Distance Issue

[revkev]

I filled out both surveys. It's pretty clear that the USGA and R and A are going to attempt some sort of distance rollback.

 

While I like to play by the rules the reality is that I don't or more accurately that the groups that I play my competitive rounds with have set up conditions of play that are fair minded where the rules of golf may not be.

 

So depending upon whom it is with the following conditions exist - a breakfast ball and self declared Ground under repair through the green. Preferred lies in the fairway and the ball may be moved away from tree roots, slope is allowed on range finders, anchor ban and groove rule are completely ignored the former because it's too difficult to apply and leads to too many on course arguments.

 

I can't begin to imagine that the recreational golfing public will adhere to a roll back - IMO all the governing bodies will do here is create more anarchy and further the path towards bifurcation. The later already exists whether anyone wants to admit it or not. No big deal, I went to a baseball last night, they were using wooden bats and have no re-entries allowed. The ball park that i went to has a crazy set of ground rules. Half the MLB games last night allowed a DH and the other half didn't and yet more people attended games in ballparks last night than attended any of the rounds at the Tour Championship and no one complained about the rules oddities that I've heard of.

 

It's time for golf to get over itself and promote its positives.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[NiftyNiblick]

The ball park that i went to has a crazy set of ground rules.

Does it have "catwalks," Rev?

 

We're adding them to Fenway nest season--gotta stay with the times.

[null]

The fact that USGA did there study but did absolutely NOTHING to correlate the slight increases in distances to JUST equipment tells you everything you need to know about the USGA and how incompetent they are.  Not one mention of other variables such as increased player fitness and launch monitor optimization potentially impacting those numbers.

 

USGA clearly operating from this book

 

[djahubes]

Such a non issue for everyone outside of touring professionals. These chuckleheads are going to destroy recreational golf.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[RoverRick]

I took both surveys. On the USGA survey on the open ended question about how I thought distance would effect me in the further, I stated “ Shortening distance through equipment mandates by the USGA and R&A would ensure I never spent another dime that went to either of these organizations.”

 

 

Sent from my iPad using MyGolfSpy

[MaxEntropy]

When the talk of bifurcation comes up, like rev, I think of baseball. The difficulty, in my mind, if they bifurcate is enforcement at the am level. When I used to play beer-league softball, the leagues we played in specified the maximum COR (or whatever term they used for it, I don't recall) that could be used and it was up to the umpires to enforce it. For golf, I believe that becomes even harder to enforce and to try to tell players they need to go drop more money on new clubs if they want to play in a competition. I'm sure the OEM's don't want bifurcation with the amount of development costs involved, especially if you can't market the next great thing as the same club Tiger hits.

 

Rolling back equipment across the board is a bad idea, IMO. I generally don't struggle much for distance just yet, but losing 20-30 yards would suck and I don't think a 5% drop really accomplishes what they seem to be trying to do.

 

My personal feeling, which I've seen here a few times, is they need to narrow and slow the fairways and grow the rough so if Rory decides to try to pound a driver, there is a greater risk of ending up in a bad spot for a miss. Make it require a GREAT shot to end up in his desired position.

[RoverRick]

Although that's sorta an empty threat since I have already done this because of their previous rulings.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using MyGolfSpy

[adawson]

I am sick of this distance debate. Maybe because I am a younger guy and a newer golfer. The USGA seems to care way to much about the courses and old traditions. The venues don't make the game (at least in my book). There is a reason the three point line has been extended in basketball. I'm sure similar things have happened in other sports. Most games seem great with evolving and changing, but tradition steeped golf is slower than the others.

[BIG STU]

I have said this before. If the USGA rolls back the ball the ball manufacturers will go broke. There are literally billions upon billions of balls meeting today's standards out there. Most golfers play exactly like Rev stated as in they do their own thing and play by their rules. I for one am not going to switch to a declawed ball no way.

 

And Rover Rick i have not renewed my membership with the USGA for over 5 years now. This is one fat redneck that they will not get a red hot cent off of either.

