Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I'll admit I haven't read every page on this topic. But on a lighter note, the USGA and R&A can do anything they want but I don't have to adhere to their rules. There will always be clubs and balls that don't conform to their rules and specifications too. I'm going to play the game to where it's the most fun for me regardless of what they do. 

  • Like 6

Ping G410, 10.5 5.5 Evenflow , Ping G425 5 wood/ Ping Anser 20 degree hybrid/ Srixon ZX5, 5-PW/ Ping Glide 50,54, & 58ES/ Bettinardi Queen B

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 361
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I'm sure we will hear all about the evil's of bifurcation shortly but I'm not in that camp.  I played baseball in High School and College at a very interesting time.  My senior year of High School was

What do you see the average being?  250 yards? How do you limit the equipment to maintain that average over time.  I personally think you are underestimating how people adapt to change to become more

I am in the wait and see corner on this. We already have some bifurcation within golf...one ball local rule, rangefinder usage, and tee boxes to name a couple. The biggest issue is that there rea

Posted Images

4 minutes ago, braincramp said:

I'll admit I haven't read every page on this topic. But on a lighter note, the USGA and R&A can do anything they want but I don't have to adhere to their rules. There will always be clubs and balls that don't conform to their rules and specifications too. I'm going to play the game to where it's the most fun for me regardless of what they do. 

Same here. I don’t play in tournaments, so I don’t need to play equipment that abides by the guidelines set forth for tournament play. Golf is supposed to be fun. Play what helps MAKE it fun!!!!

  • Like 8

Driver: :cobra-small: King F9 Speedback, Xphlexxx Busa 2 Liquid, XX stiff, 45”

Fwy: 

Hybrid: :callaway-small: X2 Hot Pro, 20*, :Fuji: Rombax 8D07HB TM27 X

Irons: :honma:TR20 Tour P 4/5, Tour V 6-10, Dynamic Gold X100

Wedges: Vega VW-06 50*/54*/58*, Dynamic Gold S400

Putter:  :edel-golf-1: EAS 1.0

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, LICC said:

And they have now officially proposed the research and called for participants. The next step has been taken. Thus the reason it has been published as news by all the outlets. 

I see now, completely clear.

"In a few months we're going to begin to study THIS."

A year passes.

"A year has passed, COVID delayed our plans, but our study is going to start, exactly along the lines originally proposed"

WHOOOAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!  Bifurcation is coming, its right around the corner!!!

The media is making a big deal out of this because they need to fill air time.  

15 hours ago, fixyurdivot said:

It seems odd they opted to state it that way... "at all levels of the game".  Unless I have grossly missed the basis of this whole subject, it is their concern about pro tour average driving distances.  Amateur distances have never been a basis of this subject - correct? Why not clearly state this and that any equipment changes will only affect professional level golf?  Maybe it's just me, but these generic, open ended statements ("it's not currently intended", etc.) leave lots of room for speculation and churn within the golfing community. 

To the extent that the data is available, they've definitely considered data from all levels of players.  Some of the data is summarized starting on Page 18 here: 

https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/pdf/RSI/distance-insights-2021-docs/2020 Distance Report 26-01-2021.pdf

There's more information presented in the 100-page Distance Insights Report, and more detail available in the 56 additional reports in the Distance Insights Library.

In reading the Conclusions, they identify two basic fields for future study, but do not want to limit themselves.  Those two fields are:  methods through which they can stop additional equipment-related distance gains, and the possibility of developing a (voluntary) local rule to essentially bifurcate the equipment rules.  To simplify, how do we stop future increases from equipment?  Can we find a way to decrease distance for the very top level players?  We might want some guarantee that the Ruling Bodies will NEVER change global equipment rules to reduce distance, but they would be foolish to say that.  None of us knows the future, the Ruling Bodies simply don't know what could be required down the road somewhere.  I'm certain that if the USGA/R&A were to say "We'll never change the rules to decrease distance for everyone", they'd be labelled (by some of us) as liars trying to minimize PR problems.

Edited by DaveP043
  • Like 7

:titelist-small: Irons Titleist AP2 714, KBS Tour S, 3 flat

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

:vokey-small: 52, 56, and 60 wedges

:ping-small: B60 G5i putter

Right handed

Reston, Virginia

Link to post
Share on other sites

Forgot all this distance limiting. For the recreational player that don’t care about competition or handicap one of the OEMs needs to put out a driver that is the full capability of what they can do without all the restrictions and let some people have some fun!


