Another Distance thread...but now it looks like the R&A is getting serious

[Kalen Braley]

http://golfweek.com/2018/02/12/r-and-a-ceo-martin-slumbers-on-distance-issue-discussion-needed/


There’s no doubt in my mind that the technology has made this quite difficult game just a little bit easier, and at a time when we want more people to play the game, I think that’s a good thing. But we do also think that golf is a game of skill and should be reflective of skill."

[Cal Seifert]

The question is will they actually do something or let the big manufacturers get in the way?

[Peter Pallotta]

Intriguing - if only because those who rise to the top aren't usually ones to shoot from the hip, fall on their swords, or take a public stance unless they're sure the organization is already pulling in the same direction.

[Jerry Kluger]

I hope that the concern about the game at the highest level doesn't ruin it for the other 99.9999%.


BTW: Did you notice that the player who supposedly can overpower a golf course was soundly beaten by a much shorter hitter at Pebble Beach.  And how about the announcers using the excuse that DJ's group was a threesome and this was a disadvantage to him but not his fellow pro players.

[Garland Bayley]

I hope that the concern about the game at the highest level doesn't ruin it for the other 99.9999%.


...

Everyone will still hit tee shots from teeing grounds,  and hole out on greens. No problem whatsoever unless you have some ego problem.

[Garland Bayley]

Patents granted on the highly engineered balls about year 2000. Patents expiring at the current time and the governing bodies are making noise about doing something about the distance problem. Who'd of thunk?

[jeffwarne]

I hope that the concern about the game at the highest level doesn't ruin it for the other 99.9999%.

Yes because we'd hate to see the game grow like it did in the 50's and 60's.


How could the fun possibly be ruined by having less course to walk, less waiting on athletes waiting for groups 300 plus yards, less balls off the property, less need for a $500 driver, less separate tees....


The game has been around for 500 years-I'm pretty sure it can survive a slight adjustment back to whatever(cause I doubt they'll have the balls to do anything real)


Let's hope they do something radical again like change grooves on wedges 

[Mark Pearce]

I hope that the concern about the game at the highest level doesn't ruin it for the other 99.9999%.


BTW: Did you notice that the player who supposedly can overpower a golf course was soundly beaten by a much shorter hitter at Pebble Beach.  And how about the announcers using the excuse that DJ's group was a threesome and this was a disadvantage to him but not his fellow pro players.

The myth that the game is more fun now for ordinary golfers than it was before the Pro V1 is one of the most pernicious lies the equipment manufacturers have disseminated. 

[Jon Wiggett]

The myth that the game is more fun now for ordinary golfers than it was before the Pro V1 is one of the most pernicious lies the equipment manufacturers have disseminated.

+1

[Sean_A]

I hope that the concern about the game at the highest level doesn't ruin it for the other 99.9999%.


BTW: Did you notice that the player who supposedly can overpower a golf course was soundly beaten by a much shorter hitter at Pebble Beach.  And how about the announcers using the excuse that DJ's group was a threesome and this was a disadvantage to him but not his fellow pro players.

The myth that the game is more fun now for ordinary golfers than it was before the Pro V1 is one of the most pernicious lies the equipment manufacturers have disseminated.

Mark

I think this is a grey issue.  From my perspective, it sure was a lot more fun when I could reach some short 4s compared to never facing that decision....same for short 5s.  I spose for me the issue is really about how much more attractive 225-300 and 450-500 yard holes are compared to 35 years ago.  I know there is a backlash against short 4s these days, but well done examples are still some of my favourite holes.  Some cool old holes have been reinvented by the big ball.  Of course, conversely, some cool old holes have been compromised by the big ball. I think we are just now starting to explore the full value of these odd length holes and it would be a great loss to architecture if the concepts became meaningless for a greater number of people.