[adawson]

I have said this before. If the USGA rolls back the ball the ball manufacturers will go broke. There are literally billions upon billions of balls meeting today's standards out there. Most golfers play exactly like Rev stated as in they do their own thing and play by their rules. I for one am not going to switch to a declawed ball no way.

 

And Rover Rick i have not renewed my membership with the USGA for over 5 years now. This is one fat redneck that they will not get a red hot cent off of either.

What is the reason the PGA isn't involved with USGA? I know there was debate years ago about the PGA having their own set of rules for their tournaments.

[Berg Ryman]

Bifurcate and be done with it. Jesus, it's not that hard. One set of rules for professional and elite amatuer (USGA Championships and College), one for the rest of us. 

[PlaidJacket]

I also took the surveys. Last week I think? Anyway...

 

I recall having a couple of opportunities to type in some extended comments. Basically both times I said something to the effect; that the pros need to play long courses, the fairways are too fast and need to be raised slightly, grow the rough, narrow the fairways, and corn-row the bunkers. (bunkers - and that means they stay corn-rowed during a tournament.) I also mentioned fitness (which is a good thing) as a factor.  I also said that I felt the pros could play most any course with a driver, wedge, and putter. That's not golf !! Not where I play that is.

[NiftyNiblick]

With direct marketing gradually becoming the norm, I can see club makers offering blatantly non-conforming equipment to the public, only now, I can see it becoming mainstream.

 

Don't just go by golf forum contributors. 

Most of the people with whom I played loved golf but couldn't care less about the PGA Tour stars. 

And certainly couldn't care less about playing the same equipment as the pros.

 

Half played with whatever equipment complemented their individual games the most and let them play their best

 

 

The other half didn't care about equipment at all

and bought new gear when too many clubs from their present set were broken.

 

I occasionally played with three guys--Mike, Pio, and Peter-- who had a grand time on the course but never bothered to keep score.

 

Too high COR faces,

cover shredding grooves,

hot, 1.62" golf balls,

and whatever number of clubs fit in the bag

could all become commonplace

 

and then we'll have two completely different sets of recreational players

whose paths may hardly ever cross at all

because the serious players will still be around as well.

 

Trifurcation???

 

Maybe a new, less traditional-thinking sanctioning body will rise up to challenge the USGA for course and player affiliations.

 

Or, golf participation will continue to decline and none of this will happen.

Who knows?

[THEZIPR23]

Bifurcation would be the worst thing IMO for golf. It would increase the cost of everything and move more people away from the game based on financial reasons. The USGA/RA have been the biggest contributors to their so called distance problem by allowing courses to be set up in a way that favors distance over accuracy. Distance increases are inevitable as humans continue to evolve. In relation to other sports distance has seen less of an evolution compared to others.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[palvord]

Why does it matter that current pro players can hit the ball further than the players of the past? The purpose of the game is still the same. Put the ball in the hole in the least amount of strokes possible compared to the field.

 

To me, this is like people arguing against the forward pass rule being brought to football or the addition of the 3 point line in basketball.

 

Also, pro golfers today are never going to be like the pro golfers of prior eras, no matter the technology you make them utilize. They care more about fitness, have access to better information, and have found a way to play better than others in the past.

 

At the end of the day, all sports evolve. What makes the evolution of the golf ball and club so abhorrent?

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[kardboard.kid]

The only comparison to this whole thing, not all basketball players can slam dunk with style, or at all. Some shoot 3's like at home in the driveway. You don't see the basket being raised, or three point line moving backwards. It's what makes the game fun to watch. Let those who can drive long. It's what the public wants to see, isn't it?

 

Sent from my XT1635-01 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[Mr. 82]

I've often suggested that the only organization with enough clout and power to implement changes is Augusta National Golf Club. How so? Along with the invitation they send out to their competitors in the Masters is a note stipulating that each competitor will receive 4 dozen golf balls upon arriving at the club for both practice and play during the tournament. No marking on the ball, other than the player's name and the Masters logo. It will be a ball limited to whatever specs ANGC implements.

 

What? You refuse to play the Masters ball because of your sponsors? Best of luck to you in your other golfing endeavors. It's honestly as simple as that.

