Jump to content
TESTERS WANTED! ×

NPG Episode 42: Should The Golf Ball Be Rolled Back?


Recommended Posts

On 6/23/2020 at 8:52 AM, Middler said:

Another good NPG video. I really like all the guys (and girl) and their POVs are informative. However I’m not sure I agree with a couple points on rolling back the ball.

I don’t think having 8000 yard courses is an answer, who will build and $ support these courses that no one but pros play? I guess they could have forward tees for the rest of us, but placing hazards would be tougher.

And I think the ramifications of letting some classic old courses fall off the pro calendar might have greater consequences than noted. St Andrews was mentioned. But isn’t part of the attraction (and premium rates) of playing St Andrews (and every classic course) for the rest of us that it’s the same course pros contest The Open on? If pros no longer play there, eventually amateurs won’t be as interested in playing there either, and it’s a downward spiral?

FWIW, I don’t think bifurcation is the answer. I like the MGS suggestion to just narrow fairways and grow rough out past 300 yards - try it for a year and see. 

Professional basketball, football, baseball, tennis and pro athletes from every other sport can perform at a level far beyond 99.99% of amateurs. No one is trying to ratchet them back. Yes it’s odd to reach par 5’s in 2, but they’ve gotten that good. I admire Nicklaus but it’s a little disingenuous that he’s criticizing today’s players length when he had a distance advantage most of his career (not suggesting that was his only advantage).

Talk about slowing the game down.  18 holes of looking for lost balls.  Goodby 4 to 41/2 hour rounds.  Hello 5 to 6 hour rounds.  I like having a chance to find my ball in the rough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/22/2020 at 3:53 PM, Stevens24 said:

The first issue to address is fairway roll. I have no problem with 300-320 yard carries. What gets crazy is those carries and then 35-40 yards of roll. I have never played a course set up with that much roll during regular play. More penal rough off of the fairway and around the greens. 

PGA pro's are going to score and a winning score of -15 to 20 for a regular tournament is fine. 

I am not a pro and can't hit one that far.  To accommodate those that do they have built longer courses that require bigger green fees.  So yes I would like to see a restricted flight ball to help control spiraling cost to play.  Again higher rough the more time you add to playing a round of golf.

Edited by Albatrass
another reason
Link to comment
Share on other sites

100% do not think the ball should be rolled back. Goes to all the points that everyone continues to make, grow the rough or tighten the fairways or both so theres a premium on fairways hit, make tougher pin placements, etc. The best golfers in the world are still missing cuts and shooting par.

Sent from my SM-G950U using MyGolfSpy mobile app

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Albatrass said:

Talk about slowing the game down.  18 holes of looking for lost balls.  Goodby 4 to 41/2 hour rounds.  Hello 5 to 6 hour rounds.  I like having a chance to find my ball in the rough.

OK, then what’s your alternative since this is a thread on dealing with the distance question?

  • Titleist TSR2 11° HZRDUS Red CB 50 6.0 w Lamkin UTx Midsize
  • Titleist TSR2 16.5º HZRDUS Red 60 CB 6.0 & TSR2 21º HZRDUS Black 4G 70 6.0 w Lamkin UTx Midsize
  • Mizuno JPX923 HMP 4-GW, T22 54.12WS, T22 58.04DC w Lamkin ST+2 Hybrid Midsize
  • Evnroll EV5.3
  • Maxfli Tour & ProV1
  • Ping Pioneer - MGI Zip Navigator AT
  • Payntr X 002 LE, Ecco Biom C4, FJ DryJoys
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to be so late getting into this, I have just a few comments.

On 6/23/2020 at 6:32 PM, THEZIPR23 said:

There is a breaking point somewhere in golf due to the limits of the courses, that is different from other sports. IMO we are probably only 1 generation away from the breaking point. So yes there will probably have to be something that changes. What do you propose they do?

I think that for the huge majority of golfers, we are decades away from having any real problems due to the lack of length in golf courses.  Driving distance for amateurs is creeping up, but most courses remain completely relevant for damn near every single golfer.

On 6/23/2020 at 6:38 PM, yungkory said:

This. I'm not going to enjoy golf if I start hitting it shorter. I'm not particularly long (that's what she said) to begin with, don't need help making the game harder.

I started out hitting it shorter, with wooden woods and balata balls.  I don't support decreasing distance from equipment, but if it happens, most golfers will continue to play.  We'll complain, of course, but we'll play.

14 hours ago, Albatrass said:

Talk about slowing the game down.  18 holes of looking for lost balls.  Goodby 4 to 41/2 hour rounds.  Hello 5 to 6 hour rounds.  I like having a chance to find my ball in the rough.

The talk of toughening the course is for the very top level of players.  The courses you and I play will probably remain unaffected.  

