[Dan Herrmann]

In another thread, Patrick Mucci wrote:
"Redan at NGLA had to be in 1910. -187 yards
With that equipment and ball.  What would that be equal to today ?

And, at 187 with that equipment, it would seem to have been a driver or 3-wood equivalent.

Certainly the high fade wouldn't have been the shot of choice.  In 1910 did the distance demand playing short of the green ?"

Got me thinking - what would happen to modern courses if the ball were rolled back?   For example, would today's forced carries become impossible for a 10 handicapper?   Would a long, uphill par 5 become tough to reach in 3?  Or - would the game be enhanced?

[BHoover]

What's so hard about rolling the ball back for the pros and top amateurs only?  Just have a tournament ball for the Tour pros and top amateurs and keep the current ball for the recreational golfer.  Why is that difficult?

The game does not need to be made more difficult for the recreational golfer, and technology should not render courses obsolete for the top players.  Bifurcation solves that problem, and it's not an unprecedented move (see the tournament grooves ruling).

[Dan Herrmann]

I was thinking more about this subject.  Several years ago, I participated in a USGA/R&A event at French Creek where we played with a rolled-back golf ball.  The USGA set the tees at "appropriate" lengths, and we had at it.

It was a LOT of fun.  Joe Bausch scored an eagle 2 on our 9th hole, and I'd guess that 80% of the participants had NO problem with the concept.

[Chris_Hufnagel]

Don't a lot of the "what if" scenarios become moot if people simply decided to play from the right tees in the first place?

I play a little hickory golf when I can, and always try to look at courses with both an eye for how they would play with modern equipment and how they either played then or how newer courses would play today with hickories and period-accurate golf balls.

For me, more than length as I think that can be offset by the right tees, I always look at course conditions (firmer being better) and approaches to greens - can I play a running shot in or do I need to attack it from the air?

[jeffwarne]

In another thread, Patrick Mucci wrote:
"Redan at NGLA had to be in 1910. -187 yards
With that equipment and ball.  What would that be equal to today ?

And, at 187 with that equipment, it would seem to have been a driver or 3-wood equivalent.

Certainly the high fade wouldn't have been the shot of choice.  In 1910 did the distance demand playing short of the green ?"

Got me thinking - what would happen to modern courses if the ball were rolled back?   For example, would today's forced carries become impossible for a 10 handicapper?   Would a long, uphill par 5 become tough to reach in 3?  Or - would the game be enhanced?

Shouldn't a "long uphill par 5" BE difficult for a 10 handicap to reach in 3 anyway?
But if that question has to be asked and answered for a majority, not much chance for a rollback

[Bill_McBride]

If the ball is rolled back....

....and I lose even MORE distance, I will be really pissed.   .     A general roll back is certainly not the answer.  A tournament ball is.  

[Steve Salmen]

If you ever decide to dabble with balatas or Professionals, you will have a major problem on your hands: the balls have a shelf life.  I occasionally dabble with Professionals and balatas.  I am at least the same length, probably longer than when I was 20.  The 7 iron I used to hit from 155 will go 140 if I'm lucky.  I'm not exactly sure when Titleist stopped making each model, but it has to be 10 years for the Professional and a few years more for the balata.

[Jordan Caron]

If you ever decide to dabble with balatas or Professionals, you will have a major problem on your hands: the balls have a shelf life.  I occasionally dabble with Professionals and balatas.  I am at least the same length, probably longer than when I was 20.  The 7 iron I used to hit from 155 will go 140 if I'm lucky.  I'm not exactly sure when Titleist stopped making each model, but it has to be 10 years for the Professional and a few years more for the balata.

The first pro V1 came out in late 2000 if I believe. I would think Balata's and Professionals were finished not long after that, 2002 maybe.

Back to the original topic which I like. I would think a 6000 yard course these days would have played like 7000 + 100 years ago. So a 187 yard hole would have to play what a 220 yard shot is now. And we all know a 220 yard shot now vs 100 years ago was much more difficult due to the size of the sweet spot.

[Garland Bayley]

If the ball is ever rolled back, golf will go back to the game that many of us old folks learned to love a long time ago. If need be we can just move forward a tee or so on the "modern" courses.

We might have to walk farther on the "modern" monstrosities if the tees are not located well, but they tell me that's good for my health.

[Mike Bowen]

I am in favour of a rollback for all.  If the ball were rolled back 10%, longer hitters would lose more distance than shorter hitters.  If you take 10% off a tour pros 300 yard drive they are losing 30 yards.  10% off a 200 yard drive is only 20 yards.  These two individuals drives are now 90 yards apart instead of 100 yards.

The other thing is how many golfers would even know the difference between a 250 yard drive and a 225 yard drive if there was no land mark such as a bunker on a hole they always play.

[Dan Herrmann]

Mike Bowen - that is exactly what the USGA/R&A tests showed.  Long hitters lost about 10%.  My wife (shoots around 91) gained about 4%!

