[Patrick_Mucci]

Recently, I was playing with two very enjoyable fellow's who have been around/involved with golf for many years, one at a very high level.

We were discussing golf, the course we were playing, distance, costs, membership dilemmas and other topics.

Steve Shaffer's Seminole thread got me thinking.

What if a unique club, like ANGC, CPC or Seminole adopted a LIGHTER ball.

Presently, 1.68 and 1.68 are the size and weight of a golf ball.
If the weight was reduced, all of the playing qualities, except distance would essentially remain the same.

Imagine, on the first tee, having your clubs counted, with the excess of 14 removed, your golf balls removed and replaced with a supply of "lighter" golf balls.

Now, I know what some will say, but, when you go to a "pitch and putt" course they supply you with "their" golf ball, why not these unique courses ?

Lighter balls are already being manufactured for ranges with spacial constraints, so why not for the golf course ?

[ed_getka]

Patrick,
    Apparently I need to get out more. I have never heard of lighter golf balls. The first question that springs to mind is how are they affected by wind? It seems like a lighter ball would have more trouble boring through the wind.

[Joel_Stewart]

My guess it wouldn't have to be that much.  5% may make a big difference?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ed,

The ball discussed resulted in about a 10 % reduction in distance.

The wind would have more influence a lighter ball.

[Adam Clayman]

This idea came up circa 1999.

[Ross Tuddenham]

Does the mass and size of the ball have to change, why not just alter the aerodynamics? 

[Ronald Montesano]

If a tree falls in the woods...

This change really has no positive impact on how 95% of golfers play the game. Technology has not aided them nearly as much as the media would lead you to believe. The people that this would impact probably don't play at Seminole. As a matter of fact, the miniscule percentage of players that play those courses would have no impact on the incredible majority of golfers who play the game.

I would suspect that the lighter ball would be more susceptible to the influences of wind and to side spin. How does this improve the game? I'm all eyes.

[Anthony_Nysse]

Would this be something similar to the Caymon Ball? I believe it was used on the Nicklaus designed courses in the Caymon Islands. It basically took about 20% off the distance.

[PCCraig]

If they told me that in order to play CPC, ANGC, or Seminole I had to use a squash ball on the first tee I wouldn't argue

I think it's an interesting idea, but one that I don't find all that practical for most golfers. How could you tell someone who can't break 90 at any of the above courses that his ball is giving him an unfair advantage at said course, and that he should use a ball that doesn't go as far? So then he shoots 110...what does that accomplish?

As for better golfers, it might be a novel idea...but I can't imagine it would last long. How frustrating would it be to have to play with a wildly different ball at different courses? 

[Pete_Pittock]

Pity the handicap committee.

John vander Borght wrote an 'in my opinion' piece on the balloon ball http://www.golfclubatlas.com/in-my-opinion/john-vander-borght-the-balloon-ball/

[Garland Bayley]

I don't see why we just don't try to go back to where we were. A lighter ball would have a negative effect on everyone for both distance and direction. The USGA was not regulating spin. The inventors found a way to alter spin. I would hope that when the spin ball patents expire the USGA can begin to regulate spin.

If you plot the spin off of different lofts for the old soft ball, you would start with a high spin off the low lofts and go higher. If you plot the spin off of different lofts for the old "rock" hard ball, you would start with a low spin off the low lofts and go higher. I would have to imagine the slopes (rise/run) of these lines would be fairly close, thereby giving you an indication of the possible regulatory standard.

Let the better players deal with the negative characteristics of spin as they used to, while the lesser players play the lesser spinning balls as they used to, and still do.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ron M,

You seem to be in the camp that the increase in distance hasn't hurt the game.
50 years later, in far worse shape, I'm hitting my driver further.
The courses I play are longer, significantly longer, than they were 50 years ago.

P Craig,

The negative impact of the lighter ball may be weighted toward the longer hitter rather than the average golfer.

The average golfer today, is playing a longer course than he played 50 years ago.

There's something interesting about playing a relatively static course over a lifetime.

Garland,

We discussed spin as well.

But, since lighter balls are already being manufactured, I thought that route might be a "quicker" alternative.

[Garland Bayley]

Patrick,

I doubt that making the game more difficult would help attract players.

Unfortunately, we have the golf manufacturers selling the public a bill of goods on how they have made the game easier. I have to think there have been people that have been turned off by that and given up.

I also think the sophistication of the ball manufacturers would allow them to come up with a compliant ball for a new standard in fairly short order. It seems to me that the ball business has to be fairly lucrative.

Gillette gives away razors so you will have to buy and unending supply of blades.
Cell phones are given away so you have to buy and unending supply of connect time.
Titleist should give away standard clubs so that you have to buy and unending supply of balls.

[Mark Chaplin]

What is unique about ANGC, CPC and Seminole? There are lots of exclusive clubs with small memberships and difficulty in access.

[Patrick_Mucci]

What is unique about ANGC, CPC and Seminole?

How they're governed ?
I should have included PV.

There are lots of exclusive clubs with small memberships and difficulty in access.

Could you name 5 in the U.S. with golf courses of similar quality ?

[Mark Chaplin]

I don't live in the USA. But can name a few courses elsewhere, not that it takes the question any further.

I'm sure the first move on the ball will come from ANGC via The Masters, they can impose whatever restriction they like and I'm sure the manufacturers will build the ball rather than withdraw their players.