The distance issue is an issue of image for the top level of players.  They've increased their distance to the point where their tactics are completely foreign to many of us, and many of us don't like that.  To me, that's simple evolution of the game, I'm not crazy about it but I can live with it.  If a tournament organizer (PGA Tour, USGA, PGA of America, whoever) decides to taper fairways, let the grass grow, anything to penalize distance without accuracy, that would be great in my view.  That's not something the USGA or R&A can regulate.  

The distance also causes an issue with developers and owners and architects, because of the image of "tournament length".  Even good scratch players don't need 7500 yard courses to be properly challenged, but when someone is planning and building a new course, he may think that he needs to make it long enough to challenge Rory and Bryson and Dustin.  He doesn't, but he still may feel the pressure.  

I fully support efforts and research to minimize future equipment-related distance gains.  I oppose rolling anything backwards, and I would hate to see bifurcation.  I don't think bifurcation is practical, for a number of different reasons.  Roll-backs are possible, but unlikely, based on the currently stated intentions of the R&A and USGA.

 

:titleist-small: Irons Titleist T200, AMT Red stiff

:callaway-small:Rogue SubZero, GD YS-Six X

:mizuno-small: T22 54 and 58 wedges

:mizuno-small: 7-wood

:Sub70: 5-wood

 B60 G5i putter

Right handed

Reston, Virginia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

I fully support efforts and research to minimize future equipment-related distance gains.  I oppose rolling anything backwards, and I would hate to see bifurcation.  I don't think bifurcation is practical, for a number of different reasons.  Roll-backs are possible, but unlikely, based on the currently stated intentions of the R&A and USGA.

+1, well said. Obviously equipment manufacturers, who buy all the ads, pay pros and sponsor tournaments, won't like minimizing equipment related gains - but it has to stop somewhere.

  • Titleist TSR2 11° HZRDUS Red CB 50 6.0 w Lamkin UTx Midsize
  • Titleist TSR2 16.5º HZRDUS Red 60 CB 6.0 & TSR2 21º HZRDUS Black 4G 70 6.0 w Lamkin UTx Midsize
  • Mizuno JPX923 HMP 4-GW, T22 54.12WS, T22 58.04DC w Lamkin ST+2 Hybrid Midsize
  • Evnroll EV5.3
  • Maxfli Tour & ProV1
  • Ping Pioneer - MGI Zip Navigator AT
  • Payntr X 002 LE, Ecco Biom C4, FJ DryJoys
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Middler said:

+1, well said. Obviously equipment manufacturers, who buy all the ads, pay pros and sponsor tournaments, won't like minimizing equipment related gains - but it has to stop somewhere.

A lot of stuff has been regulated for quite a while already, and they're all surviving.  I don't know what else might be possible to test and limit, maybe assembled clubs somehow, but I think that's the way the Ruling Bodies will go.  And they'll still be marketing more forgiveness, higher or lower launch, more adjustability, whatever.  The distance report talked about collaboration with all stakeholders, I'd bet the manufacturers will be much more amenable to maintaining current distances than they would be towards bifurcation or rollbacks.

:titleist-small: Irons Titleist T200, AMT Red stiff

:callaway-small:Rogue SubZero, GD YS-Six X

:mizuno-small: T22 54 and 58 wedges

:mizuno-small: 7-wood

:Sub70: 5-wood

 B60 G5i putter

Right handed

Reston, Virginia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DaveP043 said:

A lot of stuff has been regulated for quite a while already, and they're all surviving.  I don't know what else might be possible to test and limit, maybe assembled clubs somehow, but I think that's the way the Ruling Bodies will go.  And they'll still be marketing more forgiveness, higher or lower launch, more adjustability, whatever.  The distance report talked about collaboration with all stakeholders, I'd bet the manufacturers will be much more amenable to maintaining current distances than they would be towards bifurcation or rollbacks.

Again I agree with your POV completely. But it would be interesting to see a world where equipment manufacturers could no longer legitimately claim “more distance” - they’ve been addicted to that ad copy for decades.

Callaway: A.I. Created Next Level Distance

TaylorMade:Designed to provide faster clubhead speed for more ball speed and distance...Improves ball speed across the face by calibrating each head to the threshold of the legal speed limit

Ping: Significant advancements in custom fitting while increasing both forgiveness and ball speed highlight the G410 Plus and SFT drivers.

Cobra: Cobra’s first ever CNC Milled Infinity Face delivers precision performance for faster, longer and straighter drives.

etc. etc. etc...

