Goin' low on the Old Course in the final round of the Dunhill

[Bill Raffo]

Limit the ball already.  Little leaguers and weekend warriors on the softball field put down the aluminum and still enjoy MLB despite the wooden bats. Of course they didn't let the aluminum into the professional ranks. What organizing body would make equipment decisions that would force all the venues to renovate and rebuild with costs running into the millions of dollars? Destroy the intimacy and historical context of its most storied venues?   Who would do that?

[jeffwarne]

Limit the ball already.  Little leaguers and weekend warriors on the softball field put down the aluminum and still enjoy MLB despite the wooden bats. Of course they didn't let the aluminum into the professional ranks. What organizing body would make equipment decisions that would force all the venues to renovate and rebuild with costs running into the millions of dollars? Destroy the intimacy and historical context of its most storied venues?   Who would do that?

Best case-Dottering old fools not recognizing what's happening until too late
Worst case-People with vested commercial interests. Players, manufacturers,equipment peddlers,architects, developers


Reality-a little of both -popularly supported by 200 yard hitters who think golf is actually easier now than it was 40 years ago-it isn't ,as the scale grew and the laws of unintended consequences/resonses to elite players have conspired to make it more of a ball searching exercise than it ever was (narrow fairways,tall rough, "native" grasses, OB, shrunken corridors in relation to distance ball flies etc. to say nothing of unplayably tight /short fairways at higher end courses)

[MCirba]

I'd like to disagree with Bill and Jeff but sadly they have all the facts on their side.

[George Pazin]

Who gives a crap if once a year a few holes at TOC are drive and a flip wedge for the best players in the world?


Honestly, that is like me worrying about the gas mileage Bill Gates gets in his McClaren whatever. Or which VS Angel Leo is with these days and how the others shunned are coping.


Nobody needs to devise special challenges for these special players. Them competing against each other is all the challenge anyone needs. Ever. [/size]What a pro hits into ANY GREEN ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH has zero impact on my life whatsoever. Or at least it should. When the bozos start screwing up golf courses to "challenge" these guys, then it starts to affect my life.


Just leave the courses alone so the rest of us can enjoy them as is for the rest of the year.[/font]

[Niall C]

Who gives a crap if once a year a few holes at TOC are drive and a flip wedge for the best players in the world?


Honestly, that is like me worrying about the gas mileage Bill Gates gets in his McClaren whatever. Or which VS Angel Leo is with these days and how the others shunned are coping.


Nobody needs to devise special challenges for these special players. Them competing against each other is all the challenge anyone needs. Ever. What a pro hits into ANY GREEN ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH has zero impact on my life whatsoever. Or at least it should. When the bozos start screwing up golf courses to "challenge" these guys, then it starts to affect my life.


Just leave the courses alone so the rest of us can enjoy them as is for the rest of the year.

[Niall C]

George


Well put, I agree with you.


That said, what Bill and Jeff (and Mike C) are proposing is changing the equipment, at least for pros in the case of Bill. Apparently they can't accept that its OK for one of the best players in the world to shoot 61 or whatever he scored. It's the regimented view that scores should be at a certain level or range that leads to the arguments on either changing the course or changing the equipment. Just let scores be and you don't need to worry about either IMO.


Niall

[Thomas Dai]

I wonder if, indeed when, a boredom element will set in. I reckon it already has for some.
Tournaments in the pro game function due to sponsorship. Sponsorship is about advertising and product placement and the like.
If potential spectators, viewers more likely, don’t watch as much coz the golf is boring driver-wedge-putter, then one day this will trickle down to sponsors/advertisers and the like and ultimately effect the tours, their events and a siginificant number of pay-cheques, money in the golf business in general.
Once-upon-a-time watching pros play, when there was more fairway wood and long-iron golf, with all the short game and recovery shots that tended to result had a good, solid degree of excitement to it, something that modern driver-wedge-putter golf doesn’t imo possess.
Excitement sells, boredom doesn’t.
Atb

[MCirba]

Thomas is exactly correct.   


