d.lama

As a person who was a more competitive bowler in my younger years - #1 Yes and #2 No. I also have opinions about the super-modern materials that end up performing the same way regardless of oil layout and condition.

What is the heel drop on SQAIRZ

That's not what the ban is though. The closest thing to what you're thinking is in the below image, you can't anchor your forearm to your chest as a mechanical lever point - Arnie, Jack, nor Player did that in their stroke.

... Hence the current problem with the ball (equipment) going too far. 1995 hit had Frank didn't think we had anything to worry about with 460cc drivers with more capacity for MOI and COR - 'no pro would be caught dead swinging one' is basically what he said (I recall the video and him chuckling like it was a joke). Then in 2000 ball tech took a leap forward and it was apparent that something needed to be done, so they "kinda" did in 2004, now they are realizing they didn't do enough and are setting new ball testing parameters for 2028.

My point is that based on this test (there will be others with more scientific methods) the USGA was correct to change the ball requirements. The 2004 ball test setup wasn't stringent enough and technology overcame some of the limitations they thought they put in place, so the modern ball is faster/longer than they meant for it to be in 2004 when the USGA set those first tests requirements, they made a mistake and are correcting it with the new test. There are people out there touting that the ball is only longer because athletes are better, faster, stronger. This video shows that isn't the case; same athlete, same driver, same course conditions...and the 2010 ball went shorter. The USGA guy is wrong - it IS the equipment.

Tiger Woods played this ball in 2010 The modern ball isn't any faster than in 2004 when the USGA regulated the ball The -ProV1 is 5mph faster He consistently shorter with the One Tour And....It's not the equipment that is making modern pros longer.

The only reason what you said is possible is because the NCAA slowed down the Aluminum bat. Before the NCAA rules change (i.e. the ruling body) ball speed off the bat's was measurably quicker. https://www.acs.psu.edu/drussell/bats/alumwood.html

Looks like someone goofed the image. that's the average. Later in the article they give the correct info.

Do you think the change accomplishes nothing because you don't see the purpose, or you against the change because you don't want to see the fastest swingers lose 15 yards? If it's negligible, what do you care? Would you as bothered if every tournament venue moved the tee boxes back 15 yards in 2025? What if every tournament venue moved all their fairway bunkers 15 yards further than the existing tees?

These guys tested with a Pinnacle Soft, supposedly it already conforms, he swings pretty fast. They saw ball speed drop with 11.4° launch and lower spin 1852rpm. They lost 11y carry but the roll made up for it so total loss was 3yards.

I did think that this is the direction they'd take rather than the ball first. It's far too easy to hit the extreme toe of a driver and only lose a couple yards (sometimes gain from a low spin bomber). I was also wondering if they may do a matrix of some sort. Want a 46" driver shaft then head must be 210g without weights. want to max out at 48" then head must be 230g without weights. Or Maybe a loft based matrix, want to play a 7° loft then the MOI = ###. Or maybe want a 48" shaft then the driver head maxes out at 430cc. All of those would add headaches for rules officials and testing though.

Your 236 will probably become 233. What made you think you'd lose 30 yards?

I guarantee that plenty of computer modeling has been done and it's known what the new test conditions will do; perhaps this year the results will be readily available. I'm still not following why consistency is even being brought up. Persimmon clubs are still made today and they hit shorter than the super equipment put out by Callaway and Taylormade. There is a reason to rollback, you just don't agree with the reasoning. Now they have set up new regulations for the ball. Maybe. I just posted two video that show that is not the case.

I'm using Pre-1994 equipment and distances in order to point out that the 3-5 yards you and I will lose is nothing when compared to those older distances. The ruling bodies are rolling it back a small portion and people are acting like the sky is falling. Also, what does equipment consistency have to do with slowing the equipment down? They can do all the speed training they want or need to, nobody is saying they can't. Since 2000 there has been a 24.75 average gain. N. Højgaard only managed to get 177mph ball-speed from a 1999 Callaway Hawkeye driver when his normal ball speed is around 194mph. I propose that if he got that driver fit and specked for him he would probably get the ball speed up to mid 180's with his swing but he'd never hit 194 and would therefore be shorter than he is right now.

Those poor 63 year old's that played the game, prior to 1993 ... how could they ever handle hitting slower equipment, how did the game survive. Also, the estimates are that you will probably lose 3-5 yards with the ball rollback, unless you swing at 120mph, not the 15 yards you think you will lose.