 

Unfortunately this whole debate is as simple as following the money. The governing bodies are already so grossly whored out to manufacturers and other corporate sponsors that they are too busy counting their 7 figure salaries to truly do what is in the best long term interest of the game.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[revkev]

I am sick of this distance debate. Maybe because I am a younger guy and a newer golfer. The USGA seems to care way to much about the courses and old traditions. The venues don't make the game (at least in my book). There is a reason the three point line has been extended in basketball. I'm sure similar things have happened in other sports. Most games seem great with evolving and changing, but tradition steeped golf is slower than the others.

Thank you!

 

And at THEZPR23 how exactly would bifurcation (which already exists under the guise of conditions of play or local rules) add to cost? I'm not seeing it - if anything you could argue that it would reduce cost, I would think.

 

The solution is so simple - let the tours police themselves. The USGA has little trouble protecting par through its course set up - certainly the Tours can set courses up to produce the winning scores that it would like at its venues also.

 

They've made two significant changes to the game over the past decade and we are loosing players. Granted there are other factors involved but you have to think that their hijinks are part of it.

 

Make the game play faster and more fun to play - that's what's needed

 

@Nifty - the Trop has catwalks - oh does it have catwalks, some are in play, others a HR others still a foul ball. It's a hoot for opposing outfielders.

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[THEZIPR23]

And at THEZPR23 how exactly would bifurcation (which already exists under the guise of conditions of play or local rules) add to cost? I'm not seeing it - if anything you could argue that it would reduce cost, I would think.

Maybe I am wrong but someone has to pay for all the equipment costs, R & D, Labor, manufacturing etc. Who is going to pay for Taylormade to make Tiger a new club that conforms to these rules? Or Bridgestone to make a new ball? We know it's not going to be him. It is going to be us and majority of golfers will not benefit. It will be worked into the cost of retail clubs IMO. 

[SteddyGolf]

A football is a football, a basketball is a basketball, and a baseball is a baseball. The players using these objects don't, for the most part, get to select the brand, type or technology. These sports attempt to standardize equipment to eliminate deviation while increasing the importance of the player's and not the equipment's performance.

 

I like technology and love the pursuit of the perfect clubs. Still could you imagine a golf tournament where all participants had to use the same clubs and balls? Rory shows up to The Open empty handed because the tournament provides his clubs which are the exact same clubs as all other competitors?

 

On the flip side could you imagine a clean up hitter walking up to bat and tossing the catcher a baseball of his choosing? Maybe it was developed to go higher and longer or maybe it produces just line drives and ground balls.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[GB13]

The scores are staying fairly similar so I don't think there is a distance problem. Distance has pretty much plateaued after the implementation of the PV1. If they want to fix what they think is a problem, have softer, narrower, fairways, longer, thicker rough, and hard greens.

The rough at East Lake screwed with a lot of people last week and made them hit more conservative clubs off the tee to find the fairway. That seems to be the logical answer.

[revkev]

Maybe I am wrong but someone has to pay for all the equipment costs, R & D, Labor, manufacturing etc. Who is going to pay for Taylormade to make Tiger a new club that conforms to these rules? Or Bridgestone to make a new ball? We know it's not going to be him. It is going to be us and majority of golfers will not benefit. It will be worked into the cost of retail clubs IMO.

I see your point but we only have to pay if we buy equipment from them. I'm not - when I first started playing golf all the equipment was basically the same so you kept your clubs forever.

 

I could live with my current set as my forever set with no problem - just reshaft it when I get older.

 

Of course OEMs are likely to go bonkers with their non conforming equipment if this roll back happens and they have half a brain.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[PMookie]

I did both as well. All a rollback on amateurs would do is drive more from the game. Manufacturers might like it... Two sets of equipment (legal/illegal), two sets of balls, etc.

Didn't the USGA partner with TaylorMade on that HUGE cup a few years back? If so, their track record is remarkable.

How about spending time getting more people playing golf?! Ya THINK?!

