[Tim Gavrich]

I find it very interesting that even though one claim against the modern golf ball is that long hitters have a bigger advantage than they used to, the data that Jeff cites does not bear that out. In 2017, McIlroy averaged 317.2 yards off the tee. William McGirt and Chez Reavie shared 149th at 285.2 yards - 32 yards behind Rory. In 1980, Dan Pohl led, averaging 274.3 yards, while Calvin Peete and Alan Tapie tied for 150th at 248.5 - a 25.8 yard difference.
[/size]
[/size]If you look at the stats over the intervening years, you'll see that the longest hitter on tour has been about 30 yards longer than the 150th-longest hitter on tour.Why is it necessarily better that the Tour distance leader average 275 yards, rather than 315?
[/size]
[/size]Jeff Schley, where are you getting the 7,500-7,700-yard number for Tour course length? Which courses on this season's PGA Tour schedule are in that range? I'm not sure there's more than 1 or 2. Many are closer to 7,200 yards, which is the length of the course that Al Geiberger shot the first 59 on way back in 1977.
[/size]
[/size]Why is it intrinsically better that a 400-yard hole be played with a driver and a 7-iron than with a 3 wood and a 9 iron or a driver and a wedge? If it's better to hit longer clubs into a given hole, and keeping golf courses from getting longer is important because of land/maintenance costs, then wouldn't it be better if a 400-yard hole required a driver and a 3 wood? Given that guiding philosophy, isn't 1980 an insufficient place to roll the ball back to? Why not go back to the 1800s?
[/size]
[/size]It may be the case that we should freeze or slightly roll back the distance the ball goes. But we have nowhere near the evidence to make anything more than an arbitrary and likely rash decision at this time. We simply haven't come close to figuring out what the ideal golf equipment scenario looks like - for pros and ams alike - and I think we're obligated to have much more clarity on that before deciding to make a shockwave change to the game. Ready-fire-aim is an irresponsible strategy, IMO.

[Jeff Schley]

Tim,

Good point that although there is no question the top drivers are driving 15% or further than 1980 for example, the middle of the pack guys or lower end guys also benefitted from technology gains/fitness or whatnot as well.  A rising tide lifts all boats and I don't have the time right now to compare it exactly, but good point.

I picked 1980 because that is the furthest that the PGA Tour stats page goes back to.  I would have gone back further, but it was still a time of real woods and balata balls.

The course lengths I was thinking of championship venues, not regular stops.  I could have taken off a 100 or so yards, but I don't think it diminishes the point materially. Shinnecock will play around 7445 this year as well. I just did a quick search and here is the top 10 of all time length courses for a major:

• 7,741 yards Erin Hills Golf Course, Erin, Wis., 2017 U.S. Open
• 7,695 yards Chambers Bay (2nd round), University Place, Wash., 2015 U.S. Open
• 7,676 yards Kiawah Island (Ocean Course), Kiawah Island, S.C., 2012 PGA Championship
• 7,674 yards Hazeltine National, Chaska, Minn., 2009 PGA Championship
• 7,637 yards Chambers Bay (3rd round), University Place, Wash., 2015 U.S. Open
• 7,603 yards Torrey Pines G.C. (South Course), La Jolla, Calif., 2008 U.S. Open
• 7,600 yards Quail Hollow Club, Charlotte, N.C., 2017 PGA Championship
• 7,561 yards Medinah No. 3, Medinah, Ill., 2006 PGA Championship

This years majors will play the following:
 Augusta is just below 7500 - par 72

Shinnecock will play 7445 - par 70
Carnoustie will play 7421 - par 71

Bellerive will play 7547 - par 71

[Mark Fedeli]

Here is 2018 driving distance top 10.  What we see is the leader from this year has gained a MASSIVE 53 yards from the 1980 leader.  Also the 10th place golfer has gained 43 yards on the 1980 10th place golfer (Jack Nicklaus btw).  Now this is not taking into account the entire tour, but the top 10 have gained about 15% in distance from 1980 til today.  The course distance has changed from about 6500-6700 to 7500-7700 which is about 15% as well.  Correlation?  It appears courses are trying to keep pace.

Jeff, are those numbers only counting drivers that hit the fairway?

[Jon McSweeny]

For those who support a rollback/bifurcation or any other significant change in the ball, what is the primary reason to limit the ball as opposed to limiting other equipment? Why change the ball instead of changing the max driver size to 300 cc (or something similar) or limit the amount of perimeter weighting that is acceptable.