Used to watch professional golf regularly. Now unless it's a really interesting course architecturally I could care less.  And even those courses I just find myself saddened by how neutered they've become with the onslaught of Technology.


Watching driver wedge golf with balls stopping on a dime is unlikely to inspire the Next Generation to take up the game.  Watching one birdiefest after another is not exciting or captivating, much less alluring as the PGA Tour likes to think it is.


As far as making changes to golf courses to make them tougher for the best players that horse has left the barn a long time ago.

[George Pazin]

Mike, I used to watch a ton of golf before, and like you, I only tune in for the occasional special course now. But I don't think it's because of the driver-wedge fest, I just think I've lost interest in today's robo-pros. I know a lot of people on here hate Tiger, but whatever you think about the guy, it's hard to deny that he was a spectacular player to watch. Only Rory in full form plays with a similar flare, imho. The bombers may hit it long, but DJ, Brooks, JT, whoever, they aren't really compelling to watch.


Maybe that is the equipment, but I know my tastes aren't what others' are. I thought two of the most fascinating events since 2000 were the 03 Open at Sandwich and the 04 US Open at Shinney, and those are routinely cited by just about everyone as events that were marred by set up, like Carnoustie in 99. The difference between those and Carnoustie 99 are night and day to me, but apparently not to everyone else.


Sure, I'd like to see the ball rolled back. And I think the pro game would probably be more interesting had metal woods never been introduced. But I'm not holding my breath on action of either of those fronts.


I'm just asking the powers that be to stop altering (or encouraging members of top courses to alter) great courses to accommodate a handful of guys in the world, especially when a little rain completely negates ANY AND ALL efforts at defense.

[MCirba]

I'm just asking the powers that be to stop altering (or encouraging members of top courses to alter) great courses to accommodate a handful of guys in the world, especially when a little rain completely negates ANY AND ALL efforts at defense.

Bingo.


This year's ultra-long Erin Hills proved that approach doesn't work either unless we start building 8,000+ yard courses with 25 yard or less wide fairways and I doubt that would work either when wet.


Existing traditional courses trying to go down that road are playing a fool's game however as I'm certain we'll see at Shinny this year unless the course is bone dry.

[Jim Nugent]

George, you make good points about nearly every course.  What about ANGC?  IMO it doesn't really exist for the members so much, except as a status symbol of the ultra elite.  The course is mostly a major tournament course, that has to challenge the world's best players every April.

My guess is a tournament ball is not really on the table.  So short of that, what do they do, if they don't want a drive/flip-wedge/putt affair?  (Which could be deadly for them as a major.)  What does any course do, that wants to hold PGA-tour or major events? 

I've given a generic solution, probably about a half dozen times (more long par 3s), and the dead silence that has followed makes me think the rest of you treat it with contempt, pity or maybe both.   

[MCirba]

Jim,


We aren't actually looking for solutions here.. I think we just sometimes like to bitch. 


 

[Marty Bonnar]

Jim,
Honestly, there’s no contempt or pity intended. Just a resigned acceptance of the inevitable, unfortunately.
Best,
F.

[Dave McCollum]

I shouldn't comment as I've only played TOC once and walked it on Sunday once.  Yet it seems to me that they mostly set the pins on relatively flat portions of the greens.  What little I saw seemed to back this up.  Not that the greens lack contour--try putting from the wrong side of a double green.  Add in the fact that 1/4 of the field were amateurs, so putting pins in difficult positions might cause 6 hour rounds. This may be an entire misconception produced by my very limited experience.  Marty and others with more knowledge, feel free label it as BS.

[Marty Bonnar]

Dave,
Not bs in the slightest. The Dunhill is (locally) notoriously slow. The combo of ultra-cautious end of season pros with nervously tentative ams always brings about glacially-paced rounds on all three courses. This year, the weather and Course conditions couldn’t have been better, yet we were still subjected to slow play. The event doesn’t really attract massive audiences either on the ground or in the media, so the organisers aren’t really fussed either way. It’s a bit of a corporate jolly which is loved by the participants, so que sera, sera!
Cheers,
F.