I spose we could go back to non-reachable 4s and explore very long 3s while losing the 260-300 yardage range, but somehow I don't think there is an appetite for this amongst golfers.  Its only the long ball which has really opened up the possibilities for the decent player.  I don't think archies have properly exploited the grey area between par 3s and 4s....they are still stuck in trying to design courses which threaten 7000 yards and use five sets of tees to compensate for this approach.  If the idea of fully exploiting the yardage range between 100 and 500 yards was followed there would be no need for courses that are longer than 6300 yards (which would be very long) unless we are talking about really big hitters. There isn't a one size fits all formula we can use these days...bifurcation is the answer if we truly want to keep possibilities of design wide open.

Ciao

[Thomas Dai]

What’s needed is a really significant roll-back, or however it’s termed, in ball and equipment. Not just a few % points but a big jump, like 20-30%.
How about (a symbolic) introduction for the 150th Open at TOC in 2021?
Not holding my breath though.
Atb

[Michael Felton]

Yet the average handicap remains the same doesn't it? The pros have got better, but I suspect that some of that at least is down to optimising launch conditions, fitness and the ability of the top level players all being better than they were 40 years ago. Amateurs generally haven't improved any. But they're missing the optimisation, fitness and ability parts of that.

[Garland Bayley]

...
I spose we could go back to non-reachable 4s and explore very long 3s while losing the 260-300 yardage range, but somehow I don't think there is an appetite for this amongst golfers.  ...

False choice. Just move the tee markers forward.

I guess the real issue is that low handicappers need to tee it forward, and stop preaching to high handicappers to do so. High handicappers are not that concerned with short par 5s and 4s, because they so seldom put together the shots necessary to make eagle.

[jeffwarne]

I hope that the concern about the game at the highest level doesn't ruin it for the other 99.9999%.

The myth that the game is more fun now for ordinary golfers than it was before the Pro V1 is one of the most pernicious lies the equipment manufacturers have disseminated.

+1
the exact opposite is true
especially given the fact that UNFUN courses and UNFUN setups are generally the accepted response to technology.


Erin Hills or Deal?
Chambers Bay or Dornoch? (or Merion,NGLA, Brora or Pac Dunes)
large scale and "proper tees" are way over rated

[BHoover]

When will the R&A (and the USGA, for that matter) get serious and limit the number of clubs that can be used in their tournaments? It’s time for a 6-club-or-less major championship.

[Garland Bayley]

When will the R&A (and the USGA, for that matter) get serious and limit the number of clubs that can be used in their tournaments? It’s time for a 6-club-or-less major championship.

Now you are talking about an economic change that the industry fill choke on (find impossible to swallow).

[Bob Montle]

When will the R&A (and the USGA, for that matter) get serious and limit the number of clubs that can be used in their tournaments? It’s time for a 6-club-or-less major championship.

I doubt that will never happen.  The opposite (adding a club) will probably happen first.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

What’s needed is a really significant roll-back, or however it’s termed, in ball and equipment. Not just a few % points but a big jump, like 20-30%.

What? So you'd have Dustin Johnson averaging 220 yards?

Yet the average handicap remains the same doesn't it? … Amateurs generally haven't improved any.

No, average handicap has dropped and continues to drop.

[Ian Mackenzie]

This is not uniquely a golf issue.


1. Hockey sticks made of composite materials allow "weaker players" to take harder shots.
2. Advancements in tennis racquets and tennis balls now facilitates routine 130 mph+ serves and almost eliminating the "net game".
3. Indy and F-1 race cars go faster, use less gas, and have computers that tell a driver when to pit.
4. Skis are faster and easier to turn today.


BUT, 44% of all golf shots are still taken on the green.


Possible Answers (for pro tour):


1. Dryer and narrower fairways with unkempt rough.
2. No raking bunkers making them real hazards and not "opportunities"
3. Shot clock

[jeffwarne]

This is not uniquely a golf issue.


1. Hockey sticks made of composite materials allow "weaker players" to take harder shots.
2. Advancements in tennis racquets and tennis balls now facilitates routine 130 mph+ serves and almost eliminating the "net game".
3. Indy and F-1 race cars go faster, use less gas, and have computers that tell a driver when to pit.
4. Skis are faster and easier to turn today.


