[TEPaul]

"A few other of my opinions which are solidly based on fact, but again with which you seem to disagree:  
--The old distance balls had little or no impact on the balance of the game because they were not good enough for the elite players to use."

David:

That kind of statement is just so transparently illogical as to be laughable. Do you really expect an intelligent person to buy that?

This issue is about distance, and not whether a ball feels hard or soft around greens. The ODS which has been around for 30 years is the Overall DISTANCE Standard to which is attached a DISTANCE LIMITATION and not the Overall Softness or Hardness Standard with a limitation on how hard or soft a ball can legally FEEL. The latter has never existed, obviously, and either has any limitation on spin rate.

What if elite players just decided in the last 30-40 years that they no longer cared about the hard feel around the green and that they'd prefer to sacrifice that soft feel around greens (which has nothing whatsoever to do with distance or its limitation) for the greater distance of those old hard balls?

That, according to the USGA as it involves the golf ball itself would've created a distance spike right there as they switched to those old low spinning HARD balls that been ODS legal for decades.

Do you actually think the USGA could've then said;

"Oh, you elite players can't make that choice to the hard ball that most all handicap players use even if it is ODS conforming or we'll deem that ball non-conforming because it will create a distance spike for elite players with that heretofore ODS legal golf ball and put the distance relationship amongst players of all levels out of balance."

Your logic or rationalization is preposterous.

 

[DMoriarty]

"A few other of my opinions which are solidly based on fact, but again with which you seem to disagree:  
--The old distance balls had little or no impact on the balance of the game because they were not good enough for the elite players to use."

David:

That kind of statement is just so transparently illogical as to be laughable. Do you really expect an intelligent person to buy that?

This issue is about distance, and not whether a ball feels hard or soft around greens.

No Tom, this issue is about balance in the game of golf.  And there is nothing illogical at all about my statement regarding that balance.  The game was not out of balance 30 to 40 years ago.  It is now.  The main difference between then and now is technological innovation; namely the creation of a low spin distance ball which was usuable by elite players.  

What is illogical is measuring changes in the game and the balance of the game based on a ball which better players refused to use.  

What if elite players just decided in the last 30-40 years that they no longer cared about the hard feel around the green and that they'd prefer to sacrifice that soft feel around greens (which has nothing whatsoever to do with distance or its limitation) for the greater distance of those old hard balls?

Tom, if you have to rewrite history to make your point, then perhaps your point is not worth making.    

[Andy Hughes]

Andy Hughes, you just might not swing the club fast enough to reap much of a distance dividend.  That'd put you squarely with most of the rest of us.

Well, seems like good company and all. But I'd like to at least know why I am in such company while others managed to escape.
Is there some swing speed that leaves one on one side of the line?  109 mph has been thrown around--is it truly that hitting more or less than that speed really means you can pick up big distance gains or not?

I looked through most of the thread, but didn't see if you've spent any time on a launch monitor. If you haven't, do it as soon as you can. If you are hitting it 260, you definitely have enough clubhead speed to benefit. A couple examples....

Doug, short answer is no, I have never been on a launch monitor.  But it does sound like that is the way to go. Thirty more yards would be nice.  Hell, every little bit helps, but even moreso I would like to know I am doing all I can if nothing else. Now, who knows where to go in the D.C. area?

[TEPaul]

"The main difference between then and now is technological innovation; namely the creation of a low spin distance ball which was usuable by elite players."

That's right David, the manufacturers created a low spin distance ball that was usable by elite players. Soft feeling three piece high spin balls had been legal and on the market forever and are still conforming and two piece low spin balls that felt hard around greens had been legal and on the market for about 30 years and still are conforming. The "feel" of a golf ball has never been regulated and either has the amount of spin rate. That's what some of us are talking about now as a potential solution and it seems the USGA has been looking very carefully at that too. And that after about a four year $10 million comprehensive test of golf ball dynamics and construction begun in 2002 by the USGA Tech Center.

What are you saying now that the R&A/USGA should've banned the two piece low spin hard ball or the three piece high spin softer feeling ball so the manufacturers would not be able to ever combine the two? Or maybe you're saying that the R&A/USGA around 1965 should never have allowed the manufacuturers to introduce low spinning two piece balls with hard covers that didn't split or crack if mishit once like golf balls from about the beginning of the 20th century until around 1965 did. There's little question that those low spinning hard cover balls went farther when hit hard because of their trajectory when the USGA created their ODS limitation in 1976.