[Dave McCollum]

Let's not forget the amateurs endure a long waiting list or vetting process for the privilege of paying $10K for 3 rounds of golf.  It would seem something of PR blunder to put their feet to the fire.  Good grub, plenty of parties, some nice wines, good cigars, and some fun golf is more the order of the day.  Pros in benign weather should kill the course.  Not that it sheds one spark of light on this discussion, but as a complete hack, I didn't think the TOC was very difficult.  I made a 9 on the second hole (with no lost balls) and still shot in the 80's in a stiff breeze.  I was a little surprised that the course record was as high as it was (63?).  I'd add that it was one of the best golf experiences of my life.  I can't be certain about my objectivity--the history, the home of golf, all TOC represents as the pinnacle of the game and as a standard for every course, and the perfection of St. Andrews as a golfer's nirvana--but very few of my travels have matched my expectations so well, and I have been around.           

[Mark Pearce]

Let's not forget the amateurs endure a long waiting list or vetting process for the privilege of paying $10K for 3 rounds of golf.  It would seem something of PR blunder to put their feet to the fire.  Good grub, plenty of parties, some nice wines, good cigars, and some fun golf is more the order of the day.  Pros in benign weather should kill the course.  Not that it sheds one spark of light on this discussion, but as a complete hack, I didn't think the TOC was very difficult.  I made a 9 on the second hole (with no lost balls) and still shot in the 80's in a stiff breeze.  I was a little surprised that the course record was as high as it was (63?).  I'd add that it was one of the best golf experiences of my life.  I can't be certain about my objectivity--the history, the home of golf, all TOC represents as the pinnacle of the game and as a standard for every course, and the perfection of St. Andrews as a golfer's nirvana--but very few of my travels have matched my expectations so well, and I have been around.         

All of this.  TOC isn't a tough course for anyone, really, let alone the top pros.  On an easy day, set up to be playable by amateurs, of course they'll go low.  So what?  A decent breeze and firm conditions next time the Open is there and it'll still be a challenge.

[Niall C]

  What does any course do, that wants to hold PGA-tour or major events? 

I've given a generic solution, probably about a half dozen times (more long par 3s), and the dead silence that has followed makes me think the rest of you treat it with contempt, pity or maybe both.

Jim
 
In response to your first question above, I suppose the answer is to do what they have been doing to date which is presumably to stick some new back tees in where ever they can to lengthen the course and to make the fairways narrower by growing the rough in.
 
The first part of the solution will have very little bearing on the course for the ordinary members/visitors unless they decide in a rush of blood to play off those tees in which case good luck to them/more fool them (take your pick which). The second part of the solution is a question of set up for the tournament and can be readily “fixed” with a mower once the circus has left town. Neither solution seems to me to be that problematic unless like Mike you consider it is inhibiting your enjoyment of televised golf. In that respect I tend to agree with George that the problem there lies with the players who take an age to play the game.
 
However I also have to ask, how many courses are we talking about anyway ? A couple of dozen maybe ? In the greater scheme of things both the solutions and the number of courses affected hardly call for bifurcation of equipment as Bill suggests. One of the joys of golf is that to an extent you can measure yourself up against a Tiger or a Rory. Why throw that away because someone shot a new course record.
 
Now in response to your second question as to long par 3’s, over here on some of the courses I’ve been a member at and am currently a member at, and all of which are classic era courses, have long par 3’s. I think they are wonderful and I much prefer them to the “standard” 170ish yard par 3. The thing is though, the best way to go about getting them is to build a par 4 and sit on your hands for about say a hundred years or so 
 
Niall

[Duncan Cheslett]

I hate to go all Melvyn on you guys, but banning caddies and yardage books might be a start...




...I am reliably informed by someone who knows that detailed information on yardages is worth at least 3 shots per round for a pro golfer.

