Planned 2030 Golf Ball Rollback

[Chip Strokes]

26 minutes ago, jlukes said:

So tour averages have hardly budged in the last 15 years, and that graph doesn't include any correlation to player overall fitness/swing speed or advancements in club fitting and coaching due to launch monitors.

don’t bother...

[null]

11 minutes ago, LICC said:

Do you have any data or direct examples to show any correlation between player fitness and distance? I've been giving numerous examples and statistics showing otherwise.

I don’t think you know what otherwise means...

the only data you have shown is that average driving distances have remained nearly flat for the last 15 years

 

 

[LICC]

1 minute ago, jlukes said:

I don’t think you know what otherwise means...

the only data you have shown is that average driving distances have remained nearly flat for the last 15 years

 

 

And those 15 years correlate to the time the USGA implemented stricter equipment standards. So you are bolstering my view.

[null]

1 minute ago, LICC said:

And those 15 years correlate to the time the USGA implemented stricter equipment standards. So you are bolstering my view.

Right. So why are they acting like anything has changed over the last 15 years?

[LICC]

3 hours ago, StrokerAce said:

Preach!

 

From Golfweek: Asked if he would be in favor of a local rule or different rules for the pros, McIlroy said: “I would be all for that. If they want to try to make the game more difficult for us or more – try to incorporate more skill to the game, yeah, I would be all for that, because I think it only benefits the better play, which I feel like I am."

[cnosil]

Do you have any data or direct examples to show any correlation between player fitness and distance? I've been giving numerous examples and statistics showing otherwise.

Outside of Bryson there probably aren’t any documented examples that are readily found.

You show graphs related to distance do you have specific examples of players that only changed equipment and did not work to improve fitness or swing?

We can make lots of correlations that can support more distance. I don’t doubt that distance increased because of equipment. I don’t doubt that distance increased because of improved fitness. I don’t doubt that distance increased because of improved swing mechanics. I don’t doubt that distance increased because players changed their strategies on how holes are played.

Whatever the reason you want to attribute to the increase I’d distance, controlling the equipment seems like the easy answer. All you have to do is make the clubs have less COR or change the ball characteristics. Unfortunately there is more to the gains than just equipment and ignoring those other factors will result in the same problem at some undefined date in the future. We changed grooves to reduce spin and while it may have done that it didn’t change the game.

The only reason this is even a topic is because some people think a course should be played in a specific way. No matter what arguments or examples are provided the people on the other side will defend their position by saying that example isn’t relevant. The governing bodies will do what they will do. As long as there is money to be made players will adapt. If changes are made people will say enough wasn’t done or that the changes did nothing, or that they wish they would go back to player bombing it off the tee.

Ultimately this thread could go on forever with no one agreeing

[StrokerAce]

I'm just glad they didn't raise the hoop from 10 feet to 13 feet when more and more people started dunking....

[cnosil]

I'm just glad they didn't raise the hoop from 10 feet to 13 feet when more and more people started dunking....

we should make the hoop smaller, have the ball have less bounce, and raise the basket to 20 feet.

In baseball we need to give the ball less energy because players are hitting it too far. And make the ball heavier because pitchers throw it too fast. And we need to get rid of the DH, the pitcher needs to bat.

We can always find a narrative about why we don’t like something. get the ear of people in charge and you can start to influence change and make it souls like it is for the best. Everyone has an opinion and many have facts but not everyone gets what they want.

When pga players start scoring in the 50s with regularity then maybe we have a problem.

[LICC]

2 minutes ago, cnosil said:

Outside of Bryson there probably aren’t any documented examples that are readily found.

You show graphs related to distance do you have specific examples of players that only changed equipment and did not work to improve fitness or swing?

We can make lots of correlations that can support more distance. I don’t doubt that distance increased because of equipment. I don’t doubt that distance increased because of improved fitness. I don’t doubt that distance increased because of improved swing mechanics. I don’t doubt that distance increased because players changed their strategies on how holes are played.

Whatever the reason you want to attribute to the increase I’d distance, controlling the equipment seems like the easy answer. All you have to do is make the clubs have less COR or change the ball characteristics. Unfortunately there is more to the gains than just equipment and ignoring those other factors will result in the same problem at some undefined date in the future. We changed grooves to reduce spin and while it may have done that it didn’t change the game.

