News:

This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.


Jim Hoak

  • Karma: +1/-0
Elephant in the room on distance
« on: March 06, 2018, 10:59:49 AM »
I read all the discussion on the distance argument here on GCA on many threads--mainly focused on whether it is an issue we should be concerned about.  But few posters have discussed the most-relevant issue that is coming out this morning--The PGA Tour (and it seems the PGA of America) seem very resistant to any rollback that will impact them.
Everyone seems to agree that a rollback of distance for the average golfer--the 99.99% who play the game for love and fun--would be uncalled for and a disaster.  The USGA reports the average male golfer hits a drive 200 yards and the average female 146 yards. 
So, that leaves only bifurcation of the rules as an answer.  But if the people who will be rolled back--the elite, generally professional, players--don't agree to be bifurcated, is there any solution?  All the discussion on here about the need for a distance reduction for the elite players seems to be very "ivory-towered" and irrelevant to reality.

John Kavanaugh

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elephant in the room on distance
« Reply #1 on: March 06, 2018, 11:07:54 AM »
An old guy won this week on a short course. We, old guys, don't need a rollback to beat the young strong players. Keep the ball long and make the courses even shorter. What everyone is missing is that short courses are the worst thing for long hitters.

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elephant in the room on distance
« Reply #2 on: March 06, 2018, 11:16:36 AM »
...
Everyone seems to agree that a rollback of distance for the average golfer--the 99.99% who play the game for love and fun--would be uncalled for and a disaster. 
...

That's total BS!
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Jeff_Brauer

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elephant in the room on distance
« Reply #3 on: March 06, 2018, 11:29:28 AM »

Garland,


Quite frankly, no it isn't.  At least anywhere but on golf club atlas.  At least, I have never heard any discussion about average golfers wanting to get any shorter than they already are.  In fact, most would legislate they can play souped up balls, while their opponents have to play with a rock that barely gets airborne.


Such is human nature.


Wonder if it would be any easier to just have a separate set of club rules for PGA tours, like smaller, maybe persimmon drivers?
Jeff Brauer, ASGCA Director of Outreach

Jeff Schley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elephant in the room on distance
« Reply #4 on: March 06, 2018, 12:37:38 PM »
...
Everyone seems to agree that a rollback of distance for the average golfer--the 99.99% who play the game for love and fun--would be uncalled for and a disaster. 
...

That's total BS!

I think the average golfer wants the status quo and they should have it.  The pro is just causing too much business in the renovation business to keep up with the Jones's.
"To give anything less than your best, is to sacrifice your gifts."
- Steve Prefontaine

Wayne_Kozun

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elephant in the room on distance
« Reply #5 on: March 06, 2018, 01:04:14 PM »
Do we know that a rollback will have much, if any, effect on the average amateur?  The amateur has not gained nearly as much distance as a pro and probably wouldn’t lose much if we went back to an earlier ball, like the original pro V1 or even the Titleist Professional.

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elephant in the room on distance
« Reply #6 on: March 06, 2018, 01:25:47 PM »
Wayne,


I think it would be interesting to do a blind test.  Where you have X number of amateurs that play 5 rounds each, where each round uses a different unmarked ball.  And then they try to guess which ball type they had for each round...



Jerry Kluger

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elephant in the room on distance
« Reply #7 on: March 06, 2018, 02:09:01 PM »
Kalen: Amateurs will figure it out once the ball hits a cartpath - those of us who regularly miss the grass can tell what kind of ball it is by how it scuffs on a cart path:)

Kalen Braley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elephant in the room on distance
« Reply #8 on: March 06, 2018, 02:12:56 PM »
Kalen: Amateurs will figure it out once the ball hits a cartpath - those of us who regularly miss the grass can tell what kind of ball it is by how it scuffs on a cart path:)


Jerry,


I guess they'd just have to do this experiment at Bandon!!  ;D

SL_Solow

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elephant in the room on distance
« Reply #9 on: March 06, 2018, 02:52:35 PM »
There are really 2 issues.  Both relate largely to the Tour caliber players and then have ripple effects on GCA and lesser players.  The first is the impact on architecture.  If perceived differences in distance cause classic courses to be lengthened this impacts on cost, slow play and design integrity.  None of these factors is improved.  If we could be certain that classic courses would not worry about the play of pros and their ability to challenge them, this factor would go away.  But the proliferation of redesigns to keep courses "relevant" gives little hope that this will happen.