I see plenty of talk about changing ball regulations, but rarely see people seriously proposing new club regulations. Is there any particular reason for that? I can see that changing the ball might be simpler than changing a large number of club regulations, but is there any reasoning besides simplicity?

[John Kavanaugh]

Because the people that want the ball changed will be buying new balls eventually no matter what the specifications. The change will cost them nothing. Buying new clubs...not so cheap.

[Jeff Schley]

Here is 2018 driving distance top 10.  What we see is the leader from this year has gained a MASSIVE 53 yards from the 1980 leader.  Also the 10th place golfer has gained 43 yards on the 1980 10th place golfer (Jack Nicklaus btw).  Now this is not taking into account the entire tour, but the top 10 have gained about 15% in distance from 1980 til today.  The course distance has changed from about 6500-6700 to 7500-7700 which is about 15% as well.  Correlation?  It appears courses are trying to keep pace.

Jeff, are those numbers only counting drivers that hit the fairway?

No. 

"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."

[Jeff Schley]

Because the people that want the ball changed will be buying new balls eventually no matter what the specifications. The change will cost them nothing. Buying new clubs...not so cheap.

Exactly.  The ball has a life cycle of maybe 1 round (if not lost) whereas I still use my fairways woods 15 years later.

[John Kavanaugh]

I just had my first grandson. In 12 years I will be 70 and under the current one ball - one world policy we will be able to play from the same set of tees. If the game is bifurcated we won't even be playing the same game. It depresses the hell out of me.


In a game that has been played for 400 years these perfect synergies between a man and his grandson are no longer accidents.

[Mike Sweeney]

For those who support a rollback/bifurcation or any other significant change in the ball, what is the primary reason to limit the ball as opposed to limiting other equipment? Why change the ball instead of changing the max driver size to 300 cc (or something similar) or limit the amount of perimeter weighting that is acceptable.

I see plenty of talk about changing ball regulations, but rarely see people seriously proposing new club regulations. Is there any particular reason for that? I can see that changing the ball might be simpler than changing a large number of club regulations, but is there any reasoning besides simplicity?

I think the distance questions is a combination of and in no particular order:

• Agronomy improvements, and as John K said, Victoria National is much drier and harder for their Tour event. Nobody wants to go backward with agronomy. Maybe a longer cut as a piece of the puzzle.
• Ball
• Clubs
• Swing mechanics of golfers with teachers, video and such. That is never being reversed, it is just the evolution of humans.
• Fitness - similar to swing mechanics.
• Drugs - It seems like a direct correlation these days for sports in general with $$$=drugs. Trying to random test 144 golfers each week who are Independent Contractors, is never going to be easy. Do I think everyone is on juice? No, but I think Tiger was before there was drug rules, and that is what destroyed his back along with a incredibly stressful swing on his body.

The Clubs is almost easier as the equipment companies could arguably sell more/new spec clubs. However, if you eliminate the driver and say only allow 15 degree or higher clubs for The Masters, it changes the game. Personally, i like change, but I doubt they would do it.


The Masters Ball is the simplest, I think. They already have Masters tees that they don't allow Members or Guest to play (I think). The game is already bi-furcated at the tee. The ball is just a second level of bi-furcation. The Masters is the only place where it could happen simply, so let's hope for Dustin Johnson to hit Driver-Wedge into the Par 5's shoot -28 under this year, and then we see a "Masters Ball".

[Mike Sweeney]

I just had my first grandson. In 12 years I will be 70 and under the current one ball - one world policy we will be able to play from the same set of tees. If the game is bifurcated we won't even be playing the same game. It depresses the hell out of me.


In a game that has been played for 400 years these perfect synergies between a man and his grandson are no longer accidents.

Complete fallacy. When was the last time we had any course of significance with one set of tees? The game has been bi-furcated forever.

[John Kavanaugh]

Mike, all I am saying is that a 70 year old man and his 12 year old grandson can play the same set of tees with the exact same equipment and go mano a mano. I simply do not see it being the same if we are playing different games. I look forward to the day he can beat me straight up.

[Jim Hoak]

Most everything I read about this subject focuses on what professional golfers are doing.  How many of you are pros?  How many professional golfers are there as a percent of the golf world?  I still believe we are letting the tail wag the dog on this one.  Why don't we just forget what the pros are doing?  Why should we really care?  Golf would still be the great game we love without this obsessive focus we see to have on what the PGA Tour does.
I have seen nothing persuasive on why we amateurs should care about the distance of pros.