When Frank Thomas arrived at the USGA in the mid 1970s the USGA Tech Center was about the size of a three car garage but a guy like you in 2006 expects that they should have seen every conceivable technological innovation coming before it came at them and should have designed and created a test for any conceivable innovation even if they couldn't imagine what it might be.  

It would be great if the USGA Tech Center could design, create and use tests to monitor I&B and write I&B rules and regs they couldn't foresee with the 20/20 hindsight that you utilize but that's not the way life works.

"What is illogical is measuring changes in the game and the balance of the game based on a ball which better players refused to use."

Not if it was ODS legal it's not illogical.


 

[Tom Huckaby]

Andy:

RESIST.
Yes, you can maximize your distance potential doing exactly what Doug suggests - get on the launch monitor, find the optimal combination of clubhead/shaft/ball, purchase such (to the tune of over $500 almost certainly), then bash away and impress the tech-heads.

The problem is it never ends.  The second something new comes out, you are no longer optimized... and you end up feeling somewhat gipped.

So you do it again... get that latest new shaft/ball/clubhead... to the tune of another $500...

Now if money is no issue and you love to tinker, then go for it.

But if you are more sane, well... just understand that to do this means to jump on a never-ending cycle.

Some find that fun.

Just be forewarned.

And remember, the hickories aren't going anywhere.

 

[Garland Bayley]

IMHO if you are not nearly a scratch player, you should not bother with the launch monitor. Until you reach that level, you are really just playing against your handicap. Try to beat your handicap until you reach scratch, and then experiment with launch monitors and decide if you really want to see how far you can go towards maximizing your plus handicap.

You don't beat your handicap with technology. You beat it with improvements to your game.

[Tom Huckaby]

Garland - that is sage counsel and makes perfect sense.

BUT... Andy didn't ask how to become a better player - he asked how to hit the ball farther.  Chicks do dig the long ball...

 

[john_stiles]

Brent,

Tiger probably has another 15 yards being worked on in the factory today.  Tiger has been quoted as saying he isn't using a driver near the COR limit because the 'faces' crack more frequently than he likes.  In addition,  he could use a lower spinning ball than he presently uses.

So new material/construction for Nike driver and he can get  more distance.   A new golf ball cover and/or inner cover that gives him the desired feel and playability, at lower spin, and he can gain more distance.

The USGA should receive the information from the manufacturer after it passes the manufacturers' own simulation USGA B&I testing.  

If it passes the USGA test at USGA test center,  the USGA can add that ball and/or driver to their list of things to study.

[TEPaul]

"You don't beat your handicap with technology. You beat it with improvements to your game."

Garland:

I hope David Moriarty doesn't see that. He thinks ball technology has seriously unbalanced the game and all the elite players are benefitting from technology while all the average swinging handicappers of the world have been left in the dust. What do you think he'd like to see technology do for him---help him hit his driver only 10 yards behind Tiger's best? Is that what he'd view as bringing the game back into "balance"?  

[TEPaul]

JohnS:

Tiger has recently been qouted as saying he'll play a slightly higher spin ball than most of the rest because he wants that additional control on approaches and doesn't mind giving up a bit of distance off the tee for it. By the way Holmes does not use the highest allowable COR (.083) either for the same reason---eg cracks too many faces.

[Bryan Izatt]

Well, seems like good company and all. But I'd like to at least know why I am in such company while others managed to escape.
Is there some swing speed that leaves one on one side of the line?  109 mph has been thrown around--is it truly that hitting more or less than that speed really means you can pick up big distance gains or not?

The answer is no, there isn't a number where you'll gain the magical increase.  You started this thread by saying your point of comparison was 10 or 20 years ago when you were hitting it 260.  If you were doing that 20 years ago, you would've been average or above on Tour.  Only way you could do that then was if you had tour swing speed or you were using the  Pinnacle rocks.  If it was through use of a 2-piece ball then you already had your distance gain back then (as TEP says the USGA says).  If you were using a tour balata ball then and a Pro V1 now, and you get the same distance now, then you've lost some swing speed.  You've aged.  