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Forgot all this distance limiting. For the recreational player that don’t care about competition or handicap one of the OEMs needs to put out a driver that is the full capability of what they can do without all the restrictions and let some people have some fun!


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

And I am fine with this and this is what@LICC has been stating. I think it sounds fine in theory but I personally believe that If implemented it would impact the golf at all levels; not just the PGA tour. Yes, there will be people that don’t care and play whatever they want just like is done today.

If you want an illegal driver, I believe callaway marketed on for a while but it wasn’t successful or you could shave the face to make
It hotter. I think many people want to play the same equipment as pros so they can do comparisons.
  • Like 4

Driver:  :ping-small: G400 Max 9* w/ KBS Tour Driven
Fairway: :titelist-small: TS3 15* set  to 16.5* w/Project X Hzardous Smoke
Hybrids:  :titelist-small: 816H1 19* set at 18* w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
                :titelist-small: 915H  21*  w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
               :titelist-small: 915H 24*  w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
Irons:      :honma:TR20V 6-11 w/Vizard TR20-85 Graphite
Wedge:  :cleveland-small: 588 54-14, 58-12
Putter:  Bellum Winmore 787

Backups:  :bobby-grace-1: 6330, :taylormade-small:TM-180

 

Member:  MGS Hitsquad since 2017697979773_DSCN2368(Custom).JPG.a1a25f5e430d9eebae93c5d652cbd4b9.JPG

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

I see now, completely clear.

"In a few months we're going to begin to study THIS."

A year passes.

"A year has passed, COVID delayed our plans, but our study is going to start, exactly along the lines originally proposed"

WHOOOAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!  Bifurcation is coming, its right around the corner!!!

The media is making a big deal out of this because they need to fill air time.  

To the extent that the data is available, they've definitely considered data from all levels of players.  Some of the data is summarized starting on Page 18 here: 

https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/pdf/RSI/distance-insights-2021-docs/2020 Distance Report 26-01-2021.pdf

There's more information presented in the 100-page Distance Insights Report, and more detail available in the 56 additional reports in the Distance Insights Library.

In reading the Conclusions, they identify two basic fields for future study, but do not want to limit themselves.  Those two fields are:  methods through which they can stop additional equipment-related distance gains, and the possibility of developing a (voluntary) local rule to essentially bifurcate the equipment rules.  To simplify, how do we stop future increases from equipment?  Can we find a way to decrease distance for the very top level players?  We might want some guarantee that the Ruling Bodies will NEVER change global equipment rules to reduce distance, but they would be foolish to say that.  None of us knows the future, the Ruling Bodies simply don't know what could be required down the road somewhere.  I'm certain that if the USGA/R&A were to say "We'll never change the rules to decrease distance for everyone", they'd be labelled (by some of us) as liars trying to minimize PR problems.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and bet that, were we to conduct a forum poll asking "Do you feel you hit the ball too far?", it would be NO by a landslide.  I haven't looked at the non pro data in their report but, presuming it reflects what we see out on the courses we play, I'd be very surprised it would be fall into the excessive distance issue.

The R&A and USGA needs to limit this to pro level golf.  If college or other pro-like amateur players want to adopt whatever they decide, fine with me.... but leave the 97% of us mere mortals out of the mess. 

  • Like 2

:ping-small: G410 Plus, 9 Degree Driver | Official 2019 MGS Tester

:ping-small: G400 SFT, 16 Degree 3w

:ping-small: G400 SFT, 19 Degree 5w

:ping-small: G410 Irons 4-UW 

:ping-small: Glide 2.0 56 Degree SW   (removed from double secret probation 😍)

:ping-small: B61 Putter

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/5/2021 at 1:11 PM, THEZIPR23 said:

Yes, adjusting will make it difficult and extend the learning curve. I think it was Weiskopf that said he switched to the bigger ball when he was still an AM because he knew he was going to go pro and wanted to get a head start on it. The difference now being that the Amateur game is a pseudo minor leagues at this point, where as previously it was just used to get tournament experience. If they push it down to the college level to allow them to adjust during that time then IMO it will get pushed to everyone and there is no bifurcation. It is not as simple as I am playing the pro ball so I am 1 club shorter. There are so many variables that would be affected by the change. Traj, spin, flight etc...