[BCrosby]

Let's not forget the amateurs endure a long waiting list or vetting process for the privilege of paying $10K for 3 rounds of golf.  It would seem something of PR blunder to put their feet to the fire.  Good grub, plenty of parties, some nice wines, good cigars, and some fun golf is more the order of the day.  Pros in benign weather should kill the course.  Not that it sheds one spark of light on this discussion, but as a complete hack, I didn't think the TOC was very difficult.  I made a 9 on the second hole (with no lost balls) and still shot in the 80's in a stiff breeze.  I was a little surprised that the course record was as high as it was (63?).  I'd add that it was one of the best golf experiences of my life.  I can't be certain about my objectivity--the history, the home of golf, all TOC represents as the pinnacle of the game and as a standard for every course, and the perfection of St. Andrews as a golfer's nirvana--but very few of my travels have matched my expectations so well, and I have been around.         

All of this.  TOC isn't a tough course for anyone, really, let alone the top pros.  On an easy day, set up to be playable by amateurs, of course they'll go low.  So what?  A decent breeze and firm conditions next time the Open is there and it'll still be a challenge.

Yep. We are over-thinking the Dunhill/TOC thing.


Bob

[jeffwarne]

Let's not forget the amateurs endure a long waiting list or vetting process for the privilege of paying $10K for 3 rounds of golf.  It would seem something of PR blunder to put their feet to the fire.  Good grub, plenty of parties, some nice wines, good cigars, and some fun golf is more the order of the day.  Pros in benign weather should kill the course.  Not that it sheds one spark of light on this discussion, but as a complete hack, I didn't think the TOC was very difficult.  I made a 9 on the second hole (with no lost balls) and still shot in the 80's in a stiff breeze.  I was a little surprised that the course record was as high as it was (63?).  I'd add that it was one of the best golf experiences of my life.  I can't be certain about my objectivity--the history, the home of golf, all TOC represents as the pinnacle of the game and as a standard for every course, and the perfection of St. Andrews as a golfer's nirvana--but very few of my travels have matched my expectations so well, and I have been around.         

All of this.  TOC isn't a tough course for anyone, really, let alone the top pros.  On an easy day, set up to be playable by amateurs, of course they'll go low.  So what?  A decent breeze and firm conditions next time the Open is there and it'll still be a challenge.

Yep. We are over-thinking the Dunhill/TOC thing.


Bob

The weather was good. (it's usually not in October)
Pins were perhaps easy.
But it's not a "Dunhill/TOC" thing.


It's a willingness to continually bastardiza and eventually obsolete the cathedrals of the game by players and manufacturers while pulling the wool over 15 handicappers looking to hit it 225 rather than 224(while thinking they are hitting it 265 because course operators move the tees up to fool them).


Look at the many, many low 60, 61, and 62 shot routinely on Tour, and the way they do it.Bombi t-wedge it.
It affects the entertainment value (of course pace of play and a million other things do as well) Real golf fans are FAR more likely to tune in to watch a US Open at Oakmont and Shinnecock than the horror Chambers(as in Bay and Erin Hillls) built to replace them. Then if they DO want to play there it's a 5 hour plus round just because of the walk


Having an actual set of enforceable standards (that doesn't change every year) that the manufacturers have to follow could solve this problem.
By the way, the new hot weapons for next year are demonstratably hotter-again. (I'm sure the USGA will tell us otherwise-but I watched a well equipment-optimized elite player gain 4 mph ball speed(as promised) by simply putting the new 2018 head(as opposed to last years) on his old shaft)
Bifurcation is already here-grooves for instance(can you imagine? grooves? really?)
Bifurcation won't change the average golfers game in the least.

And for those who think by keeping the current nonbifurcated setup they can compare themselves to a Tour player because they are playing the same courses and equipment..
well that is truly delusional....You don't ever get the same equipment, it's certainly not optimized like theirs, and you're never going to get to play the tees , setup and conditions they are-or for that matter even putt out most of the time.

[Niall C]

Jeff


In fairness, what I said was that to an extent you can measure yourself up to a Tiger/Rory. I was allowing for differing conditions/tees, customised clubs etc however what I said basically holds true. Any punter can buy Rory’s clubs (minus any tweaks) even if they don’t suit his/her swing.


