Michael Moore,
No, that must be another parable.
David Lott,
I agree with you.
I alluded to their unique presentation in the October edition of
"Inside the USGA"
AGCrockett,
The fact that your distance and almost everyone elses hasn't gone down in 13 years, as you've aged, become less athletic and more sedintary is the telling story.
When I was younger I saw my dad and his contemporaries distance plummet as they aged. Today, guys at 65 are longer than they were when they were 25.
I see 15 handicap players age 70 hitting it longer than good players did in their 20's forty years ago.
And you don't think a broad spectrum of golfers has benefited dramatically from technology ?
I'm contending that reduced distance won't alter the game, participation and its enjoyment.
Rounds per year as recorded by individual clubs are a good barometer for play and popularity, understanding that certain clubs control that number through their admissions policy.
Adam Clayman,
What you and the others lose sight of is the damage that high tech and distance have done to wonderful classic golf courses.
You cannot continue to allow technology and distance to reduce the inherent values of the playing grounds
It's not just about the ball and the equipment, as if they exist in a vacuum. It's the related damage they've done to classic golf courses, the cost to create new ones and renovate existing ones.
Everyone screams at how ANGC is being ruined, how the architectural values as intended by AM are being squeezed out of the golf course. Why is ANGC making these changes ? Because they're responding to the distance problem, the one that you and others don't see.
Merion, Pine Valley and many other courses are being lengthened to combat and offset the distance brought about by hi-tech, and, it's not for the PGA Tour Pros that all courses are being lengthened. Even my dinky, little, 6,500 yard, wonderful golf course in New Jersey is being lengthened to offset the distance brought about by hi-tech.
And, courses that can't add length due to land restrictions are moving bunkers, narrowing their rough, growing it deeper and more lush, speeding up their greens to a comical degree and losing them due to the adverse results, as are courses that can add length at the tee end. Some courses are moving greens to add length.
And, you're worried about some marginal golfers who MAY turn tail and abandon the game because they don't hit it as far or as straight. Are you kidding me.
My position is, let them go and good riddance.
They're not the core of the game and they're not golfers at heart.
I recently lost 50+ yards on my drives and comparable distance on my irons and my love and enjoyment of the game didn't diminish one iota. I just had to alter my plan of attack and navigation of the golf course.
What's all this whining and worrying about the manufacturers and marginal golfers, focus instead on the destruction and disfiguration of classic golf courses, the cost to build and maintain new golf courses and how expensive distance has made the game.
TEPaul,
While I take issue with the USGA on certain topics, I think they've done a superior job on guiding the game since they were formed.
I am disturbed about the distace issue, amateurism and a few other issues, but, on balance, they've been outstanding for a volunteer organization.
However, like all of us, they're not always correct. Hence,
without constructive criticism, progress is impossible,
and my comments are in a constructive vein.
For those who don't wish to support the USGA, ask yourself, what would happen to golf if the USGA no longer existed ?
Who would take their place ?
Who would guide golf ?
The manufacturers ? 150 self interested Tour Pros ?
Each golf club ?
Chaos would reign.
We need the USGA, but, we need them to listen, to listen to letters such as Ron Prichard's letter of 13 years ago and to be more attentive and responsive to the issues.
Eternal vigilance is the price of greatness.
I still want to know WHY my paddle grip on my putter was banned. I never putted the same after I had to replace it.
Yet, these long things they use to churn butter with, with two grips are routinely permited.
And, BRING BACK THE STYMIE for match play.
Even Bobby Jones, a distinquished gentleman and an accomplished player wrote passioned pleas to the USGA to retain it.
Back to the topic.
Creating a "competition ball" with certain performance standards, and spec'ing equipment with the same goal in mind won't hurt golf, it'll preserve classic courses and provide the same level of fun that golf has enjoyed for centuries.
P.S.
Someone told me that he heard that a Tour Player, other than Woods or Daly, at the Amex had four drives at 400+.
Is that true ?