The only reason this is even a topic is because some people think a course should be played in a specific way. No matter what arguments or examples are provided the people on the other side will defend their position by saying that example isn’t relevant. The governing bodies will do what they will do. As long as there is money to be made players will adapt. If changes are made people will say enough wasn’t done or that the changes did nothing, or that they wish they would go back to player bombing it off the tee.

Ultimately this thread could go on forever with no one agreeing

I agree with a lot of what you said above, except that distance increased materially because of improved fitness. I don't see it at all. 

Examples of distance increases of players compared to when they played with older equipment:

Fred Couples- 2018 driving distance: 296 yards; 1990 driving distance: 272 yards

Retief Goosen- 2018 driving distance: 293  yards; 1999 driving distance: 274 yards

Scott McCarron- 2018 driving distance: 295 yards; 1995 driving distance: 271 yards

It's easy to keep going with this.

[LICC]

8 minutes ago, StrokerAce said:

I'm just glad they didn't raise the hoop from 10 feet to 13 feet when more and more people started dunking....

Bad analogy. They added the three-point line when the game was being dominated too much by big men, and changed the game.

[LICC]

4 minutes ago, cnosil said:

we should make the hoop smaller, have the ball have less bounce, and raise the basket to 20 feet.

In baseball we need to give the ball less energy because players are hitting it too far. And make the ball heavier because pitchers throw it too fast. And we need to get rid of the DH, the pitcher needs to bat.

We can always find a narrative about why we don’t like something. get the ear of people in charge and you can start to influence change and make it souls like it is for the best. Everyone has an opinion and many have facts but not everyone gets what they want.

When pga players start scoring in the 50s with regularity then maybe we have a problem.

Baseball lowered the mound when pitchers were too dominant. They just changed rules a couple of years ago on pitcher changes. They have talked about banning defensive shifts. They also changed how the ball is made in recent years. And if MLB ever went to aluminum bats it would be a disaster.

[cnosil]

I agree with a lot of what you said above, except that distance increased materially because of improved fitness. I don't see it at all. 
Examples of distance increases of players compared to when they played with older equipment:
Fred Couples- 2018 driving distance: 296 yards; 1990 driving distance: 272 yards
Retief Goosen- 2018 driving distance: 293  yards; 1999 driving distance: 274 yards
Scott McCarron- 2018 driving distance: 295 yards; 1995 driving distance: 271 yards
It's easy to keep going with this.

Whether it was 1%, 5%, 50% or more fitness designed to improve swing speed is a factor. You don’t have to agree with all of it but it is a fact.

What equipment changes resulted in Bryson gaining 20 yards since fitness played no part in those gains?

[LICC]

2 minutes ago, cnosil said:

Whether it was 1%, 5%, 50% or more fitness designed to improve swing speed is a factor. You don’t have to agree with all of it but it is a fact.

What equipment changes resulted in Bryson gaining 20 yards since fitness played no part in those gains?

Maybe it's 1% for fitness, but the data doesn't show it. But the data correlations to equipment advances are indisputable. And I'm attributing swing changes to the equipment advances, because players are swinging in a way that they couldn't do successfully with the prior equipment. When you have extremely larger clubheads with larger sweet spots, you can go harder at the ball than previously.

Bryson may be the one exception, but he also made major swing changes so you can't say it was the bulk and not the swing changes that caused his distance increases. Hard to say either way, and he has looked like he has reduced some of that bulk too.

[null]

29 minutes ago, LICC said:

I agree with a lot of what you said above, except that distance increased materially because of improved fitness. I don't see it at all. 

Examples of distance increases of players compared to when they played with older equipment:

Fred Couples- 2018 driving distance: 296 yards; 1990 driving distance: 272 yards

Retief Goosen- 2018 driving distance: 293  yards; 1999 driving distance: 274 yards

Scott McCarron- 2018 driving distance: 295 yards; 1995 driving distance: 271 yards

It's easy to keep going with this.