 

  • Titleist TSR2 11° HZRDUS Red CB 50 6.0 w Lamkin UTx Midsize
  • Titleist TSR2 16.5º HZRDUS Red 60 CB 6.0 & TSR2 21º HZRDUS Black 4G 70 6.0 w Lamkin UTx Midsize
  • Mizuno JPX923 HMP 4-GW, T22 54.12WS, T22 58.04DC w Lamkin ST+2 Hybrid Midsize
  • Evnroll EV5.3
  • Maxfli Tour & ProV1
  • Ping Pioneer - MGI Zip Navigator AT
  • Payntr X 002 LE, Ecco Biom C4, FJ DryJoys
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Middler said:

Again I agree with your POV completely. But it would be interesting to see a world where equipment manufacturers could no longer legitimately claim “more distance” - they’ve been addicted to that ad copy for decades.

Callaway: A.I. Created Next Level Distance

TaylorMade:Designed to provide faster clubhead speed for more ball speed and distance...Improves ball speed across the face by calibrating each head to the threshold of the legal speed limit

Ping: Significant advancements in custom fitting while increasing both forgiveness and ball speed highlight the G410 Plus and SFT drivers.

Cobra: Cobra’s first ever CNC Milled Infinity Face delivers precision performance for faster, longer and straighter drives.

etc. etc. etc...

 

As long as we golfers want to hit it further, they're going to market increased distance, even when the distance is limited by the rules.  Never let the truth get in the way of selling golf clubs!

:titleist-small: Irons Titleist T200, AMT Red stiff

:callaway-small:Rogue SubZero, GD YS-Six X

:mizuno-small: T22 54 and 58 wedges

:mizuno-small: 7-wood

:Sub70: 5-wood

 B60 G5i putter

Right handed

Reston, Virginia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DaveP043 said:

As long as we golfers want to hit it further, they're going to market increased distance, even when the distance is limited by the rules.  Never let the truth get in the way of selling golf clubs!

Is distance really limited by the rules? 

Bryson added distance by improving speed and optimizing launch conditions to match the speed under the current rules. DJ and other pros have picked up speed thru improved ball speed while their drivers and ball still fall within the rules.

Matt from TXG had better distance with sim over m5 and both drivers fall in the rules.

 

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Is distance really limited by the rules? 

Bryson added distance by improving speed and optimizing launch conditions to match the speed under the current rules. DJ and other pros have picked up speed thru improved ball speed while their drivers and ball still fall within the rules.

Matt from TXG had better distance with sim over m5 and both drivers fall in the rules.

Ball speed is limited under a specific testing regimen.  COR of driver heads is limited.  Those are both intended to limit the distance that equipment alone can provide.   But absolute distance is not limited, as that depends on factors that are completely beyond regulation, including a players physical attributes, swing techniques, club optimization, course conditions, etc.  The Ruling Bodies have long had a role in regulating equipment, and will continue to do so, but they cannot regulate all of those other factors.

:titleist-small: Irons Titleist T200, AMT Red stiff

:callaway-small:Rogue SubZero, GD YS-Six X

:mizuno-small: T22 54 and 58 wedges

:mizuno-small: 7-wood

:Sub70: 5-wood

 B60 G5i putter

Right handed

Reston, Virginia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Middler said:

OK, then what’s your alternative since this is a thread on dealing with the distance question?

Hope you are having a good day.  Some of the greatest pros in golf feel that the USGA and the R&A should use flight restricted golf balls.  Restricting the distance of the golf ball had been done before so a precedent has been set. An example being  a golf ball can't be a smaller diameter than The Rules of golf specify.  Dunlap made a ball that was smaller and bore through the wind that the pros used to play.  Softball is a sport that uses flight restricted balls.  To many home runs.  If flight restricted softballs are not used It would mean bigger fields would be needed so that more hit balls will be in play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I ended up mucking about with a Callaway Magma. I was quite interested in how it performed against a Supersoft.

I wonder if the way around all the IP but to still maintain the one set of rules, reduce distance... increase the minimum ball size.

Easier to hit, but increased size therefore increase wind resistance so cant hit as far, and increase spin (???), but Bridgestone can still use all their patents.

:cobra-small: LTDx LS 9*D,  HZRDUS Green HC 60g 6.0, 45" 4g + 12g weight 
:cobra-small: King LTD @ 14.5* HZRDUS Blue 70g 6.0, 42.5"
:cobra-small: King LTD  @ 17.5*, HZRDUS Blue 70g 6.0, 4
0.5"/ :cobra-small: 2022 Utility Iron 2 @ 17*, Ventus Black 10x, 39.25"

:cobra-small: 2022 Utility Iron 4 OL @ 20* Fujikura Pro Iron 115TX 36"
wishon.png.f487cdf69e368c89461d72fa6fc7bbe4.pngEQ1-NX OL 5i-PW Fujikura Pro Iron 115TX 36
"

Cobra SBOL 48*, 52*, 56* Fujikura Pro Iron 115TX 36"
OIP.jpg.04da427c8e36dc0d247492fdfa8569f6.jpgC-Series DW Armlock

Vice Pro Plus

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...