What Weiskopf was talking about in those days you had the smaller European ball which would go like a scalded cat. Those balls were legal for play in R&A sanctioned events but not over here in USGA sanctioned events. I do not think the smaller ball was sold retail here but you could still get them. My Old Man had a Pro friend based in England who used to ship them over. He had Titleist , Penfold, Spalding Dot and Dunlop 65s shipped over. All the gamblers and hustlers used them. My Old Man made a mint off of them. And I am real sure my old man was not the only one getting them shipped over. I know usually before going over to The Open all the big name players practiced with the smaller ball because they go better into the wind and they played it over there. I remember one of our guys in Jr high got DQ for playing one because someone called him on it. He was not trying to cheat but had found the ball and after all it was a new Titleist so he played it. This guy was like our #5 player and was not really a golfer and did not know. I know it embarassed him and he quit the golf team and golf period. 

  • Like 2

Driver --- Honma G1-X Stock R Flex----  3W Callaway Steelhead UST Pro Force Gold 65 stiff--- 2 iron 1980 Macgregor VIP Nike R flex-------- Irons 3 thru PW 1980 Macgregor VIP Hogan Apex shafts--- SW Cleveland 588 Sensicore S-400-- Putter Rusty Santa Fe Bulls Eye Fluted shaft-- Bag Old School Hoofer I had in the stash--- Goes along with my raggety persona

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, fixyurdivot said:

I haven't looked at the non pro data in their report but, presuming it reflects what we see out on the courses we play, I'd be very surprised it would be fall into the excessive distance issue.

As I read things, the USGA/R&A agree with this.  That's why they have no plans to reduce distance for the vast majority of us.  

 

20 hours ago, 2puttbogey said:

Forgot all this distance limiting. For the recreational player that don’t care about competition or handicap one of the OEMs needs to put out a driver that is the full capability of what they can do without all the restrictions and let some people have some fun!

Its time for The Hammer!!

https://hammergolf.com/sp/hammer-free-official-site/?utm_campaign=brand-us&utm_source=google&utm_medium=brand&utm_content=8437,12191688621,117484878415,494853958524&gclid=Cj0KCQiAvP6ABhCjARIsAH37rbSp_1LIJkIqmuFRj7h-bBiDGsogaLlFkQRCGTmgcNLKKMFLdhkCwjsaAvFYEALw_wcB

Add 50 yards instantly!  Hit it dead straight!!

  • Like 1
  • Haha 4

:titelist-small: Irons Titleist AP2 714, KBS Tour S, 3 flat

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

:vokey-small: 52, 56, and 60 wedges

:ping-small: B60 G5i putter

Right handed

Reston, Virginia

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

As I read things, the USGA/R&A agree with this.  That's why they have no plans to reduce distance for the vast majority of us.  

 

Its time for The Hammer!!

https://hammergolf.com/sp/hammer-free-official-site/?utm_campaign=brand-us&utm_source=google&utm_medium=brand&utm_content=8437,12191688621,117484878415,494853958524&gclid=Cj0KCQiAvP6ABhCjARIsAH37rbSp_1LIJkIqmuFRj7h-bBiDGsogaLlFkQRCGTmgcNLKKMFLdhkCwjsaAvFYEALw_wcB

Add 50 yards instantly!  Hit it dead straight!!

Does one have to perfect the caveman yell in order to get all of "the hammers" distance? 😆

  • Like 2
  • Haha 5

:ping-small: G410 Plus, 9 Degree Driver | Official 2019 MGS Tester

:ping-small: G400 SFT, 16 Degree 3w

:ping-small: G400 SFT, 19 Degree 5w

:ping-small: G410 Irons 4-UW 

:ping-small: Glide 2.0 56 Degree SW   (removed from double secret probation 😍)

:ping-small: B61 Putter

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, fixyurdivot said:

Does one have to perfect the caveman yell in order to get all of "the hammers" distance? 😆

I'm assuming that there's an included  instructional video on 3.5" floppy disk that will help you to learn the yell.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 5

:titelist-small: Irons Titleist AP2 714, KBS Tour S, 3 flat

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

:vokey-small: 52, 56, and 60 wedges

:ping-small: B60 G5i putter

Right handed

Reston, Virginia

Link to post
Share on other sites

The topic of distance is a funny one because no matter what the USGA and R&A do, someone is going to be unhappy.  If they do nothing, the traditionalists will be unhappy because modern equipment is, "ruining the game" and if they do something to limit distance, the weekend hackers and pros will be unhappy because its limiting their performance.