Why do you keep bringing up data from before 2004?  Pretty much everyone admits the solid core ball led to significant increases in distance.  Nobody is arguing it didn't.  Start pulling data from after 2005 and then we can have a discussion.

[LICC]

Just now, jlukes said:

Why do you keep bringing up data from before 2004?  Pretty much everyone admits the solid core ball led to significant increases in distance.  Nobody is arguing it didn't.  Start pulling data from after 2005 and then we can have a discussion.

The distance problem on Tour has been around for years. It isn't some new issue. It directly relates to the equipment advances from 1995-2004.

[null]

4 minutes ago, LICC said:

The distance problem on Tour has been around for years. It isn't some new issue. It directly relates to the equipment advances from 1995-2004.

Thank you for proving my point.

 

[Middler]

2 hours ago, cnosil said:

Ultimately this thread could go on forever with no one agreeing

I can guarantee that, it's a fundamental characteristic of all online forums - the older the audience the more certain no one will change anyone else’s mind in any meaningful way.

[LICC]

18 minutes ago, jlukes said:

Thank you for proving my point.

 

That if a problem is old enough we should just ignore it?

[cnosil]

Bryson may be the one exception, but he also made major swing changes so you can't say it was the bulk and not the swing changes that caused his distance increases. Hard to say either way, and he has looked like he has reduced some of that bulk too.

So the one year gain for Bryson wasn’t relate to equipment. It was related to fitness and/or swing changes.

However it is accomplished, the simple fact is you personally don’t want to look at the driver stats chart and see players over 300 yards and because that wasn’t the norm at some point in time it is because of changes to the ball and clubs.

Our point is that you can scale equipment back to temporarily make the average some number but players like Bryson will find ways to increase distance because golf strategy says to score better hit the ball farther. We have seen videos of Finau, DJ, and Rory getting significantly more distance with no equipment changes.

Again however the gains were achieved and no matter how much data is shown, the simple fact is that you (and others) don’t like it and you will show stats that support you claim and dismiss the opposite data as freakish, marketing, one off, and not real. It is impossible to separate equipment, fitness, and swing improvements to determine the amount of impact. Equipment becomes the easy focal point because you can’t tell players not to work on fitness and not to work on improving their swing.

[null]

5 minutes ago, LICC said:

That if a problem is old enough we should just ignore it?

No - that the USGA all of a sudden caring about distance being issue is a bunch of crap.  Bunch of old money courses complaining that elite tour pros make their courses look outdated.

[LICC]

3 minutes ago, cnosil said:

 

So the one year gain for Bryson wasn’t relate to equipment. It was related to fitness and/or swing changes.

However it is accomplished, the simple fact is you personally don’t want to look at the driver stats chart and see players over 300 yards and because that wasn’t the norm it is because of changes to the ball and clubs.

Our point is that you can scale equipment back to temporarily make the average some number but players like Bryson will find ways to increase distance because golf strategy says to score better hit the ball farther. We have seen videos of Finau, DJ, and Rory getting significantly more distance with no equipment changes.

Again however the gains were achieved and no matter how much data is shown, the simple fact is that you (and others) don’t like it and you will show stats that support you claim and dismiss the opposite data as freakish, marketing, one off, and not real. It is impossible to separate equipment, fitness, and swing improvements to determine the amount of impact. Equipment becomes the easy focal point because you can’t tell players not to work on fitness and not to work on improving their swing.

 

And this is where we disagree. Players today will not take equipment from 1995 and hit the distances they do today. No matter what weights they lift or swing changes they make, it wouldn't happen. Maybe they can squeeze 5 more yards, maybe. The predominant cause of the distance increases has been equipment advances, so that if equipment is modified for Tour events to scale back the distance to 2000 levels, players won't be supercharging back up to the max distances again just by weight training or swing changes.

[null]

2 minutes ago, LICC said:

And this is where we disagree. Players today will not take equipment from 1995 and hit the distances they do today. No matter what weights they lift or swing changes they make, it wouldn't happen. Maybe they can squeeze 5 more yards, maybe. The predominant cause of the distance increases has been equipment advances, so that if equipment is modified for Tour events to scale back the distance to 2000 levels, players won't be supercharging back up to the max distances again just by weight training or swing changes.