The second factor is somewhat more subtle and relates to the nature of the competitive game.  Without entering into the discussion of "why" players are longer today, and the relative weight to be given to the various factors, we know that tour golf is a very different test than it was throughout history.  The best players, at least since the advent of the steel shaft, always had to show proficiency throughout the bag.  Indeed , the ability to hit accurate long irons was a key determining factor  separating many of the best with Nicklaus being a prime example.  Of course great putting was always an equalizer but the real players were good through the bag.  Today, long irons come into play on tight driving holes, very long par 3's and sometimes for 2nd shots on par 5's, that is those where a mid or short iron is not required.  so the skill required has changed and, at least to my mind, been dumbed down to a degree.  I suppose we could build courses only for the tour which could be stretched out long enough to create the test but to what end and how would they survive economically?


Finally, unless people stop watching, why would the tour want to change.  If the ball were made to go shorter, the manufacturers could no longer advertise based on distance (I know with the current rules they shouldn't now but an overt reduction would kill the "pitch")  If that were the case, endorsement dollars would be significantly reduced and what organization of touring pros wants that?  Finally, notwithstanding its huge war chest, the USGA has never taken on the manufacturers.  In the Karsten case, it didn't have the reserves and folded notwithstanding its excellent counsel's advice that it would prevail against Ping.  That opened the floodgates and, notwithstanding the recent publicity, I will be quite surprised if it finally "stands up'.

Mark Pearce

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elephant in the room on distance
« Reply #10 on: March 06, 2018, 03:52:33 PM »
Everyone seems to agree that a rollback of distance for the average golfer--the 99.99% who play the game for love and fun--would be uncalled for and a disaster.
We have an English expression for that statement.  But I want to stay on this board.


I enjoy golf no more now than I dis 25 years ago, when I didn't hit the ball so far.  The reality (which the manufacturers and their puppets, the USGA and R&A really don't want people to understand) is tht a rolled back ball would make no difference whatsoever to the enjoyment most hackers get out of the game.  Most have no idea how far they hit the ball.  THey over-estimate by a distance and nothing would change.  Say they did lose 5 yards off the tee.  Would that really be a problem?  Maybe 1 in 100 would even notice.  The argument that a rollback would make the game less enjoyable for the average golfer is utter bollocks.


Oh dear, I said it....
In June I will be riding the first three stages of this year's Tour de France route for charity.  630km (394 miles) in three days, with 7800m (25,600 feet) of climbing for the William Wates Memorial Trust (https://rideleloop.org/the-charity/) which supports underprivileged young people.

Mark Pearce

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elephant in the room on distance
« Reply #11 on: March 06, 2018, 03:55:08 PM »
Wayne,


I think it would be interesting to do a blind test.  Where you have X number of amateurs that play 5 rounds each, where each round uses a different unmarked ball.  And then they try to guess which ball type they had for each round...
Several years ago the R&A tested a "rolled back" ball in medals at a few selected clubs.  My eldest son played in one of those medals.  He didn't notice any difference at all, except on the putting green.
In June I will be riding the first three stages of this year's Tour de France route for charity.  630km (394 miles) in three days, with 7800m (25,600 feet) of climbing for the William Wates Memorial Trust (https://rideleloop.org/the-charity/) which supports underprivileged young people.

jeffwarne

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elephant in the room on distance
« Reply #12 on: March 06, 2018, 04:07:26 PM »
Everyone seems to agree that a rollback of distance for the average golfer--the 99.99% who play the game for love and fun--would be uncalled for and a disaster.
We have an English expression for that statement.  But I want to stay on this board.


I enjoy golf no more now than I dis 25 years ago, when I didn't hit the ball so far.  The reality (which the manufacturers and their puppets, the USGA and R&A really don't want people to understand) is tht a rolled back ball would make no difference whatsoever to the enjoyment most hackers get out of the game.  Most have no idea how far they hit the ball.  THey over-estimate by a distance and nothing would change.  Say they did lose 5 yards off the tee.  Would that really be a problem?  Maybe 1 in 100 would even notice.  The argument that a rollback would make the game less enjoyable for the average golfer is utter bollocks.




