[Matt_Ward]

Has anyone bothered to check the stats Golf World posts each week on the overall distances between the year prior to the new regs on balll spin and what is happening now ?

[Thomas McQuillan]

"Even though I would like to see it, I think the biggest risk is that manufacturers and players would ignore a ball rollback."


Jason:

No kidding! To my way of thinking that is the biggest concern for the USGA/R&A and the future of golf by a magnitude of God Only knows what.

Both Tom and Jason:
What is keeping the vast majority of the masses from playing non-conforming clubs and balls right now?  Both are readily available on the internet right now, but are rarely used.  

The stigma they would recieve. I'm quite they would lose a lot of friends and playing partners if they would attempt to break the rules of golf so easily. It would be thought of the same way as cheating in a competition.

[Chuck Brown]

Chuck:

I was not aware that the ruling bodies had assured manufacturers they would do nothing to the golf ball as long as the Tour driving distance stayed the same as 2002-3.  That seemed to be what Mr. Otto was saying, although his voice was a few decibels lower at that point than for the rest of his talk.

Michael:

Mr. Otto did say that the R & A were against ANY difference in regulations between the pros and the rest of us.

One other point where that came up was when Tom Mackenzie suggested limiting professional players to eight clubs.  Mr. Otto expressed some interest in a rule like that ... because he does not want to see the advent of the 68-degree wedge that he held up to show us.  He even suggested a letter-writing campaign to show support for such a rule.  However, he also mentioned that the manufacturers would be apoplectic about the idea of selling sets of 8 clubs instead of 14.

Tom. there's another current GCA thread on a reduced number of clubs.  

What I have written there is that for somebody like me, or like a Tom Doak walking the hills above Crystal Lake with a faithful retriever at your side, playing with 8 clubs is a glorious and altogether unappreciated idea.  For the fun of it.  For simplicity and ease of walking, and the encouragement to use different swings.

For people like Bubba Watson, limiting him to 8 clubs is a joke, because it will only encourage him to hit driver-wedge on every hole less than about 485 yards.  Driver and wedge will only become more, not less, important, with a limitation on the number of clubs in tour pros' bags.

[Tom_Doak]

I have made the point here before, but the ruling bodies' stand on principle against "bifurcation" ignores the fact that they have made many rules in the past which were different for pros and amateurs.

For many years the R & A ball was smaller than the USGA ball.  In the 1970's, the R & A mandated the bigger U.S. ball for the Open and Amateur championships ... but set no timetable for making the average golfer switch over.  It happened over a period of 15-20 years, gradually, as the rule was put into effect in county championships, club championships, and on back down the chain of command, until eventually somebody in your foursome insisted that everyone should play the bigger ball.

Likewise, some of the restrictions on clubs which have been imposed in recent years are grandfathered in for a long time for amateurs, but in a much shorter time window for the pros.

[Tim_Weiman]

Jeff Mingay,

I completely agree with you.

[Garland Bayley]

When is the last time a PGA Tour pro bought a set of clubs from a manufacturer?

Never but 'if Tiger only uses eight clubs then why should I play fourteen?'.

Because you can. People were playing many more than 14 before they put that limit in.
Do you know about personal messages and how to use them on the site?

[Jeff_Mingay]

Jeff Mingay,

I completely agree with you.

Thanks Tim. My statement is pretty simple. But it might be so simple it's genius  

Frankly, to hear one of the top men in-charge of equipment regulation claim that rolling back the distance to begotten by the golf ball might result in "average golfers" quitting the game is scary.

[BCrosby]

The R&A joint statement is news to me. It is also troubling.

The R&A has - in effect, if not legally - bought peace as to future "improvements" to the ball at the price of ceding the right to roll back the existing ball.

I don't know if that means the R&A was simply out negotiated or that they perceived themselves as so impotent that they were forced to take the best deal they could get.

Either way, it's depressing news.

Bob

[Dan Herrmann]

I just remembered what the guys from the USGA and R&A told my group when were done with their ball testing last year.  And I think they're right...

Goes like this (I'm paraphrasing)
The ProV1 didn't go any further than the old Top Flite or even the 1970's Spalding Molitor.  The difference is that the ProV1 (and the Strata, which was the ball that really changed the game) were workable by better players around the green.

Before the Strata/ProV1 era, the Surlyn-covered rocks sure flew a long way, but putted like crap.

----------------

That being said, I sadly think the members of the Treehouse here are a vocal minority.  Unfortunately, the old baseball adage also applies to golf, "Chicks dig the long ball".

[Bruce Leland]

The USGA and R&A are employing "fuzzy math" in their argument of no significant distance gain since 2003.  For one thing, as I understand it, the PGA Tour measures driving distance on select holes only for their stats.  Unless something has changed or they are using ALL shotlink data.  Also, as stated previously, the significant change in the golf ball happened prior to that date and there hasn't been any significant improvement since.

Why are they so hesitant now when they have examples of banning a flight correcting ball in the past.  Specifically, the old Maxfli Black Max would self correct during flight and it was taken off the market by Dunlop.

