Jump to content

DaveP043

Member
  • Content Count

    1,328
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

DaveP043 last won the day on June 18 2016

DaveP043 had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

2,191 Excellent

About DaveP043

  • Rank
     
  • Birthday 01/03/1956

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Northern Virginia
  • Interests
    You mean I need interests outside of golf?
  • Handicap:
    6.3

Recent Profile Visitors

3,610 profile views
  1. This certainly has some potential, although when the USGA does this for the US Open we hear complaints about how that makes golf too one-dimensional. The other problem is that course conditions are completely beyond the ability of the USGA/R&A to regulate. Now its certainly possible that the increased attention the study brings, and ongoing discussions that will involve the PGA Tour might encourage the Tour to revise the way it sets up courses. It might be a smart thing for the Tour to do this on their own, to minimize the motivation for enacting new equipment regulations that decrease distance
  2. This is my experience as well. I remember reading dire predictions of how slow it would become if the flag was going in and out and in and out, and I remember predictions of how it would be much faster when we all agreed to leave it in. As it has turned out for me, the impact is pretty minimal, whether everyone makes the same choice, or whether the pin changes in or out on every putt.
  3. Based on what they said at the time, this change was made to allow a choice that had potential to speed play slightly. Based on what you say, you're seeing that seniors tend and remove the flag while younger players don't is that right? I don't see that distinction at my club, its more often that the better players prefer to remove the flag, while the rest of us are more willing to have it remain in the hole. After a year's experience playing with folks on both sides of this, I really haven't seen any hassle, as long as players communicate. I do see too many times when guys assume the other folks know what they want, and that isn't confined just to the flagstick. If everyone speaks up, its easy and fast.
  4. My last significant golf holiday was a week in Scotland in 2018. A friend of mine did all the bookings himself, and it was no real problem. In hindsight, we might have chosen to stay at a different hotel for one of our two locations, but booking through a travel service wouldn't have eliminated that hotel. I've planned 2 trips to Ireland and two to Scotland the same way, and never an issue. I go to Pinehurst pretty often, because I own a condo at one of the golf resorts there. We book all of our golf through the resort, since they always get us lower rates than we could on our own. In that area, booking through a resort or service might save some money, although using something like AirBnB could save enough money on lodging to offset the higher costs for golf.
  5. I'm in for birdies, I'll be playing the Blue tees at Stoneleigh Golf Club in Round Hill, VA (6234 yards, 72.0/135). Only one round so far this year, and only one birdie.
  6. Well it appears he's a relentless marketer, a "stop smoking" expert, and a real estate agent, in addition to claiming to be able to teach golf stuff. His Youtube channel stuff is 9 years old, although I see a few videos that are only 3 years old. I see videos of him swinging, but no instruction, and in my view his swing isn't particularly good. Just a personal reaction, I don't think this is the direction I'd choose for online instruction.
  7. I haven't played the Maxfli, so I won't make a specific recommendation. However, since the OP is planning to use just one ball, planning ahead shouldn't be much of a problem. Order 5 dozen, and when 4 are gone, make another order. Assuming of course that he's happy with the choice. For me, I've had the balls arrive within a week of when I order, but I don't think there's a specific guarantee.
  8. I do wonder if the costs to develop and manufacture a "go short" ball would keep some of the smaller ball companies out of the "elite ball" marketplace. We know that most elite players don't actually pay for golf balls, so I'd anticipate that most of the costs associated with the "short" ball would end up being spread out over all of the people who DO pay for their own balls, meaning you and me. Titleist could do that and we'd never notice much difference, bot others might not want to risk losing market share due to price increases. I'll still be really surprised if the various stakeholders could agree on any type of equipment bifurcation, whether its voluntary (via Local Rule) or mandatory somehow.
  9. Have you ever hit a putt that went directly over the hole? If so, the pin almost certainly would have slowed it down, so that your next putt would be shorter. But for putts travelling at the correct speed, putts that would go in with or without the pin, the pin can only hurt your chances. Tour pros have excellent speed control, most of their putts fall into this category.