So the fast swingers get even more of an advantage.  Alienate the slower guys further.  Just because boo hoo an elite tour player drove a Par 4 at my old snobby elite private country club

[cnosil]

And this is where we disagree. Players today will not take equipment from 1995 and hit the distances they do today. No matter what weights they lift or swing changes they make, it wouldn't happen. Maybe they can squeeze 5 more yards, maybe. The predominant cause of the distance increases has been equipment advances, so that if equipment is modified for Tour events to scale back the distance to 2000 levels, players won't be supercharging back up to the max distances again just by weight training or swing changes.

Show me real examples and proof that it won’t happen. Not a marketing video where we see if someone can do something. I want to see people that have been playing equipment for that era made to today’s manufacturing tolerances.

[null]

Roll back the driver!!!!!!!

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/dustin-johnson-hit-jack-nicklaus-old-1-iron-and-persimmon-driver-really-really-far

 

[LICC]

5 minutes ago, jlukes said:

Roll back the driver!!!!!!!

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/dustin-johnson-hit-jack-nicklaus-old-1-iron-and-persimmon-driver-really-really-far

 

He used a modern ball, so take 10-15 yards off, and that's about the same as Jack would drive it in his prime, and about 30-40 yards shorter than DJ can drive it with modern equipment.

Edited February 4, 2021 by LICC

[null]

8 minutes ago, LICC said:

He used a modern ball, so take 10-15 yards off, and that's about the same as Jack would drive it in his prime, and about 30-40 yards shorter than DJ can drive it with modern equipment.

Great - but that isn't the argument the USGA is making.  They have this BS narrative about putting skill back into the game.  DJ is still going to drive the ball relatively further than the field.  Same with Bryson, Rory, etc.

Equipment rollback doesn't FIX anything in terms of competitive balance or certain skills mattering more.  All it does is make a bunch of rich old people feel better about the exclusive golf courses they belong to

As Rory said yesterday: "It reeks of self-importance"

[LICC]

3 minutes ago, jlukes said:

Great - but that isn't the argument the USGA is making.  They have this BS narrative about putting skill back into the game.  DJ is still going to drive the ball relatively further than the field.  Same with Bryson, Rory, etc.

Equipment rollback doesn't FIX anything in terms of competitive balance or certain skills mattering more.  All it does is make a bunch of rich old people feel better about the exclusive golf courses they belong to

Tour golf has always had those who could hit longer distances than others. The argument is that with the state of equipment today, most of the Tour doesn't have to play the courses strategically anymore, and the advantage for long hitters is even more extreme now.

[null]

6 minutes ago, LICC said:

Tour golf has always had those who could hit longer distances than others. The argument is that with the state of equipment today, most of the Tour doesn't have to play the courses strategically anymore, and the advantage for long hitters is even more extreme now.

Being long is a strategy.  Being closer to the hole after your drive makes it easier to hit your approach shots closer, which makes it easier to get down in less putts.  No amount of roll back will change that.  Just because strokes gained didn't exist in the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s doesn't meant that driving the ball wasn't the most important component of golf back then either.

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/why-jack-nicklaus-in-his-prime-would-dominate-modern-day-golf-too

Quote

“He rarely had to take anything out of his golf bag but his driver, wedge, putter and towel. …"

That quote is about Jack Nicklaus and the 1963 PGA Championship...

[cnosil]

Tour golf has always had those who could hit longer distances than others. The argument is that with the state of equipment today, most of the Tour doesn't have to play the courses strategically anymore, and the advantage for long hitters is even more extreme now.

And at the end of the day so what?

[LICC]

1 minute ago, jlukes said:

Being long is a strategy.  Being closer to the hole after your drive makes it easier to hit your approach shots closer, which makes it easier to get down in less putts.  No amount of roll back will change that.  Just because strokes gained didn't exist in the 70s, 80s and 90s doesn't meant that driving the ball wasn't the most important component of golf back then either.

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/why-jack-nicklaus-in-his-prime-would-dominate-modern-day-golf-too

 

Being long relative to others is a skill. Jack's length was a big advantage. Today, 20+ guys on Tour can overpower a normal Tour course with distance.