[TEPaul]

"Tom Paul:
Do you really think Titleist would break the rules of golf, if the rules were changed?"


TomD:


I think the answer to that question depends on a whole lot of factors and I think the USGA/R&A and the manufacturers are all very well aware of what they are.

Do I think the modern golf ball and equipment manufacturing companies think it is ideal to have to operate under the I&B Rules and Regulations of two Amateur bodies for the forseeable future like the next hundred years as they have been for close to the last hundred years? Very, very unfortunately, I definitely doubt it.

[Jeff_Mingay]

The USGA and R&A are employing "fuzzy math" in their argument of no significant distance gain since 2003.  For one thing, as I understand it, the PGA Tour measures driving distance on select holes only for their stats.  Unless something has changed or they are using ALL shotlink data.  Also, as stated previously, the significant change in the golf ball happened prior to that date and there hasn't been any significant improvement since.

Why are they so hesitant now when they have examples of banning a flight correcting ball in the past.  Specifically, the old Maxfli Black Max would self correct during flight and it was taken off the market by Dunlop.

Bruce,

I like the term "fuzzy math". Very appropriate.

[Tom_Doak]

Bruce / Jeff:

Mr. Otto from the R & A portrayed the average distance as being derived from Shot Link, but he did not state exactly whether the number represents

(a)  the average length of all tee shots on par-4 and par-5 holes
(b)  the average length of tee shots in the fairway on the same
(c)  the average length of all tee shots where a driver was hit, or
(d)  the average length of all drivers hit in the fairway.

I doubt it is the last.  It's an important point, because he mentioned that the average roll-out on a fairway is 25 yards ... so if you take the average of all tee shots (some of which get 20 yards less roll), and compare that to a number from the 1990's which was the average for two holes of drives in the fairway, that's not a very fair comparison.

[Garland Bayley]

Bruce,

Thanks for enlightening me. I had never heard of self correcting balls. Now I know the USGA implemented a symmetry rule to rule them out. So that gets me back to my original argument about the new balls. Why don't they implement a spin symmetry rule? As I have described it before, plot spin vs club head loft. Put a limit in the steepness of the slope.

[Wade Schueneman]

Why does a rule change have to affect the masses?  I don't like modern ball technology, and if the manufacturers started putting out balata ablls again I would play them (I think that it is fair to pay for great feel with an unforgiving ball), BUT if the R&A and the USGA cap ball technology I doubt that Pro V1s will cease to exist.  The Tour players may have to restirct themselves, but the rest of us can play whatever we want.  Most of us play baseball with aluminum bats regardless of what the pros use.  Why should golf be different?

And for what it is worth, I think an 8 club max and a 56 degree max would be great for pros and amateurs alike.  Not only would it force the pros to be more strategic and inventive, but it might also encourage more golfers to walk rather than ride. 

[Jeff_Mingay]

Tom D.,

The way I (and, franklly, anyone with sense) look at it, the modern golf ball has been permitted to travel too far. As you know very well, there are very serious, even dire consequences which have resulted. This is a fact which people who cite complex mathematical equations and ridiculously detailed analysis continue to argue with. It's comically mindboggling.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Tom Doak,

Great question you asked.

As much as I'd like to see a roll back in both ball and equipment, I came to the realization that the game of golf had transitioned from sport to entertainment, and as long as it remains primarily entertainment, no roll back will occur.

One can only hope.

And I hope that Augusta and The Masters will adopt a competition ball in the next 5-10 years, after everyone discovers that stimp readings of 35 isn't the way to defend par.

[Bruce Leland]

Bruce / Jeff:

Mr. Otto from the R & A portrayed the average distance as being derived from Shot Link, but he did not state exactly whether the number represents

(a)  the average length of all tee shots on par-4 and par-5 holes
(b)  the average length of tee shots in the fairway on the same
(c)  the average length of all tee shots where a driver was hit, or
(d)  the average length of all drivers hit in the fairway.

I doubt it is the last.  It's an important point, because he mentioned that the average roll-out on a fairway is 25 yards ... so if you take the average of all tee shots (some of which get 20 yards less roll), and compare that to a number from the 1990's which was the average for two holes of drives in the fairway, that's not a very fair comparison.

Here is a link that addresses a few of these questions Tom.  http://www.pgatour.com/r/stats/2007/101.html  You can select the driving statistics back to 1980. 

Also, to quote the measurement parameters from the site:  "The average number of yards per measured drive. These drives are measured on two holes per round. Care is taken to select two holes which face in opposite directions to counteract the effect of wind. Drives are measured to the point at which they come to rest regardless of whether they are in the fairway or not."  Now what it doesn't tell you is whether the two measurement holes each tournament are wide open par 5's or tight little par 4's.  I'm quite certain that many players use clubs other than the driver on the measurement holes from time to time.

[jonathan_becker]

One thing that I've noticed in my game from playing a titleist professional in 1998 to the balls of the present is that I really don't hit my irons any further today.  I really don't.  I've used similar blades with the same lofts my whole life and still hit my 7 iron 165 yards.  Sure, the new balls fly much straighter and tighter than a titleist professional....but with no extra distance for me.