[Garland Bayley]

Mike Bowen - that is exactly what the USGA/R&A tests showed.  Long hitters lost about 10%.  My wife (shoots around 91) gained about 4%!

Exactly Dan.

Some of the people that complain about losing distance with age fail to realize that they very well might be longer with a freshly made Balata ball than they are with the ProV1. For example, Sir Bob might be one of those that would gain.

[Tim Martin]

The other thing is how many golfers would even know the difference between a 250 yard drive and a 225 yard drive if there was no land mark such as a bunker on a hole they always play.

Range Finders, GPS, sprinkler heads, 100, 150, and 200 yard markers, and yardage books might provide some context.

[Mike Bowen]

The other thing is how many golfers would even know the difference between a 250 yard drive and a 225 yard drive if there was no land mark such as a bunker on a hole they always play.

Range Finders, GPS, sprinkler heads, 100, 150, and 200 yard markers, and yardage books might provide some context.

I guess what I mean is in actually watching the flight of the ball.  If I really "catch one on the screws," I don't really care what the measurable distance is.  I just know that I ripped it.  It's a little utopian, but does a well struck drive feel or even look different whether it's a normal ball or a rolled back ball.

[Dan Herrmann]

Well said, Mike.  .

[Thomas Dai]

I am in favour of a rollback for all.  If the ball were rolled back 10%, longer hitters would lose more distance than shorter hitters.  If you take 10% off a tour pros 300 yard drive they are losing 30 yards.  10% off a 200 yard drive is only 20 yards.  These two individuals drives are now 90 yards apart instead of 100 yards.

+1

......but not though rolled-back to 1.62" - see other recent thread - but still at 1.68" (or even a bit bigger?).

atb

[Sean_A]

I think the rolled back ball will encourage more clubs to create more tees - that is a trend I don't want to promote.  Think about it, the flat bellies lose 30 yards on a 400 yard hole.  So they are now hitting a 130 yard club.  I lose 25 yards on a 400 yard hole and I am now hitting a 175 club.  The flat belly is still hitting wedge.  I am have gone from an 8/7 iron to a 5 iron.  Please tell me exactly how I benefit compared to the flat belly? The answer will be to add another set of tees for clubs in the UK.  The rollback is pie in the sky stuff unless courses alter where the "daily" is and that could have reperecussions on hazard placement.  Its far easier and more sensble to bifurcate.  Some guys will play elite golf with an elite ball and others will play hacker golf with an easy ball.  Sounds a lot like what golf is like anyway, its just a matter of admitting it.  BTW - why stop at 10% if the game is bifurcated?  Why not crank it back 20% or whatever number you like?  Bifurcation is far more flexible because we don't have the age old problem of trying to come up with a system which is "fair" for all. 

Ciao 

[John McCarthy]

I advocate to rolling back to the balata era distance...but not to the balata ball.  They cut too easily and would get out of round.  A modern cover on a softer ball should do the trick.

[Garland Bayley]

I think the rolled back ball will encourage more clubs to create more tees - that is a trend I don't want to promote.  Think about it, the flat bellies lose 30 yards on a 400 yard hole.  So they are now hitting a 130 yard club.  I lose 25 yards on a 400 yard hole and I am now hitting a 175 club.  The flat belly is still hitting wedge.  I am have gone from an 8/7 iron to a 5 iron.  Please tell me exactly how I benefit compared to the flat belly? The answer will be to add another set of tees for clubs in the UK.  The rollback is pie in the sky stuff unless courses alter where the "daily" is and that could have reperecussions on hazard placement.  Its far easier and more sensble to bifurcate.  Some guys will play elite golf with an elite ball and others will play hacker golf with an easy ball.  Sounds a lot like what golf is like anyway, its just a matter of admitting it.  BTW - why stop at 10% if the game is bifurcated?  Why not crank it back 20% or whatever number you like?  Bifurcation is far more flexible because we don't have the age old problem of trying to come up with a system which is "fair" for all. 

Ciao 

If they were not adding more tees before the ProV, why would they add more tees after it is rolled back?

You claim it would be a detriment to you. So you are the minority. Why penalize the majority (people who are more competitive with others because the rolled back ball brings them back into competition) for your benefit?

[Ben Hollerbach]

I recall reading about a test conducted with a group of nationwide tour players a few years ago where the Bridgestone ball they used would only show a reduction in flight for very high swing speeds. Most players in the field saw a reduction of flight with their driver and 3 wood off of the tee but all other shots performed as normally expected and the distance reduction left them 1.5-2 clubs longer into the greens. The concept behind the ball is one that the average player sees no performance loss while the high swing speed player would loose 5-8% of their top end distance. A ball rollback of this nature wouldn't disrupt the play for 98% of the golfing public but would allow the game's distance to be controlled at the extreme end either allowing a reduction of course length by 300-400 yards or the reintroduction of previously viewed obsolete courses to the tournament ranks.