Doug, short answer is no, I have never been on a launch monitor.  But it does sound like that is the way to go. Thirty more yards would be nice.  Hell, every little bit helps, but even moreso I would like to know I am doing all I can if nothing else. Now, who knows where to go in the D.C. area?

Optimizing could help.  But as Huckaby points out it can get expensive (I've got 6 drivers in the basement if you're interested in trying some, cheap .   Optimizing won't get you 30 yards.  Maybe 5 or 10.  If you're hitting it 260 now and your club head speed is much more than 105 mph then there is room to optimize.  If you're swing speed is around 100 to 105 then you're getting as much distance as you're gonna get with that swing speed.

[john_stiles]

With apologies to all for being O/T,   I accidently received a private email making fun of others and my  'distance comments'.     The newspaper reporter said something about getting ordained, starting the  'Church of the Almighty Persimmon',  and getting tax exempt status.  Fair enough. I laughed.

My reply to him was :

Well,  if a 19 year old plays at 7000 yards and only hits 8 irons, 9 irons and wedges,   you know he will be by-passing your club when (if) he actually joins a golf club.   You need to think about doing something.

But I imagine my friend, if you were preaching, the service might go something like this.

"  Now brother, can't you see the light.  Don't you see a new golf ball coming down from the heavens.

Come on up and join hands in the circle.

Brother you can be saved.  I know you can be saved.  You can hit it further and have more fun. Say praise the Pro V.

Don't you see the light.  Here at the Church of the Unrepentant Midget Hitters,   we hope your visit provided some new word, the word of new distance never seen before,  some new enthusiasm.  Let's all go to page 666 in the hymnal and sing,  'Praise Unto The Pro V.'

As you leave the Church,  please remember that you are required to use the envelop as we need more land to enlarge the sanctuary, and need to build new pews and expand the doorways.  You will be billed anyway so why not donate.

Do not forget to pick up the church bulletin about Wednesday night service,  'A New Year, A New Driver'.  Brother Callaway will give a brief testimonial about seeing the face of Titanium in the pond at Augusta."

[Bryan Izatt]

I'm not sure I'd use Tiger as a knowledgeable source for club and ball technology.  Wasn't he the guy who reverted to his old Titleist with a steel shaft a couple of years back when he couldn't control a large headed graphite shafted Nile.  So he could feel the ball on the face a bit longer for improved control with the driver.  As if anybody could feel a clubface/ball crash that lasts a few microseconds.  That didn't last long when he started hitting the old driver off the planet.

For clarity on the ball, the new balls have high cor cores and dimple patterns designed to optimize turbulence and reduce drag for increased distance.  The new covers are thin and designed to increase friction when struck a relatively glancing blow with high lofted clubs.  That's how you get the best of both worlds in one ball.  Low spin off the tee and high spin with short irons.  Sort of like a balata ball on the cover and a Pinnacle at the core.

[john_stiles]

TEPaul,

I agree with your note.  Tiger has some distance to gain if Nike can solve his issues with golf ball playability and cracked driver faces.

And if I was a Nike exec, my assignment to the crew would be to get an improved driver face, closer to the COR, that Tiger and J.B Holmes could hit.

If the golf ball development crew was idle, and we had to pay their salary,  their task would be to work on a lower spinning ball that Tiger would play.

In this case,  Nike's task seems pretty straight forward.

Also, please note that even 'club players' are going to these Performance Institutes.  Fortunately for me,  I'm an old dude, on the border line of not caring anymore, just play, and also do not have the time and money to do all that.

I just pay for all the new coursework, new tees, etc. monthly.

[TEPaul]

"and also do not have the time and money to do all that."

Get outta town John----with your money the country could wipe out the deficit.

[john_stiles]

I'm not sure I'd use Tiger as a knowledgeable source for club and ball technology.  

Bryan,

Most of the previous threads have discussed your well taken points, but I think Tiger is a great person to use.

Nike previously developed a custom ball for Tiger.  Tiger won numerous majors and other tournaments about the world. Tiger now says the Nike driver faces closer to the COR cracked too frequently.  If Tiger wanted more distance, well,  I think Nike will work on that material/construction driver face issue.

No ?  I would not want to be the Nike person to tell Tiger his request will not even be considered;  or we will not be spending any money to solve your individual desire to have a driver face that will not crack.