Let's start with the first post.
a "disaster" ??? ?
Who knew that while the game was growing by leaps and bounds for years, that we were living a disaster...



At the clubs I've been fortunate enough to work at, everybody hits it 260-300.
How do they know that?
the caddie (who is also keeping score) tells them that's how far they hit it.


Mark is spot on . This mythical "average" golfer-who hits it 200-would not notice at all if you slipped a balata or rolled back ball  ball into the mix. The same guy who is believing his 200 yard dives are 260


Taking it a step farther, when an amateur comes to me looking for more distance, I always ask "How far do you hit it"
I can assure you after they tell me 250, that I better run straight to Trackman before I utter one word or instruction...


Because there's no reward in getting a 200 yard driver to 210....if he's under the delusion that his current drives go 250.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2018, 06:04:50 PM by jeffwarne »
"Let's slow the damned greens down a bit, not take the character out of them." Tom Doak
"Take their focus off the grass and put it squarely on interesting golf." Don Mahaffey

Garland Bayley

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elephant in the room on distance
« Reply #13 on: March 06, 2018, 04:17:59 PM »

Garland,


Quite frankly, no it isn't.  At least anywhere but on golf club atlas.  At least, I have never heard any discussion about average golfers wanting to get any shorter than they already are.  In fact, most would legislate they can play souped up balls, while their opponents have to play with a rock that barely gets airborne.


Such is human nature.

...

Since when did they change the game from getting in the hole in the least amount of strokes to hitting it the farthest off the tee?

Sorry, just more BS from someone that should know better.
"I enjoy a course where the challenges are contained WITHIN it, and recovery is part of the game  not a course where the challenge is to stay ON it." Jeff Warne

Thomas Dai

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elephant in the room on distance
« Reply #14 on: March 06, 2018, 05:46:25 PM »

Since when did they change the game from getting in the hole in the least amount of strokes to hitting it the farthest off the tee?

Good point GB.

It’s pretty easy just to focus on distance in this debate whilst forgetting how the characteristics and construction of balls can make them either easier or harder to use around the green, especially if used in conjunction with an appropriate wedge by a skilful player.
Atb

Mike Sweeney

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Elephant in the room on distance
« Reply #15 on: March 06, 2018, 07:14:33 PM »

So, that leaves only bifurcation of the rules as an answer.  But if the people who will be rolled back--the elite, generally professional, players--don't agree to be bifurcated, is there any solution?  All the discussion on here about the need for a distance reduction for the elite players seems to be very "ivory-towered" and irrelevant to reality.


PREAMBLE:



I have only played one TPC course, and that was was TPC Sawgrass. It really was a Doak 5.5 for me. I am still waiting for a Pete Dye course that I want to play twice, and i have played one PD 3 or 4 times and a second PD 2 times.


I get it. In the big picture of life, i stink.


Maybe I was in the Top 10% of golfers at my peak. Who knows, maybe I had a round or two one summer that put me in the Top 5%. That means I was one of the best 1.25 million golfers in the United States, assuming there were 25 million golfers. That does not include the stats on overseas players, so I am actually really insignificant. :)


Let's say John Kavanaugh at his best was the 100,000th best golfer in the United States of America. I have played with John, and he has really good hands. Combine my length at my peak (and some decent wedges), with John's game around the greens, and maybe our combined MOJO puts in the Top 25,000 players in the USA.


John will jump in here and add to the legacy of "Old White Guys" who are not as good at golf as they think they are. :)

BODY:


Stop allowing these Bozos to mess with my golf courses - Shinnecock and Merion.


REALITY:


I have never been a member of Shinnecock or Merion, but I have an affinity to both.


Merion East is closed for ALL of 2018! Shinnecock's fairways were narrowed for this year's US Open. I just don't understand why the Members put up with this nonsense.


Screw GCA.com, we don't host events. Why are Augusta, Merion, and Shinnecock not creating a new-USGA to deal with this? The answer is the USGA has penetrated those clubs, and we may be too far down the road.


I really hate saying that.





"One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we’ve been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We’re no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us."

Dr. Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back