[Evan_Green]

Many bemoan technology's effect in diminishing the strategic values of classic golf course architecture (e.g. lengthening classic courses and/or ability with modern equipment to carry the hazards that used to make these holes so interesting). Many would like to see equipment  "fixed" or rolled back,rather than continuing to stretch out old courses and/or build and maintain new ones of 8000+ yards...certainly this is nothing new to this group...


So my questions to the board are these:
- If you could roll back technology (ball & clubs) to a certain year, what year would it be and why?


- What year's technology would allow one to most appreciate classic golf course architecture TODAY- given TODAY's golf course conditioning etc. ?
(For example if you choose 1950, I mean you are playing in 2017, on the 2017 version of Great Classic Golf Course of your choice, with 1950 equipment, NOT playing this course in 1950, on the 1950 version of this course with 1950 equipment)


- If your choice is other than 2017 equipment, assuming you are just playing for fun, as opposed to competing, what stops you from taking out equipment from your favorite year chosen above...19__ or 20__ and moving up to the appropriate tee and playing there with that equipment?

[Thomas Dai]

Some initial thoughts, which may change as I ponder the question more!

Unless your 'in the business', when it's a source of employment and income (as well as hopefully enjoyment), golf is a leisure activity, something that ought to be fun.

Whilst my heart and soul would like to go back to some dim and distant yee olde period there are other factors to consider so that the game is more fun, or rather less no-fun. For example, playing in the cold and rain and wind in a soaking tweed jacket or a soggy jumper knitted by granny vrs playing in modern gore-tex or the equivalent.

With this scenario in mind I would be inclined to suggest some form of compromise, namely -

Clothing, footwear etc - near-modern period - but not so modern as at present when golf and fashion seem to be overlapping.

Golf ball - late 1990's era - Titleist Professional, Maxfli Revolution period - less distance than now and more workable but crucially (fun) still pretty durable in comparison to earlier periods.

Clubs - early 1990's - late steel shaft and wooden head period - more ease/consistency of manufacture but still with some element of uniqueness, more playable (fun) than previous periods but still requiring skill rather than strength, which seems to be how the modern game is.

Architecture & maintenance - still pondering this one - but courses would certainly be shorter and hazards more hazardous and all in an more open aspect style with less corridors of trees and with less ball hunting needed. Maintenance would be less manicured......they'd be some, but not to excess, sheep on the course (not greens) if circumstances/predators permit. Difficult not so be in favour of modern drainage and irrigation however, although not overused.

atb

[Tom_Doak]

So my questions to the board are these:
- If you could roll back technology (ball & clubs) to a certain year, what year would it be and why?


- What year's technology would allow one to most appreciate classic golf course architecture TODAY- given TODAY's golf course conditioning etc. ?
(For example if you choose 1950, I mean you are playing in 2017, on the 2017 version of Great Classic Golf Course of your choice, with 1950 equipment, NOT playing this course in 1950, on the 1950 version of this course with 1950 equipment)


- If your choice is other than 2017 equipment, assuming you are just playing for fun, as opposed to competing, what stops you from taking out equipment from your favorite year chosen above...19__ or 20__ and moving up to the appropriate tee and playing there with that equipment?

Evan:


I'll tackle your questions backwards.


3)  There is nothing stopping anyone from playing with whatever equipment they desire.  [I found a Polara golf ball on a course last year, so there is apparently not much stopping anyone playing with illegal equipment, either.]  The #1 problem with the new equipment is that it's forced so many changes to classic courses in the name of "keeping up" and many of those changes are poorly executed.  The #2 problem is that everyone pays too much attention to the Tour and then wants the same when they play, even if it's not the same, at all, for their golf.


2)  As Mr. Dye said to me, if you rolled back the ball, any modern course could easily be adapted to it by adding a few tees forward, if necessary.  And unlike the case with back tees, there is always room for more forward tees.


1)  I don't know that there is a magic year, and I do not want to "roll back technology" for everyone; I just want to see the best players use equipment that tests their game more, instead of forcing golf courses to change in response to club technology that makes the game easier for them. 
     The biggest change in golf in my lifetime has been the advent of the metal driver.  Persimmon woods had far more design restrictions [a persimmon head as big as today's drivers would have been completely unwieldy] and limitations on technological improvement, which is why the equipment companies hated them ... because the equipment companies want to sell you a new and improved driver EVERY DAMN YEAR, instead of something that lasts.  It also took some of the craftsmanship element out of club making, which is a shame if you'd ever met any of the old guys who did it.  Ask any golf pro -- those small heads were harder to square up and you just couldn't take as big a rip at the ball.  If the Tour players had to play persimmon, I personally wouldn't ask for anything more.

