances with Mark King.  Dawson, R&A and USGA have reached the tipping point...

Mike,
Wouldn't you say courses got harder partially as a misguided respose to equipment?
I'll take a 6750 yard back tee  Athens or Augusta CC with a wooden driver and balata over a fescue lined, lake filled, 7300 yard modern beast with hot equipment any day

Jeff,
sure they did.  No doubt.  But I have sat and watched some of the numbers presented that Mark King is talking about.  He knows there are 24 million golfers out there.  He knows the USGA does nothing but act as a parasite for probably 10,000 of our 16500 golf clubs.  As an example.  A state golf assoc wants to charge a course $2000 per year for membership.  With that you can recoup the investment by selling handicaps to your members but the average small club may only have 25-50 members wanting a handicap so they lose.  Yet the larger private clubs can provide a handicap to 400 golfers and make money on the deal.  And the small public course is stuck losing money if they wish to be a member of the assoc.  You and I both have grown up seeing the guys that would grease a driver face with grease ticked under a golf cart wheel well.  Those same guys could care less about the USGA and they spend money playing golf across America.  I think the Tour wlll do something, too may people in the know keep saying all of this is coming to a head.  Golf Channel, equipment companies, cart companies.  Hell, the most basic of golf is walking, the tour walks, amateur championships walk yet most golfers ride....it's definitely an advantage.  It's getting ready to change fast when this economy comes back.  And the first thing you will see change is going to be bluetooth music speakers attached to carts with music from our phones...There is a huge market that could care less for he USGA...
BTW, played Streamsong with Bob and Matt Ranum yesterday.

[jeffwarne]

Mike,
saliva was the lubricant of choice at the Patch .
I'm all for the speakers-my guys use portable ones-"closing time"'s my personal on course favorite.

Matt's a big Bridge fan-I think he had 7 "practice" rounds for the caddie championship we hosted.
One thing's for sure-if they think putters and grooves are the things to address, King is right

[Mike_Young]

Mike,
saliva was the lubricant of choice at the Patch .
I'm all for the speakers-my guys use portable ones-"closing time"'s my personal on course favorite.

Matt's a big Bridge fan-I think he had 7 "practice" rounds for the caddie championship we hosted.
One thing's for sure-if they think putters and grooves are the things to address, King is right

Vaseline was the favorite for us growing up.
Yep they said they like the Bridge....
I think the CEO's are fed up with the pompous ass dealings of the USGA and R&A.  Dawson is the stick that stirs it.  Once they took corporate sponsors they were fair game. 

[William_G]

I'm good with music too, my favorite after a chip in for birdie is Feeling Good by Nina Simone

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8tuTSi6Sck

[Mike_Young]

I'm good with music too, my favorite after a chip in for birdie is Feeling Good by Nina Simone

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8tuTSi6Sck

Me too.  Just small changes creeping....like baseball and softball...it's coming...

[JESII]

Mike,

What's in the water these days?

Mark King made zero case against the USGA's behavior/actions other than to say they're not going along with him. What else are the CEO's fed up with?

[JESII]

Just out of curiosity...what would be the basis of a lawsuit against the USGA in the event of a rollback? Maybe I'm dense but it's a serious question.

You define the rollback terminology then tell me who has a case.

[Richard Choi]

This isn't so much about "protecting par" as it is about keeping golf course architecture relevant.

What the hell does "relevant" mean???

[William_G]

I'm good with music too, my favorite after a chip in for birdie is Feeling Good by Nina Simone

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8tuTSi6Sck

Me too.  Just small changes creeping....like baseball and softball...it's coming...

doubt it, it's one thing to have music on an iPhone

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()