 

Now get off my lawn.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[NiftyNiblick]

On the flip side could you imagine a clean up hitter walking up to bat and tossing the catcher a baseball of his choosing? Maybe it was developed to go higher and longer or maybe it produces just line drives and ground balls.

 

 

I don't know about today, but when I was in college and went to the football games, that absolutely DID happen in inter-conference games.

 

One team would use a Wilson football on offense and the other would use a Spalding.

I don't know about now, but that was definitely done then because it was the type of odd thing that would catch my interest.

 

It would be less likely in baseball, I suppose, because the defense puts the ball into play..

[Justinius]

I personally believe that a rollback or bifurcation would be horrible for the game! For one, statistics show that for amateurs, distance has slightly decreased over the last few years. The only area that has shown an increase is on tour. Which leads to my next point...

If there were separate rules for professional equipment and amateur equipment, many of the tour events and players would begin losing sponsors. Titelist, Cobra, Ping, Taylormade, etc. could no longer say "play the same club that your favorite pro plays". That is a huge marketing strategy that they would lose if the rules were bifurcated. In addition, a rollback would eliminate the second biggest marketing strategy of pushing equipment improvements year after year. Because of this, I can see the equipment manufacturers putting their money where their mouth is and fighting any rollback or bifurcation tooth and nail.

[Shankster]

Sure they can roll the ball back 1.5% but bring back anchored putters, and square grooves, and divots in the FAIRWAY are ground under repair.

 

What a crock of shite.

 

Who needs rules anyways.

[revkev]

I'd support efforts to continue to slow the advances in golf equipment including balls, but I'm not in favor of bifurcation. The biggest jumps in distance happened decades ago (earlier thread) and not as much in the last 10+ years so I don't understand why it's a big issue now? So equipment/ball makers have to have dual lines? And how will they police recreational players, will leagues and groups split into elite amateur and recreational amateurs? Not sure how that could be good for the game...

 

And when do better players have to go to the throttled back clubs and balls? Pros only, college, high school varsity, accomplished juniors?

Every other major sport does it without issue and golf used to. There were significantly different rules under the R and A than under the USGA in regards to the golf ball. It made it so that American pros had to play the European ball when there or be at a huge disadvantage.

 

At any rate it's easy enough to avoid bifurcation because “local” rules are built into the rules themselves as a category. It already exists it's just not called that.

 

If there really is a concern about distance deal with it at that level or this will get out of control quickly and then there will be true bifurcation and no governing body to help.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[Kenny B]

I did both surveys.  Both were a little leaning to one side of the issue or the other, but the MGS survey questions were more in line with the everyday golfer's point of view... as it should be I guess.

 

I'm of the opinion that the ball should NOT be rolled back.  There is no issue.  Pros will get bigger, stronger, faster over time.  Roll the ball back now, roll it back again a few years from now.  Why change?  Control the pro game by tournament conditions.  If the tournament sponsors want low scores, give them firm, wide fairways and low rough.  If higher scores are the golf du jour, then soften and narrow the fairways, grow the rough, and firm up the greens.  It's not rocket science.

[Kenny B]

Has anyone ever determined how much a rolled-back ball for the pros would affect amateurs with slower swing speeds?  

 

Just like advancements in golf technology, changes usually benefit players with higher swing speeds more than those with slow swing speeds.  The roll-back of the ball probably may not  affect the slower swingers as much.  However, any loss is not OK in my book.

 

If the slow speed swingers are affected significantly, imagine what it will cost to add shorter tee boxes forward of the forward tees. No one (myself included) likes to play from tees where getting to many par 4's in two shots isn't possible.  Unfortunately, that's already the case for many slow speed swingers.  If the ball is rolled back and more forward tees are not added, golf participation will decline.  

[Puttingmatt]

I want to thank MGS for their better worded survey. Much cleaner than that biased USGA survey. I am not a long hitter off the tee, 220 yards. It seems from what I have read about, that a 15% to 20% rollback is being considered. For golfers like myself, it would decimate my game.

How in the hell is that going to be fun for anyone, or grow the game. The avearge golfer already knows that answer.