BUT, 44% of all golf shots are still taken on the green.


Possible Answers (for pro tour):


1. Dryer and narrower fairways with unkempt rough.
2. No raking bunkers making them real hazards and not "opportunities"
3. Shot clock

Ian,
For the pros I don't really have an issue with those 3 (maybe narrower fariways)
and I'm 100% for #3
but #1 and #2 don't address the scale or address the distance-they just make the game harder.


and when Green Chairmen see things that presumablychallenge pros (narrow fairways, unkempt rough) they tend to follow suit at their clubs.


so in a backwards way Jerry may be right.
the (knee jerk) solutions DO make the everyday golfer suffer.


What is ironic is that if they DID roll the ball back, reverse logic would suggest the fairways could be made wider(and would feel even wider with a shorter flight) and the rough cut shorter (restoring angles)


Wouldn't that be more fun?

[John Kavanaugh]

You guys are just pissed that a 13 handicap tore up Pebble this weekend. Amazing what talent paired with modern equipment can do.

[Ian Mackenzie]

You guys are just pissed that a 13 handicap tore up Pebble this weekend. Amazing what talent paired with modern equipment can do.

Actually, what that shows is that when a legit amateur establishes a legit hdcp at a legit golf club (Whisper Rock) from legit yardage (7000+) holing everything out, then goes to PB at 6000 yards with almost no wind, he can indeed tear it up.

[Sean_A]

...
I spose we could go back to non-reachable 4s and explore very long 3s while losing the 260-300 yardage range, but somehow I don't think there is an appetite for this amongst golfers.  ...

False choice. Just move the tee markers forward.

I guess the real issue is that low handicappers need to tee it forward, and stop preaching to high handicappers to do so. High handicappers are not that concerned with short par 5s and 4s, because they so seldom put together the shots necessary to make eagle.

And have mega tees...like so many modern monstrosities...no thanks...it disrupts the flow of the game, usually looks awful and promotes cart golf...its a bad scene.

My point is that effectively, a broader range of yardage has been made more interesting for handicap players with the longer ball.  I don't think this is refutable...even if some good holes have been dumbed down for better handicap players.  I see both sides of the argument and generally think rollbackers don't properly consider all the angles in the debate.  They tend to be heavily focused on pro golf...which imo is the completely wrong angle to approach the subject.
Hence the reason why I think bifurcation is the best solution...that is if indeed it can be shown that courses will in fact not be mucked with as much if there is a rollback...I am far from convinced this is true. 

I would love nothing more than no rollback for handicap golf AND courses which properly explore the yardage range resulting in shorter courses with less par.  In my experience, 6300ish plus yard courses focus too heavily on 130-180 and 340-400 yards.  I would enjoy seeing those yardage ranges stripped a bit in favour of 100-120, 225-300 and 460-490. I am not in the least bothered about 500+. I think the big issue would be the long 3s and long 4s though.  Golfers can't get par out of their heads...its such a shame how par constrains the game.   

It should be no surprise that so many people enjoy these throwback courses which barely reach 6000 yards if that...yet folks still focus on pro golf for inspiration toward the future.  Go figure.

Ciao 

[Jim Nugent]

You guys are just pissed that a 13 handicap tore up Pebble this weekend. Amazing what talent paired with modern equipment can do.

Actually, what that shows is that when a legit amateur establishes a legit hdcp at a legit golf club (Whisper Rock) from legit yardage (7000+) holing everything out, then goes to PB at 6000 yards with almost no wind, he can indeed tear it up.

I read that just several months ago (September 2017) Fitzgerald was a 6.6 handicap.  So what it may actually show is that his handicap at Pebble, though technically accurate, didn't really reflect his ability to play golf or even his fairly recent history of doing so. 

[Kalen Braley]

So any speculation on what they'll address specifically?


Not to beat a dead horse, but seems it would be easiest to implement a tourny ball and not even get involved on the equipment (club) side...