However, driver and 3 metal are probably 20 yards further carry!!

[TEPaul]

"The way I (and, franklly, anyone with sense) look at it, the modern golf ball has been permitted to travel too far. As you know very well, there are very serious, even dire consequences which have resulted. This is a fact which people who cite complex mathematical equations and ridiculously detailed analysis continue to argue with. It's comically mindboggling."



JeffM:

You're very likely right about that but what we should probably consider here is the matter of degree at any time or in the over-all. If you don't think so then just name me a sport in the world that has ever rolled anything back or backwards with the effectveness of their implements or implements and balls in their histories.

[Bruce Leland]

"The way I (and, franklly, anyone with sense) look at it, the modern golf ball has been permitted to travel too far. As you know very well, there are very serious, even dire consequences which have resulted. This is a fact which people who cite complex mathematical equations and ridiculously detailed analysis continue to argue with. It's comically mindboggling."



JeffM:

You're very likely right about that but what we should probably consider here is the matter of degree at any time or in the over-all. If you don't think so then just name me a sport in the world that has ever rolled anything back or backwards with the effectveness of their implements or implements and balls in their histories.

The hockey puck hasn't changed much!

[John_Conley]

The ball was too long in 2003, why use that for the benchmark?   Does "sell out" work?

Bill, remember the Chicken Little "sky is falling" crowd that extrapolated to the conclusion that, "guys are going to drive it 400 yards."

What I saw seems to be confirmed.  The main increase was a one-time shift as professional golfers finally stopped using some real bad golf balls.  Titleist Professional and Titleist Tour Balata being the most prominent.

[Ken Moum]

Was there any word on whether they were considering making the ball bigger. Also, I don't think that a ball rollback would cause players to quit the game. A 25 yard loss in distance for a tour player might only equate to a 5-10 yard decrease for the average player, hardly a noticeable drop for joe public but substantial enough to bring a lot more classic courses back into play for the top 1%.

Significantly, there's at least one patent claim that says lightening the ball a few grams would actually add distance for the 85 mph swinger.

http://www.patentstorm.us/patents/5497996/description.html

The most interesting thing about that is fact that a lighter ball would absolutely be harder to control for players with a 125 mph clubhead speed.

IOW, it would deliver precisely what many of us think is needed, a rollback for Tour players that didn't hurt average players at all.

Best of all, weight is a ball spec that doesn't require any exotic equipment to test for in the field.  A simple, accurate gram scale would do.

But of course that makes too much sense.

Ken

[Jason Topp]

You're very likely right about that but what we should probably consider here is the matter of degree at any time or in the over-all. If you don't think so then just name me a sport in the world that has ever rolled anything back or backwards with the effectveness of their implements or implements and balls in their histories.

Tom:  Others can confirm whether or not I am correct but I believe these are all examples

Bowling - has ordered a number of changes to lane conditions and ball specifications.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ten-pin_bowling


Tennis - I believe but cannot confirm that tennis has slowed down the ball at the professional level

Baseball - has refused to adopt the aluminum bat at the major league level.  As a result certain amateur wood bat leagues remain (Cape Cod league); outlawed the spitball pitch, lowered the mound to make pitching more difficult

Golf - outlawed previously legal grooves, set coefficient of restitution limitations on drivers after manufacturers began producing them, outlawed croquet style putting, there are probably others

Cricket - outlawed a variety of  improved bats after certain individuals used them

[Adam Lawrence]

Bruce / Jeff:

Mr. Otto from the R & A portrayed the average distance as being derived from Shot Link, but he did not state exactly whether the number represents

(a)  the average length of all tee shots on par-4 and par-5 holes
(b)  the average length of tee shots in the fairway on the same
(c)  the average length of all tee shots where a driver was hit, or
(d)  the average length of all drivers hit in the fairway.

I doubt it is the last.  It's an important point, because he mentioned that the average roll-out on a fairway is 25 yards ... so if you take the average of all tee shots (some of which get 20 yards less roll), and compare that to a number from the 1990's which was the average for two holes of drives in the fairway, that's not a very fair comparison.

Here is a link that addresses a few of these questions Tom.  http://www.pgatour.com/r/stats/2007/101.html  You can select the driving statistics back to 1980. 

Also, to quote the measurement parameters from the site:  "The average number of yards per measured drive. These drives are measured on two holes per round. Care is taken to select two holes which face in opposite directions to counteract the effect of wind. Drives are measured to the point at which they come to rest regardless of whether they are in the fairway or not."  Now what it doesn't tell you is whether the two measurement holes each tournament are wide open par 5's or tight little par 4's.  I'm quite certain that many players use clubs other than the driver on the measurement holes from time to time.

Bruce - I don't think that is correct. Yes, back to 1980 you have stats measured on two holes per round. But the data they have since Shotlink was introduced is far more comprehensive, because they are measuring every shot. Steve was very clear about that in his presentation, although as Tom says, it could still hide bits. His data relating to average players was fascinating too: one of the points he made is that since the big drivers are so much easier to hit, more players are hitting driver more of the time.

Adam

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()