[john_stiles]

"and also do not have the time and money to do all that."

Get outta town John----with your money the country could wipe out the deficit.

"   Your honor,  when I wrote that check, the money was in the bank.  I swear.  Then this person cashes it after he said he wouldn't.  Also, your honor,  I never knew that three strikes and you're out,  applied to check fraud. "

[Martin Del Vecchio]

Tiger recently said that he plays a higher-spinning ball than most because he likes he workability.  He could sacrifice that workability (which is becoming less and less relevant) if he wanted to.  But he doesn't want to right now.

[Bryan Izatt]

John,

I meant Tiger personally.  I'm not sure of his ball or club design abilities.  

I'm sure Nike knows what they're doing and try their best to design equipment that will perform well for Tiger.

Designing a face for Tiger or other bombers, that are at the COR limit and also at the size limit of 460cc's must be a challenge with current materials.  The face has to be thin to achieve the max COR under the test conditions.  I expect that Tiger's swing speed is beyond the test conditions.  For his swing speed the face is too thin to withstand the forces he creates.  If they make the face thicker to handle the stress, then there goes the COR.

The long drive guys crack faces all the time.  The clubheads are living on the edge for high swing speed players.

[Patrick_Mucci_Jr]

Doug Sobieski,

I think you're correct, the proper application of the technology is critical

Andy Hughes,

As to those older guys who hit it further than you.
I think it might be the result of hitting 500 or more balls a day.
Practice does make perfect.

[Andy Hughes]

Now if money is no issue and you love to tinker, then go for it.
But if you are more sane, well... just understand that to do this means to jump on a never-ending cycle.
Some find that fun.
Just be forewarned.
And remember, the hickories aren't going anywhere.

Tom,
  yeah, I now the hickories will always be there for me. So I've got that going for me.
As you may have surmised, money is an issue, and $500 well exceeds the 'no need to mention it to the wife' level.  I totally understand what you are getting at, and I am not interested in a yard here or three yards there. But I have visions of the hordes of 55 year olds that Pat Mucci spoke about in hushed tones, blazing away with their 7 handicaps and suddenly carrying their drives 300 yards!  I see Mr Moriarty casually tossing aside 30 and 25 yard gains.  
When it comes to length, I get pushed around, knocked to the ground. What about me? It isn't fair. I've hit short enough, now I want my share.
Really, I just wanna know if I am around where I should, or if different combinations would make a substantial difference. I have no interest, and frankly couldn't afford,  chasing every last yard.

[Tom Huckaby]

Andy - if you're 40+, have a job and other responsibilities, rarely practice... and still get it out there 260, then you are right where you are supposed to be.  Launch monitor efforts will indeed just be chasing a few yards, for a lot of money.   God it hurts to say this but Mr. Mucci is right - practice does make perfect.

And guys like us aren't perfect.

Dave Moriarty is right also - you're just right there with the rest of us non-practicers, non-incredible speed generators, not getting all that much help from today's golf ball.

TH

[Garland Bayley]

...
Dave Moriarty is right also - you're just right there with the rest of us non-practicers, non-incredible speed generators, not getting all that much help from today's golf ball.

TH

Wrong! We can get benefit from the golf ball, and Andy perhaps already has. We cannot get the disproportional benefit available to very high speed swingers that comes from the spring like effect in the drivers. The USGA was right to limit spring-like effect before working on limiting the ball.

[Tom Huckaby]

Garland:

That's what I meant - we can get SOME benefit (that's why guys like Andy and I can still hit it as far at age 40+ as we did at age 21), we just don't get the disproportional benefit, as you say, and as Dave said before.

TH

[Mickey Boland]

So I've read this whole thread and haven't commented because I'm just like Andy.  I hit it about like all the other 40 and 50 year old guys I play with, but I too have not seen a large increase in my driving distance.  I too think, though, that were I to have today's equipment back when I was a good 25 year old player, I would have hit it a lot further then.  For guys my age, new technology has allowed me to basically stay in place longer than I would have been able to in the past.

That being said, what kind of balls have you experimented with?  I've tried the low-compression balls (Noodles, Mojo, Laddies), but I still seem to hit the ProV a little bit further than those.  What have the rest of you tried?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()