[Kalen Braley]

Everyone keeps asking why bifurcation, but I will ask why not?


- The changes will have no effect on 99.99% of current golfers who don't play any form of professional golf.
- Courses, both new and existing will feel no need to continue to disfigure themselves.
- On TV we'll get to see the pros start to think their way around the course again instead of a driver/wedge bash fest.
- Equipment changes for no one....just a different ball for the pros, which they already get for free.
- The lost art of long iron play will return to the game.


What am I missing?

[Jeff Schley]

- Courses, both new and existing will feel no need to continue to disfigure themselves.

What am I missing?

Well said.  As a result of this going under the knife and adding yardage, how much more in maintenance is needed to the budget per year?  Especially if you are adding bunkers and now watering your fairways more.  If you have 1000 more yards of golf course you are playing today then 40 years ago, that has to be a significant amount of money in labor hours, water, chemicals, etc.  NOT good for sustainability.  All the great courses want to stay great and that means attracting majors for many, alleviate this pressure by rolling back the ball please and keep the treasures as they are.

[Tom_Doak]

here is the top 10 of all time length courses for a major:

• 7,741 yards Erin Hills Golf Course, Erin, Wis., 2017 U.S. Open
• 7,695 yards Chambers Bay (2nd round), University Place, Wash., 2015 U.S. Open
• 7,676 yards Kiawah Island (Ocean Course), Kiawah Island, S.C., 2012 PGA Championship
• 7,674 yards Hazeltine National, Chaska, Minn., 2009 PGA Championship
• 7,637 yards Chambers Bay (3rd round), University Place, Wash., 2015 U.S. Open
• 7,603 yards Torrey Pines G.C. (South Course), La Jolla, Calif., 2008 U.S. Open
• 7,600 yards Quail Hollow Club, Charlotte, N.C., 2017 PGA Championship
• 7,561 yards Medinah No. 3, Medinah, Ill., 2006 PGA Championship

This years majors will play the following:
 Augusta is just below 7500 - par 72

Shinnecock will play 7445 - par 70
Carnoustie will play 7421 - par 71

Bellerive will play 7547 - par 71

These numbers are meaningless because they don't express how long those golf courses WOULD BE if they had unlimited space to expand and try to stay the same playing length as they were.  The courses at today's yardages still play quite a bit shorter than they did in the 1970's or 1980's.

[Jim Hoak]

Everyone keeps asking why bifurcation, but I will ask why not?


- The changes will have no effect on 99.99% of current golfers who don't play any form of professional golf.
- Courses, both new and existing will feel no need to continue to disfigure themselves.
- On TV we'll get to see the pros start to think their way around the course again instead of a driver/wedge bash fest.
- Equipment changes for no one....just a different ball for the pros, which they already get for free.
- The lost art of long iron play will return to the game.


What am I missing?



I think what you are missing is any evidence that that PGA Tour will agree to play a scaled back ball or other equipment different than amateurs.  So the only way to reduce distance is to reduce it for everyone.  And most of us don't want that and feel that it would hurt golf.

[BCowan]

Jim,


Agree completely, however we aren't focusing on the big issue. Ban pros from playing golf tourneys on golden age courses!  Pondgrass, Smurfield Village, Bear Clap, and insert another are more then adaquate in hosting pro tourneys. Just ban Golden age tracks from tour and majors. Win win! 

[Tom_Doak]

Mike, all I am saying is that a 70 year old man and his 12 year old grandson can play the same set of tees with the exact same equipment and go mano a mano. I simply do not see it being the same if we are playing different games. I look forward to the day he can beat me straight up.

John:


You would still be able to do this after bifurcation, with either ball you want.


Quit playing Chicken Little, man.  That's why I started this thread, I'm sick of all the people cluck-clucking about impending doom.