[A.G._Crockett]

2018.

[Peter Pallotta]

I *knew* AG was gonna say that! 

6600 yards.

I can comfortably play that with a modern mini-driver (43.5 inch shaft, 12 degrees of loft), 5 wood, and still hard to beat (though a bit old) Tommy Armour 845s.

I can also comfortably play that with 1970s Macgregor woods (driver: 43 inches), 2-PW Hogan Apex irons / early 80s Walter Hagen Haig Ultras.

Less frequent and less egregious misses with the former; more pure pleasure with the latter.

It really is true, I find, even as an average golfer: hit an old blade pure, and nothing feels better and no shot reacts better (draws/fades and holds its line).

OK - I'll take the early 80s. Interestingly, golf is the *only* area in life where I'd chose the early 80s.

Peter 


 

[jeffwarne]

1930's-1990 anywhere in there is fine.
Sure there were quality control advances, and the advent of the solid ball (with its tradeoffs)

That's the whole point-at that time, there was no "new hot driver" everybody had to have that rendered everything else obsolete.
In the 70's and early 80's the most coveted drivers were from the 50's, and pros kept their irons 10-20 years.


Maintenance rollback?-1920's to 1980's would do depending upon budget-I play a lot on unirrigated fairways even now.
Palmetto had no fairway irrigation until 1988-never thought about it.

[Sean_A]

I have zero interest in the concept of rollback unless it is intended for elite players. Even then, I am not overly bothered. I think rollback is simply an easy copout for practically everything wrong with golf. Experience tells me there are plenty of bogiemen waiting in the wings. Nothing is stopping folks from playing their game. Get on with it.


Ciao

[Tommy Williamsen]

I would like everyone to hit wooden woods. Every once in awhile I will take out my old MacGregor Tourneys or Powerbuilt woods if I can find an older ball. The sound and feel of ball on persimmon is a rare treat nowadays.

[A.G._Crockett]

Nothing is stopping folks from playing their game. Get on with it.

Amen.

The only way anyone should be allowed to post on this thread and "recommend" a return to some arbitrary "good old days" date is if you're playing that very equipment already, every time.  If you're going out with a three or four piece ball, a titanium driver, hybrids, perimeter-weighted irons, a lob wedge, a Super Stroke putter grip, and even ONE graphite shaft, you are DQ'd for raging hypocrisy.

And why stop at equipment?  How about windshirts?  Goretex?  Double straps on your carry bag?  Quality footwear?  Quality eyewear?

And so on...

And while I'm at it, here are some other things I miss about "the good old days".  Typhoid Fever.  Smallpox.  No refrigeration.  Carburetors instead of fuel injection.  No seat belts or air bags.  Leeches.  Trial by fire (or drowning). 

And so on...

[Peter Pallotta]

 
Leeches...


Good to see AG that you don't *always* rely on logic and reasoned arguments, but can also utilize rampant emotionalism and wild hyperbole when need be...

[A.G._Crockett]

Leeches...


Good to see AG that you don't *always* rely on logic and reasoned arguments, but can also utilize rampant emotionalism and wild hyperbole when need be...

Pete, there's more where that came from.   

BTW, I used my three new Titleist 816 hybrids today for the first time.  Diamana Red shafts, hosel set to the C3 position.  I loved them; they played as well as they tested for me.  Of course, I'm sure my round would have been much, MUCH more enjoyable with blade 2, 3, and 4 irons making smiley faces on a series of already-out-of-round balata balls, but still, I DID like hitting a Callaway Chrome Soft with those hybrids.

[Kalen Braley]

I still don't know why a bifurcated approach is not considered doable given its such a simple solution


A limited flight ball for top notch Pro and Am events....everyone else use the normal stuff.


Problem solved, no hassle, courses left alone, everyone keeps their current clubs, shoes, gortex, etc....


P.S.  Baseball does this, the pros use wooden bats, everyone else the modern equip...

[Sean_A]

AG


I get gut a ache laughing everytime this subject comes up because I know the hypocrisy levels hit all time highs. Everybody has a great plan to cure the evils of today until the next generation of drivers is released.


Ciao

[Kalen Braley]

AG


I get gut a ache laughing everytime this subject comes up because I know the hypocrisy levels hit all time highs. Everybody has a great plan to cure the evils of today until the next generation of drivers is released.


Ciao

Sean,


I don't see the hypocrisy, the game is hard enough for most as it is... whats the problem with having two models; one for the besties, and then everyone else?