  10. Titleist did nothing more than release a statement that tries to protect its financial interests. They also engage in a little bit of scare tactics to get people on their side.: "We believe the conclusions drawn in this report undervalue the skill and athleticism of the game's very best players and focus far too much on the top of the men's professional game and project this on golf and golfers as a whole," Its absolutely fair to disagree on value judgements, but the underlined part pretty much disregards what the conclusions of the USGA/R&A say,: " It is not currently intended to consider revising the overall specifications in a way that would produce substantial reductions in hitting distances at all levels of the game." Golf and golfers as a whole are not going to be impacted, unless you specifically believe that the USGA/R&A are lying about their intentions.
  11. If you, re a member of a club, see if you can have your pro get you on at either Keswick Hall, near Richmond, or at Benvenue, near Rocky Mount, NC. Keswick Hallis a Pete Dye redesign of a much older course, usually playable because they capped all the fairways with a sand layer. Benvenue is a Donald Ross design not far from I-95. And a third option is Royal New Kent, a few miles east of Richmond, an interesting Mike Strantz design.
  12. I just think racing and golf are two different animals. So far, we have always played under the same rules, both playing rules and equipment rules, all golfers, hacker to Tiger. This is one of very few sports where that is the case. To change that is to potentially change the effectiveness of advertising. Potential is the issue, neither the sponsors (manufacturers) nor the sponsees (players and tours) want to find out what actually happens. If we DO think about bifurcating at the pro level, there are still lines to be drawn. Are club pros using the limited equipment in local PGA events? The PGA of America's Club Pro Championship is logical. How about local Pro-Ams, pros with limited balls, the rest of their group with "normal" stuff? For State Open tournaments, are all entrants using it, including amateurs who qualify? US Open? The Masters, including the amateurs who qualify? There's just not a single clean dividing line. This isn't to say it can't be done, but its complicated.
  13. I can't see this as a viable option. First, from a player's standpoint, each guy has a little different idea of what he wants from a ball, and chooses what he plays accordingly. A standard tour ball eliminates that choice. The only viable option that I could see would be to lower speed limits or increase minimum spin levels across the board, allowing every manufacturer the option to manufacture a conforming ball. But the obstacles to bifurcation are too many to be overcome, in my opinion. As a group, we want to have the choice of playing the same ball and the same driver that the pros do. Bifurcation eliminates that. We don't want to buy two sets of equipment for improving juniors, one standard set for most play, and a reduced distance set for top competitive play. We don't want to have to learn to use two distinctly different golf balls, one for normal play, one for the random time we qualify for the State Amateur. The pros will fight the potential loss of sponsorship revenue. If I can't play the same Titleist ball is Joe GOAT does, why do I care that Joe plays Titleist, and why should Titleist pay Joe a bucketload of cash to play Titleist? We don't want to have to pay more for our golf balls, but you know they're giving the balls to the players, we're the ones who are going to subsidize the R&D and new plants needed for the reduced-distance balls. I'm not particularly opposed to bifurcation, I just don't think it will happen. My expectation is that equipment-related distance gains will be minimized to the maximum extent possible, possibly with new facets of equipment being tested and limited.
  14. Do you get it, or does it go to the estate of Sam Snead?
  15. This is exactly the issue that the Ruling Bodies are trying to avoid, the reason that they specifically say they have no plans to roll back equipment for all players. To me, any talk of distance rollbacks across the board simply ignores what the USGA/R&A have very clearly stated. But bifurcation, even via an approved local rule, will require manufacturer cooperation. The market for the "reduced-distance" equipment will be pretty small if its only elite players. Manufacturers will have to decide whether the investment in research, product development, and manufacturing facilities will be worth it. It becomes a smaller issue if its only the golf ball that gets changed, but its still significant. Certainly some of manufacturers will agree, but I'm sure some will choose not to produce separate lines of stuff for elite players. This is part of the next step, getting together the Ruling Bodies, the professional tours, and the manufacturers to try to find some way that can be swallowed by all parties. And I do mean swallowed rather than accepted, I'm pretty sure the manufacturers and the pro players will fight this tooth and nail. My bet is that there are too many conflicting opinions and motivations, and that equipment-related distance reductions will not happen. We may see additional factors regulated and tested, but not rolled back.
×
×
  • Create New...