[Jeff Schley]

here is the top 10 of all time length courses for a major:

• 7,741 yards Erin Hills Golf Course, Erin, Wis., 2017 U.S. Open
• 7,695 yards Chambers Bay (2nd round), University Place, Wash., 2015 U.S. Open
• 7,676 yards Kiawah Island (Ocean Course), Kiawah Island, S.C., 2012 PGA Championship
• 7,674 yards Hazeltine National, Chaska, Minn., 2009 PGA Championship
• 7,637 yards Chambers Bay (3rd round), University Place, Wash., 2015 U.S. Open
• 7,603 yards Torrey Pines G.C. (South Course), La Jolla, Calif., 2008 U.S. Open
• 7,600 yards Quail Hollow Club, Charlotte, N.C., 2017 PGA Championship
• 7,561 yards Medinah No. 3, Medinah, Ill., 2006 PGA Championship

This years majors will play the following:
 Augusta is just below 7500 - par 72

Shinnecock will play 7445 - par 70
Carnoustie will play 7421 - par 71

Bellerive will play 7547 - par 71

These numbers are meaningless because they don't express how long those golf courses WOULD BE if they had unlimited space to expand and try to stay the same playing length as they were.  The courses at today's yardages still play quite a bit shorter than they did in the 1970's or 1980's.

Tom I don't understand.  I listed the yardages to demonstrate the lengthening of major championship venues presently utilized.

[John Kavanaugh]

Because it will not end with one ball for the pros and one ball for us. Everyone will have a ball that fits either their age, skill level or gender. Everything that you can imagine going wrong with the game will. With the new longer balls for amateurs strong young men will hit it even further than DJ. How dangerous is that?

Or to put is in simple terms as I did above: When do you advise your child to graduate to the tour ball? Or worse, tell them to stick with the long ball because they will never be good enough.

[Tom_Doak]

Tom I don't understand.  I listed the yardages to demonstrate the lengthening of major championship venues presently utilized.

Sorry.  I thought you were presenting the yardages to compare against the older ones to show what % the ball might be rolled back.  The writers are all trying to prove that whatever % is suggested is far too much.

[John Kavanaugh]

Mike, all I am saying is that a 70 year old man and his 12 year old grandson can play the same set of tees with the exact same equipment and go mano a mano. I simply do not see it being the same if we are playing different games. I look forward to the day he can beat me straight up.

John:


You would still be able to do this after bifurcation, with either ball you want.


Quit playing Chicken Little, man.  That's why I started this thread, I'm sick of all the people cluck-clucking about impending doom.

Chicken Little said the sky was falling. I'm for the status quo. I'm more of the Emperor with no clothes. Now enjoy lunch with that image in your mind.

[jeffwarne]

For those who support a rollback/bifurcation or any other significant change in the ball, what is the primary reason to limit the ball as opposed to limiting other equipment? Why change the ball instead of changing the max driver size to 300 cc (or something similar) or limit the amount of perimeter weighting that is acceptable.

I see plenty of talk about changing ball regulations, but rarely see people seriously proposing new club regulations. Is there any particular reason for that? I can see that changing the ball might be simpler than changing a large number of club regulations, but is there any reasoning besides simplicity?

Very good point-it's of course not just the ball, but that would be a one stop shopping item.
I'd be all for addressing driver size, COR and shaft weight in realtion to overall weight(a la baseball) but that would be a more complicated endeavor.
Changing club head size and perimeter weighting MIGHT affect the average guy more, and there might be more of an outcry (certainly by the manufacturers-but I could give 2 shites about them)


Or we can just do nothing and reel in the you 'da man /mashed potatos crowd (it's so great to have them be a part of the show every week)

[Tom_Doak]

Because it will not end with one ball for the pros and one ball for us. Everyone will have a ball that fits either their age, skill level or gender. Everything that you can imagine going wrong with the game will. With the new longer balls for amateurs strong young men will hit it even further than DJ. How dangerous is that?

Or to put is in simple terms as I did above: When do you advise your child to graduate to the tour ball? Or worse, tell them to stick with the long ball because they will never be good enough.

They managed to handle this quite well in Britain for the 50+ years they played the small ball over there.  You switched when you were ready to turn pro in America. 


When the R & A made the 1.68-in ball mandatory for the Open and Amateur, you switched when you were ready to compete in events that demanded you play the 1.68-in ball.  It was the competitors in big amateur events who then insisted that national, and then county, and then local events also be played with the big ball, so they didn't have to switch back and forth.  But it was ultimately every individual competition that decided whether or not to mandate the bigger ball.

[Kalen Braley]

Jeff,


The reason why the ball is all that is needed, is because the ball doesn't care what hits it when its flight limited.


Legal driver
Illegal driver
Baseball bat
Shovel
Pool Cue


The ball will only fly as far as its designed to fly....the bashing instrument is irrelevant.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()