[Sean_A]

been generally good or bad for golf, for architecture, for golfers?  Contrary to most folks, I first blame those at the helm of clubs and developers for the proliferation of added yards to courses - essentially, the back tee mantra.  Next I blame consumers, especially those hypocrites who decried the advances of equipment then waited in line to but the very same.  Most blame the boosted equipment for this issue even though the equipment has been improving endlessly since there was equipment to improve.  I know many draw the line in the sand some 10 or 15 years ago when there was a seeming drastic jump in distance acheived by the big boys, but I think this a very arbitrary line and one that makes it easy to assign blame - namely, the USGA.  Amongst all this blame culture it occurs to that maybe I am wrong in thinking added distance is bad for golf, architecture and golfers.  Do folks think there is a positive spin in any of this or is blaming X, Y and Z the only possible outcome?

Ciao

[Jim_Kennedy]

Bad for the general population of golfers as they are paying for something they will never be able to properly use. From a layman’s outlook I’d say good and bad for architects. Good because they probably can charge a higher fee when building a behemoth and bad because it’s harder to build something relevant for such disparate groups of players. For the game itself, probably bad as better equipment means longer courses (bad for the consumer) and it’s harder to come up with cunning devices (bad for the architecture and the architect).
     
But I’d hardly blame the consumer. First, they never asked for longer courses, that decision was first made by a club or a developer, as you said, and driven by marketing and money.   
Second, the cold shoulder that was given to Callaway’s 'illegal' ERC2 driver by the consumer shows some semblance of restraint on their part. ‘Hot’ balls (Condors, etc.) have also been very limited in popularity.
Third, the number of players who decry advances in equipment while buying same is almost infinitesimal. They buy it but they don't decry it, and they do stay within the bounds of what's 'legal'.  Actually, I could probably be as wrong as you as there is no way to accurately measure that number.

I say that the issue of length sorts itself out, eventually. A declining economy reveals the  problem of sustainability at anything other than the most solvent, top-tier club

[Ronald Montesano]

First, there have always been back tees, as someone wise wrote in a recent thread.

Second, you need to define with precision what you mean, in terms of percentages.  As in, "is having back tees 10% longer than previous back tees a good thing for the game?"  This would take a 6500-yard course to 7150, as an example.

Third, if there was land there already, fine.

Fourth, if the nature of the hole was not compromised, fine.  After all, if a 240-yard hitter plays the new back tees, he/she may no longer be threatened by the drive-zone bunkers (now unreachable), but will be threatened by having to hit 2 clubs more into the green.

Fifth, as Jim notes, if costs increased due to lack of third, bad for the golfer.

[Doug Siebert]

As I've said before, its not even so much the length modern equipment allows one to hit the drive as it is the characteristics of the shot.  It used to be that a 300 yard was pretty much guaranteed to have almost 50 yards of roll.  No one was bombing it 295 and getting 5 yards of roll, and if it was wet no one was hitting 300 yard drives.

We gained a lot more yards in driver carry than we did in overall driving distance, and that's the real problem that has demanded excessive length because it makes bunkers and rough much less of a problem - i.e., if you don't fly or one hop into the bunker you are generally fine.  If you fly into the rough you still hit the ball so far that a 450 yard par 4 is still a short iron approach for a long hitter.  Back when long hitters carried it 250 or 260 a 450 yard par 4 that had the kind of rough you can't even think about hitting a 5 iron from was still plenty long unless you were that rare breed known as a straight long hitter

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()