I honestly dont know what the right answer is but I do have concerns with distance as it currently is and what it could be in the future because, as Ive said many times in the past, you cant just keep making golf courses longer and longer, for many reasons.  Some courses simply dont have the space and cant just buy up more land to make the course longer, not to mention the costs associated with watering, fertilizing and mowing more and more grass.  Especially with courses where they have limits on water usage and are in places that often face drought, its a real problem for them.  So, telling them, "just make your course longer" isnt a good solution.

I also think its an interesting one because how do you compare different eras of golf when the equipment is so different.  As someone who often plays vintage clubs, I can tell you that playing a modern, 460cc driver is vastly different than playing an old, 180cc persimmon wood.  Not to mention the difference in all the other clubs in the bag.  Really, irons are the only part of the bag where I feel that modern gear isnt lightyears better.  I'll put my old Mizuno blades up against any modern iron and feel like they would win that comparison, especially if you compare them with modern irons of similar loft.

To me, a good comparison would be baseball.  Could you imagine if they told baseball players that they could use aluminum bats?  It would turn baseball into a home run derby.  Can you imagine then, that when people complained, they told the teams to just build bigger ballparks?  It just wouldnt work and thats kind of where I feel like it is with golf.

Now, I know that Im a traditionalist.  If it were up to me, metalwoods, graphite shafts and oversize mallet putters like the Spyder would be bananed because, to me, they take away from the sporting aspect of the game, to a certain extent.  

However, you also have those who would tell you that forcing that equipment on people takes away from their enjoyment of the game and that making golf more difficult would drive people away, which is a fair argument.

Personally, I dont really care what they do but I am kind of tired of it coming up all the time.  I'll show up to the course and play with whatever gear I can and have a great time either way.  If that means that I play a ball that the pros dont play or I play a ball that only gives me 80% of my current distance; so be it.

For me, my enjoyment of golf has much more to do with just the joy of playing and not so much with the score I shoot or how far I can hit the ball.

  • Like 5

"I suppose its better to be a master of 7 than to be vaguely familiar with 14." - Chick Evans

Whats in my Sun Mountain 2.5+ stand bag?

Woods: Tommy Armour Atomic 10.5* 

Irons: Mizuno MP Fli-Hi 21* and Mizuno T-Zoid True 5, 7 and 9-irons

Wedge: Mizuno S18 Blue Ion 54*

Putter: Mizuno Bettinardi A-02

Ball: Maxfli Tour X

Link to post
Share on other sites

OK I must admit I only perused all of the comments.  I believe a few pros have been right on in indicating that course set up and  other things can be done to curb the Pro game. 

And someone help me out in explaining to me how a weekend player who is playing from tees too far back, will be changed by shortening how far his shots go.  If having to hit 3 or  4 iron approach shots into every par 4 he plays isn't enough on its own to have him move up a tee, I'm pretty sure he'll be just as likely to convince himself that he can now  get that 3 wood there.  My experience has been that people playing from the wrong tees is based on a couple of things, ego, and complete inability to accurately judge their own ability.  News Flash!  Most people who say they drive it 260 off the tee are actually only hitting it 220-235( no rule or equipment change is likely to affect this).  The guy in my example here is going to continue to play from the wrong tees, and convince himself that he can "swing harder", or that the tip he read will make up the distance "that He Should Have" ...."that he is NEVER GOING TO HAVE! 