[Tim Bert]

I see no problem with those clubs having an alternative ball for those that would like to use them.  I also see no problem with introducing a ball for competition is that's what any tournament committee decides is appropriate. 

That being said, I don't need the aid of less superior technology to enjoy the game.  I don't hit the ball far enough to render any men's tees of 5900 to 6500 yards in distance obsolete.  I certainly wouldn't want someone to dictate that I hit the ball shorter than I already do by handing me a different ball on the first tee.   I just changed my grip and club position a bit and effectively added a little loft to my irons.  I was hitting my 7 iron 150 at most last weekend.  Combine this with my technology aided 230 yard drives and I'm not going to be overpowering any classic courses any time soon.

The problem with distance in my opinion revolves around the top 5% of players that can't find tees of adequate length to play anywhere they go.  For most of us not competing for trophies (amateur or pro), I think the current technology works just fine. 

[Mark Chaplin]

Tim I couldn't agree more other than it's far, far less than the top 5% maybe top 0.5% of players.

[Ken Fry]

Pat,

I friend of mine is the golf professional at a course near Lake Michigan.  It's an old place built in 1924 and land locked.  Like many courses of the era, there was no driving range built.  One of the fairways was often used for practice from the base of a hill while players would tee off from the top of the hill.

An area was being considered for a range but the maximum distance couldn't exceed about 180 yards.  Many options were considered from mid irons and down use only, install a large net or use Cayman balls for practice.

Cayman advertises their ball behaves exactly like a traditional ball but travels about half the distance.

We went out and tried the balls on the proposed area.  What we found is the Cayman ball does behave quite similar to traditional balls, but swinging harder actually reduced the distance the ball would fly.  It didn't like being compressed more.

In the end, the members shot the idea down because they wanted to practice with a ball that was similar to what they use on the course.  In the end, the consumer will dictate what they want to use.  Even the venerable old courses of our country would have quite a fight on their hands to make their players go backward.

Ken

[Jim_Kennedy]

Pat,
The difference in weight between today's ball (1.62 oz), and the 'balloon' ball (1.55 oz.) of old is only 2 grams. It wouldn't be too hard to have a batch of PROV1s made to the 'old' weight to see how it would affect performance at all levels of play.
I'd guess that the average player would not see much difference; advances in equipment would negate most of the problems they had with the old 'floater'.  
I'd also guess that the Pro player wouldn't see much of a difference either, especially if a 'new' lighter ball remained as low-spinning off driver faces as the present standard weight ball.  
      

This is just a personal observation (although I think I could back it up if it was to be generally accepted), but I cannot remember any significant distance gains between existing persimmon drivers vs. the early metalwoods of the same general size as their wooden brothers. That changed with the advent of ever larger titanium heads, coupled with hi-performing and lighter graphite shafts. I believe that combination is responsible for more than 1/2 the increase in today's distance.

[Garland Bayley]

...

This is just a personal observation (although I think I could back it up if it was to be generally accepted), but I cannot remember any significant distance gains between existing persimmon drivers vs. the early metalwoods of the same general size as their wooden brothers. That changed with the advent of ever larger titanium heads, coupled with hi-performing and lighter graphite shafts. I believe that combination is responsible for more than 1/2 the increase in today's distance.

We're all free to believe what we want, but it don't make it so.

[Jim_Kennedy]

This is just a personal observation (although I think I could back it up if it was to be generally accepted), but I cannot remember any significant distance gains between existing persimmon drivers vs. the early metalwoods of the same general size as their wooden brothers. That changed with the advent of ever larger titanium heads, coupled with hi-performing and lighter graphite shafts. I believe that combination is responsible for more than 1/2 the increase in today's distance.

We're all free to believe what we want, but it don't make it so.

I don't believe you'll be able to prove me wrong.  

[Garland Bayley]

Jim,

Please check my chronological order for accuracy.

1. Graphite shafts
2. Multi-layer ball
3. Larger clubheads
4. Lighter clubheads and longer shafts.

Now my reasoning.

Graphite shafts in themselves did not give a significant distance increase. The metal heads were the same weight as the wooden heads, and the shafts would only be 1/2" longer than the metal shafts.

The multi-layer ball was introduced and a significant discontinuous jump in distance was immediately observed.

Experimentation showed that the lower spin ball needed a higher lofted driver. When these driver heads were introduced the buzz word of the day was "optimization" and we had another discontinuous jump in distance attributable to the ball.

Further experimentation showed that large club heads could be made that performed nearly optimally for slightly off center hits, especially since the ball did not spin as much as before. This allowed shafts to be lengthened so that longer shafts and larger forgiving club heads would allow faster club head speeds and more distance. Although this seems that distance is attributable to large club heads and lighter shafts, it was really the ball that made it possible.

QED.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Garland,
There is no doubt that the ball has had a significant influence.

In 1982 (metalwoods appeared/wound ball era) the median driving distance on Tour for Pros who placed between #5 and # 50 was 265.5 yards; in 1999 (metals/wound) the median was 283.5, and in 2010 (metalwoods/solid balls) the median was 291.

The metalwood/wound ball era added 18 yards to the figures, the solid ball era added 8.

   

[Garland Bayley]

Jim,

How about 1997 & 1998?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()