75%? Would you be.....

[Peter Pallotta]

Peter F's line -- ie a square path with a persimmon outdrives an over the top hack with an M2 every time -- rings true from my experience.
Also true from my experience:

1 - a well struck persimmon driver travels about 10-15 yards longer than a well struck modern 3 wood, but about 15-20 yards shorter than a well struck (fairly modern, 44 inch) driver
2 - persimmon is "well struck" about the same % of the time as modern equipment; but mishits aren't nearly as noticeable with the latter
3 - I compiled a persimmon and blade set for an old, long hitting friend. He still hits it farther than me, but the yardage difference between us is less with persimmon than it is with titanium...with the difference decreasing further as lofts go up, ie we hit our 5 woods about the same

Just an aside: while I'm no club collector, I do have a couple of old sets and a new one; besides differing lofts (and to some extent shaft lengths), the biggest difference between old and new is the lie-angle - the older clubs tending to have much flatter lies. 

The irony of technological advances, i.e. irons have gotten more and more upright in response to so many average golfers having an upright/over the top move...but the upright lie angles now only *reinforce* this over the top tendency; and lofts getting stronger and stronger so that average golfers see their iron shots fly longer -- with the result that pretty soon they'll hardly be any irons left in their bag, as average golfers migrate to hybrids because their modern 5 irons have the lofts of old 3 irons, which they can't (and never could) hit

I don't know if the game is getting harder or easier to play, but for my tastes it sure is getting *uglier* (re equipment). Maybe that's one reason we're getting so many stunning and natural-looking new courses, i.e. when you have to look down for 4 hours at toasters and shovels instead of crafted wood and steel, you need to have *something* beautiful to look at
   

[Stephen Davis]

Easy decision. Yes. Watching your ball go further than your playing partner's at 235 yards vs 300 yards, is just as satisfying.

[Matthew Mollica]

Easiest question I’ve had on gca.


A resounding hell yes.

[Garland Bayley]

Yep

[Lukas Michel]

The current test for golf balls is an initial velocity test where the rules define that the testing apparatus can't produce an initial velocity of the golf ball of greater than 255 ft/sec (basically a big piece of metal hits a golf ball at 144 ft/sec).


Is it not simply a matter of limiting the initial velocity to something lower (say 220 ft/sec) and giving the manufacturers a couple years to figure it out?


If they wanted to be a little more specific, they could incorporate a 'conformance curve'. Perhaps a few additional velocity measurements at lower/higher velocities to ensure it isn't going too far/short for certain swing speeds.


Can anyone point out any flaws in a method like this?

[Bill Brightly]

Wouldn't it be great if Augusta National (I think the only club that could pull this off) created a fall event for the pros with a 75% ball played from the members' tees?

[Tom Bacsanyi]

Peter F's line -- ie a square path with a persimmon outdrives an over the top hack with an M2 every time -- rings true from my experience.
Also true from my experience:

1 - a well struck persimmon driver travels about 10-15 yards longer than a well struck modern 3 wood, but about 15-20 yards shorter than a well struck (fairly modern, 44 inch) driver
2 - persimmon is "well struck" about the same % of the time as modern equipment; but mishits aren't nearly as noticeable with the latter
3 - I compiled a persimmon and blade set for an old, long hitting friend. He still hits it farther than me, but the yardage difference between us is less with persimmon than it is with titanium...with the difference decreasing further as lofts go up, ie we hit our 5 woods about the same

Just an aside: while I'm no club collector, I do have a couple of old sets and a new one; besides differing lofts (and to some extent shaft lengths), the biggest difference between old and new is the lie-angle - the older clubs tending to have much flatter lies. 

The irony of technological advances, i.e. irons have gotten more and more upright in response to so many average golfers having an upright/over the top move...but the upright lie angles now only *reinforce* this over the top tendency; and lofts getting stronger and stronger so that average golfers see their iron shots fly longer -- with the result that pretty soon they'll hardly be any irons left in their bag, as average golfers migrate to hybrids because their modern 5 irons have the lofts of old 3 irons, which they can't (and never could) hit

I don't know if the game is getting harder or easier to play, but for my tastes it sure is getting *uglier* (re equipment). Maybe that's one reason we're getting so many stunning and natural-looking new courses, i.e. when you have to look down for 4 hours at toasters and shovels instead of crafted wood and steel, you need to have *something* beautiful to look at
 

You must be a Bradley Hughes follower.


And you hit the nail on the head.  My opinion is 7000 yards needs to be considered a LONG course again even for very good players.  6500 should be no pushover, and 6000ish should be considered adequate.  Whatever needs to be done to the ball for this to be so needs to be done.