[Sean_A]

I think the rolled back ball will encourage more clubs to create more tees - that is a trend I don't want to promote.  Think about it, the flat bellies lose 30 yards on a 400 yard hole.  So they are now hitting a 130 yard club.  I lose 25 yards on a 400 yard hole and I am now hitting a 175 club.  The flat belly is still hitting wedge.  I am have gone from an 8/7 iron to a 5 iron.  Please tell me exactly how I benefit compared to the flat belly? The answer will be to add another set of tees for clubs in the UK.  The rollback is pie in the sky stuff unless courses alter where the "daily" is and that could have reperecussions on hazard placement.  Its far easier and more sensble to bifurcate.  Some guys will play elite golf with an elite ball and others will play hacker golf with an easy ball.  Sounds a lot like what golf is like anyway, its just a matter of admitting it.  BTW - why stop at 10% if the game is bifurcated?  Why not crank it back 20% or whatever number you like?  Bifurcation is far more flexible because we don't have the age old problem of trying to come up with a system which is "fair" for all. 

Ciao 

If they were not adding more tees before the ProV, why would they add more tees after it is rolled back?

You claim it would be a detriment to you. So you are the minority. Why penalize the majority (people who are more competitive with others because the rolled back ball brings them back into competition) for your benefit?

GJ

I only use myself as an example, but I don't think I am an outlying example.  Its a myth that golfers wouldn't lose ground to flat bellies if the ball were rolled back.  Of course we would because flat bellies hit the a lot further thru the bag.  Plus, the difference from a wedge to an 8 iron for a flat belly is nothing compared to a hacker going from an 8 iron to 5 iron. 

The mega multiple tee crap had to really zoom off into the stratosphere back in balata days. Now that its in full swing and woth courses being lengthened in the process, I bet there would be clamouring for a shorter set of tees, but thats just my opinion.  Just as I think the idea of a roll back is fantasy land nonsense both terms of what it could achieve and how it would effect hackers like me.

Ciao 

[Garland Bayley]

GJ

I only use myself as an example, but I don't think I am an outlying example.  Its a myth that golfers wouldn't lose ground to flat bellies if the ball were rolled back.  Of course we would because flat bellies hit the a lot further thru the bag.  Plus, the difference from a wedge to an 8 iron for a flat belly is nothing compared to a hacker going from an 8 iron to 5 iron. 

The mega multiple tee crap had to really zoom off into the stratosphere back in balata days. Now that its in full swing and woth courses being lengthened in the process, I bet there would be clamouring for a shorter set of tees, but thats just my opinion.  Just as I think the idea of a roll back is fantasy land nonsense both terms of what it could achieve and how it would effect hackers like me.

Ciao 

What part of Dan's experience with the USGA ball test is myth?

The pros (flat bellies) used science to get their big gains. Why can't science be used to eliminate their gains?

Science is not myth.

[Brent Hutto]

The myth is you guys thinking there is any widespread constituency for making golf balls not fly as far as they do today. It's just one long Grandpa Simpson rant.

[Sean_A]

GJ

I only use myself as an example, but I don't think I am an outlying example.  Its a myth that golfers wouldn't lose ground to flat bellies if the ball were rolled back.  Of course we would because flat bellies hit the a lot further thru the bag.  Plus, the difference from a wedge to an 8 iron for a flat belly is nothing compared to a hacker going from an 8 iron to 5 iron. 

The mega multiple tee crap had to really zoom off into the stratosphere back in balata days. Now that its in full swing and woth courses being lengthened in the process, I bet there would be clamouring for a shorter set of tees, but thats just my opinion.  Just as I think the idea of a roll back is fantasy land nonsense both terms of what it could achieve and how it would effect hackers like me.

Ciao 

What part of Dan's experience with the USGA ball test is myth?

The pros (flat bellies) used science to get their big gains. Why can't science be used to eliminate their gains?

Science is not myth.

GJ

They certainly can use science reduce distance for flat bellies.  But to rollback for everybody with the mantra of its good for game is bogus.  The USGA has set up a false scenario with roll back or no roll back insisting that bifurcation is not option.  Its quite obvious that bifurcation is at the very least a step forward if not a solution to the "distance problem".  But then I am one to believe the bigger problem is not distance, but the knee jerk reaction to the long ball. 

Ciao

Ciao

[Garland Bayley]

GJ

They certainly can use science reduce distance for flat bellies.  But to rollback for everybody with the mantra of its good for game is bogus.  The USGA has set up a false scenario with roll back or no roll back insisting that bifurcation is not option.  Its quite obvious that bifurcation is at the very least a step forward if not a solution to the "distance problem".  But then I am one to believe the bigger problem is not distance, but the knee jerk reaction to the long ball. 

Ciao

Ciao

Alister MacKenzie felt the ball should be rolled back for everybody for the good of the game. His mantra was "walk less, play more golf".
As a hacker, I am interested in rolling the ball back so that I can at least see where it lands and have a chance to find it. I guess my mantra is "see more, search less".

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()