[Sean_A]

AG


I get gut a ache laughing everytime this subject comes up because I know the hypocrisy levels hit all time highs. Everybody has a great plan to cure the evils of today until the next generation of drivers is released.


Ciao

Sean,


I don't see the hypocrisy, the game is hard enough for most as it is... whats the problem with having two models; one for the besties, and then everyone else?

I am referring to those that claim technology is the Hitler of golf, but their bags are full of goodies.


I am all for bifurcated rules, but I am not naive enough to believe that cutting back technology is THE solution to "preserving" our classic courses or a strong incentive to building better new courses.


Ciao

[Lloyd_Cole]

I played the same local modern muni (approx 6400) last week with hickories and this week with modern clubs (I play a Callaway 1.5 driver). Played well with the hickories and shot 80, swung a little better with the moderns for a 76. For players like me who don't have great clubhead speed, it doesn't make that much of a difference. I have fun playing both sets. I'm better with the hickory mid iron than I am with my mizuno 5 iron, I drive it a little further (not more than 25 yards) with the modern driver. Go figure.

[A.G._Crockett]

I still don't know why a bifurcated approach is not considered doable given its such a simple solution


A limited flight ball for top notch Pro and Am events....everyone else use the normal stuff.


Problem solved, no hassle, courses left alone, everyone keeps their current clubs, shoes, gortex, etc....


P.S.  Baseball does this, the pros use wooden bats, everyone else the modern equip...

The baseball analogy has never been a good one; the advent of metal bats in amateur baseball was about cost, and NOT improved distance; the same metal bat can be used for most, if not all, of a season.  The weight of a metal bat is governed by the length of the bat and the age of the league the bat is to be used in; for instance, a 3 oz drop from length to weight, and a COI that meets VERY demanding standards that mirror (at least on the sweet spot) the performance of a wood bat. 

There ARE differences, of course; the way the ball responds on "off center" strikes, poor feedback from the sound the bat makes, and so forth.  But for the most part, the game is played the same way with either type of bat.  Most college players, and lots of elite HS players, play wood bat baseball in both tournaments and leagues in the summer, and almost ALL of them use wood bats in the cage because the feedback is far, far better.  But the issues of restricted flight are handled by BBCOR standards.

In short, it's an economic birfurcation, not a performance bifurcation.  It has little if anything to do with golf.

[A.G._Crockett]

AG


I get gut a ache laughing everytime this subject comes up because I know the hypocrisy levels hit all time highs. Everybody has a great plan to cure the evils of today until the next generation of drivers is released.


Ciao

Sean,


I don't see the hypocrisy, the game is hard enough for most as it is... whats the problem with having two models; one for the besties, and then everyone else?

Because one of the charms of our game is that, at least to some extent, we play the same game that the guys on TV are playing.  Much of it is different, of course; yardages, the level of customization of their equipment vs mine, and so on.  But at the end of the day, we're MUCH closer to playing the same game than any other sport. 

I think that is not only unique, but of great value.  I fully realize that others, and perhaps the majority on this site, do NOT share my view of this.  But the idea of watching the Masters with some sort of silly ball and antique clubs has about as much attraction for me as watching some concocted "reality" show.  Who cares?

[Peter Pallotta]

AG - the truth is I understand your pov more than I let on.
I stop in at golfwrx once in a while, and I share the glee of posters there upon learning that Jim Furyk plays with regular flex shafts (hard stepped once) in his irons and "S' shafts in his woods. It's neat to feel that, every once in a while, maybe a couple of times a round for me, I'm hitting the same kind/quality of shots that the best players in the world are hitting, using the same equipment. It's fun to read that the barely over 50s on the Champions Tour might play a classic course at 6700 yards -- such that, I can "compete" with them straight up, i.e. measure my score against theirs, using the same equipment and playing the same length course.  And it's a pleasure to hit some of the newer (though not new) equipment I sometimes use, e.g. sometimes I think they should make my Ping G2 five wood illegal, so easy is it to hit high and straight; sometimes I almost feel guilt using my Adams Speedine 10 three wood, because an out of shape golfer of my limited skills shouldn't be able to get all that distance; and (my secret weapon) the TM Aerburner mini driver is an absolute wonder: the shorter shaft and smaller head make it easier for me (compared to 46 inch 460 cc drivers) to square up and hit it solidly in the sweet spot, and 12 degrees of loft produces an ideal trajectory...all of which has made me much more consistent and longer off the tee. And needless to say, the 845 Silver Scots are classic  modern game improvement irons. (The added bonus: I bought all of that equipment second hand - a couple of years or many years after initial release, and so got it at remarkably reduced prices!) In short: I understand why it's a pleasure to play the game 'the same way' (you know what I mean) as today's tour pros. I just find that it's a joy to play the game 'the same way' as *yesterday's* tour pros did -- partly because, with the glow and patina of nostalgia and the past, the likes of Hogan and Crenshaw just seem so much more *interesting* than their modern counterparts; partly because the equipment -- to my eyes at least - is so much prettier; and partly because there are a whole lot of terrific 6700 yard courses around.   
Peter     

[jeffwarne]

Leeches...