As for making obsolete the great courses, there has been continual improvement in equipment since Old Tom was a boy, including by Old Tom as I think I said at the start of this thread. During that time courses have changed/adapted and I think it fair to say both the game and those courses wouldn’t be as good or as much fun now if that continual improvement hadn’t happened. Certainly the courses you now venerate wouldn’t be what they are.


Now, I say that as a 50 something who first swung a club before reaching school age. I honestly don’t have much nostalgia for the cut down hickories I started with or the wafer thin blades I graduated to (relatively speaking all clubs back then seemed to be bladed) and can honestly say that if not for the improvement in the equipment there’s a very good chance I wouldn’t still be playing this game that I’ve grown to love.


And I certainly do love this game. And I’m looking forward to the days, assuming I live long enough, that I get to overpower a course with my drives and wedge play due to the improvements in technology


Niall

[BCrosby]

Jeff -


I guess I wasn't very clear. A rollback of the ball and/or bifurcation are ideas I've liked for a long time.


My point about the "Dunhill/TOC thing" is that given the evidence that has piled up over the years for doing something about the ball, the results of that single event shouldn't be given the significance some have attached to it, as noted by Dave McCollum and Mark Pearce.


Bob   

[Kalen Braley]

Every other major sport I can think of...


American Football, Soccer, Baseball, Basketball, etc.....they all use a ball that is not picked by the players.  Its selected by the league/governing bodies and administered by the officials.


I don't understand why it can't do this.  The tour can regulate that players must wear pants but can't implement its own ball?

[jeffwarne]

Jeff


In fairness, what I said was that to an extent you can measure yourself up to a Tiger/Rory. I was allowing for differing conditions/tees, customised clubs etc however what I said basically holds true. Any punter can buy Rory’s clubs (minus any tweaks) even if they don’t suit his/her swing.


Why exactly is that(a punter buying Rory's clubs) more important than trashing sustainability, tradition,common sense, $$$, and so many great old courses?


As for making obsolete the great courses, there has been continual improvement in equipment since Old Tom was a boy, including by Old Tom as I think I said at the start of this thread. During that time courses have changed/adapted and I think it fair to say both the game and those courses wouldn’t be as good or as much fun now if that continual improvement hadn’t happened. Certainly the courses you now venerate wouldn’t be what they are.


100% true, but at what cost to sustainability, common sense, time spent playing, cost etc.
Not all changes have been for the better-especially the new modern monstrocities


Now, I say that as a 50 something who first swung a club before reaching school age. I honestly don’t have much nostalgia for the cut down hickories I started with or the wafer thin blades I graduated to (relatively speaking all clubs back then seemed to be bladed) and can honestly say that if not for the improvement in the equipment there’s a very good chance I wouldn’t still be playing this game that I’ve grown to love.


I don't believe that for a second. You fell in love then ,not after Great Big Bertha was hatched


And I certainly do love this game. And I’m looking forward to the days, assuming I live long enough, that I get to overpower a course with my drives and wedge play due to the improvements in technology  


Bifurcation won't change that in the least


Niall

As Kalen notes, every other professional sport has a ball NOT PICKED by the player.


There are many, many more intelligent people on this board who can bury me with their wit, debate skills, and logic.
There are of course many good arguments for not bifurcating.


The best, most logical argument is "restore to what era" My answer is where the best players are challenged hitting a variety of clubs from the current back tees at most classic courses(to reduce retrofitting costs). But that is a slippery slope with a lot of variables.


I'll leave you with this. Fred Couples at age 22 drove the ball an average of 268 yards. At age 49, despite a career with a chronic bad back, he was at 298.
I'd say a 10% rollback would be about right if you believe Fred is miraculously in the same condition at 22 as he was at 49.
Now at age 57, he's driving it 296 so he is slipping-or maybe the equipment is getting worse.


That all pales compared to a regular tour event though where 350 is the new 300.