Good to see AG that you don't *always* rely on logic and reasoned arguments, but can also utilize rampant emotionalism and wild hyperbole when need be...

+1
No reason to even consider sustainability.
Let's keep makingeverything longer bigger faster better faster firmer more expensive.
All in the name of progress.

[Kalen Braley]

AG,


I'm not sure where you got your info as it pertains to bats.  Back in my playing days, metal bats were far far better than wood bats by pretty much any measure.  Lighter, better on off-center hits, ability to go opposite field, distance, etc.  I tried using a wood bat a few times in batting practice and could barely get the ball out of the infield, but with metal bats could regulary hit it deep to every field.


They did change the college bat back in 2011, but they still all use metal bats in the college game.  Its only in a few summer leagues that they have wood bat only rules.
 

[Kalen Braley]

AG


I get gut a ache laughing everytime this subject comes up because I know the hypocrisy levels hit all time highs. Everybody has a great plan to cure the evils of today until the next generation of drivers is released.


Ciao

Sean,


I don't see the hypocrisy, the game is hard enough for most as it is... whats the problem with having two models; one for the besties, and then everyone else?

Because one of the charms of our game is that, at least to some extent, we play the same game that the guys on TV are playing.  Much of it is different, of course; yardages, the level of customization of their equipment vs mine, and so on.  But at the end of the day, we're MUCH closer to playing the same game than any other sport. 

I think that is not only unique, but of great value.  I fully realize that others, and perhaps the majority on this site, do NOT share my view of this.  But the idea of watching the Masters with some sort of silly ball and antique clubs has about as much attraction for me as watching some concocted "reality" show.  Who cares?

AG,


I'm confused by this as well.  There is almost nothing in the pro game that I can relate to when it comes to golf, except maybe short putts.  The kind of shots they regularly hit and execute are ridiculous compared to my game.  But when it comes to playing something like basketball i can relate a lot more.  I can hit 3 pointers, I was a far better free throw shooter than most of the NBAs big men, I could box out and get rebounds.  In pro golf, I can never hit a driver 300+, or a 175 yard 8 iron or regularly get up and down from around the greens.  I just don't see what is lost in returning the difficulty of shot making to the game.  Hitting 8 and 9 irons into greens that were traditionally done with 4 and 5 irons makes the game more boring to me.

[jeffwarne]

I still don't know why a bifurcated approach is not considered doable given its such a simple solution


A limited flight ball for top notch Pro and Am events....everyone else use the normal stuff.


Problem solved, no hassle, courses left alone, everyone keeps their current clubs, shoes, gortex, etc....


P.S.  Baseball does this, the pros use wooden bats, everyone else the modern equip...

The baseball analogy has never been a good one; the advent of metal bats in amateur baseball was about cost, and NOT improved distance; the same metal bat can be used for most, if not all, of a season.  The weight of a metal bat is governed by the length of the bat and the age of the league the bat is to be used in; for instance, a 3 oz drop from length to weight, and a COI that meets VERY demanding standards that mirror (at least on the sweet spot) the performance of a wood bat. 

There ARE differences, of course; the way the ball responds on "off center" strikes, poor feedback from the sound the bat makes, and so forth.  But for the most part, the game is played the same way with either type of bat.  Most college players, and lots of elite HS players, play wood bat baseball in both tournaments and leagues in the summer, and almost ALL of them use wood bats in the cage because the feedback is far, far better.  But the issues of restricted flight are handled by BBCOR standards.

In short, it's an economic birfurcation, not a performance bifurcation.  It has little if anything to do with golf.

AG,
You clearly didn't have a kid pitching or playing third base when nonwood bats were HOT and very dangerous.
They purposely limit them now in performance.(as we are suggesting for elite golf)
So the comparison is PERFECTLY valid, except baseball (which didn't have a bunch of old men seeking former distance from technology creating a market) thankfully came to its senses.

[Thomas Dai]

Collectively loads of £$ is spent on ways to hit the ball further. Then collectively loads more £$ is spent on making golf courses longer. Strange world.
atb

[Wayne_Kozun]

I will take the Golden Era of the 1920s and, like Lloyd, I have a set of hickories that I occasionally use.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()