In terms of the pro game. How about "differential risk".  How about rough 250 yards from the green(5I for pros give or take) that is 4" long, and rough 90 yards from the green that is 14" + inches deep.  Fairways 300 yards from the tee that are 15 yards wide, and at 330 yards from the tee that are 4 yards wide.  So on the 420 yard  par 4 if they want that 90 yard wedge shot, the risk is entering rough that will actually be a hindrance.  The same goes for bunkers.  How about pro fairway bunkers that actually impede the pro from reaching the green in 2 if he ends up in one.  The same for greenside bunkers, and rough.  Make accuracy count.  Make it questionable as to if they will be able to get out of either on their first shot if they go into it.  A HAZARD  should actually interfere with a pro's ability to get the ball closer to the hole.  I believe you can make accuracy count for them without monkeying with equipment design.

I agree with Rory, the weekend hacker game is still very difficult, and many who try it don't stick with it. The USGA should be promoting anything and everything to make it easier to keep people involved.

  • Like 1

Driver: :nike-small:VR Pro

Irons:  :callaway-small: Mavrik 4-GW

Wedges:  :cleveland-small: CG-14 56 & RTX 52

Putter:  :ping-small: Scottsdale Wolverine

Woods:  Gigagolf  3W, 2H, 3H

Ball:  :bridgestone-small: E12 Soft Yellow 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/7/2021 at 12:32 PM, BadgerGolfer said:

The topic of distance is a funny one because no matter what the USGA and R&A do, someone is going to be unhappy.  If they do nothing, the traditionalists will be unhappy because modern equipment is, "ruining the game" and if they do something to limit distance, the weekend hackers and pros will be unhappy because its limiting their performance.

I honestly dont know what the right answer is but I do have concerns with distance as it currently is and what it could be in the future because, as Ive said many times in the past, you cant just keep making golf courses longer and longer, for many reasons.  Some courses simply dont have the space and cant just buy up more land to make the course longer, not to mention the costs associated with watering, fertilizing and mowing more and more grass.  Especially with courses where they have limits on water usage and are in places that often face drought, its a real problem for them.  So, telling them, "just make your course longer" isnt a good solution.

I also think its an interesting one because how do you compare different eras of golf when the equipment is so different.  As someone who often plays vintage clubs, I can tell you that playing a modern, 460cc driver is vastly different than playing an old, 180cc persimmon wood.  Not to mention the difference in all the other clubs in the bag.  Really, irons are the only part of the bag where I feel that modern gear isnt lightyears better.  I'll put my old Mizuno blades up against any modern iron and feel like they would win that comparison, especially if you compare them with modern irons of similar loft.

To me, a good comparison would be baseball.  Could you imagine if they told baseball players that they could use aluminum bats?  It would turn baseball into a home run derby.  Can you imagine then, that when people complained, they told the teams to just build bigger ballparks?  It just wouldnt work and thats kind of where I feel like it is with golf.

Now, I know that Im a traditionalist.  If it were up to me, metalwoods, graphite shafts and oversize mallet putters like the Spyder would be bananed because, to me, they take away from the sporting aspect of the game, to a certain extent.  

However, you also have those who would tell you that forcing that equipment on people takes away from their enjoyment of the game and that making golf more difficult would drive people away, which is a fair argument.

Personally, I dont really care what they do but I am kind of tired of it coming up all the time.  I'll show up to the course and play with whatever gear I can and have a great time either way.  If that means that I play a ball that the pros dont play or I play a ball that only gives me 80% of my current distance; so be it.

For me, my enjoyment of golf has much more to do with just the joy of playing and not so much with the score I shoot or how far I can hit the ball.

Basically I am like you I play my persimmon and blades but also play the modern stuff too. As far as  banning something outright like I said earlier most golfers could care less what the powers that be do. They are going to do what you and I do play what they want. Now I learned something when I was hurt and healing up. I sat darn near everyday on the patio at my course drinking coffee and smoking a cigar. I can see our 10th tee and 18th green. One thing I observed darn near everyone regardless of age can basically hit a modern driver. And I have seen hybrids save the game so to speak for a lot of older players. My hatred of the USGA started with the anchor ban. Lots of older retirees putted with them because of back issues or the shakes due to meds. When the Anchoring ban took effect a lot of the folks were going to quit league play if not the game all together. What most of the clubs here did was make the long putters legal for league play anchored or non anchored. Yep the courses stood to lose a lot of money if say even 20% of the retirees quit playing the game. My now home course would have been a prime example with 2 men's member groups and 2 Ladies members groups. Yep the USGA is not in touch with the golfing public period nor are they interested about the welfare of golf courses

  • Like 4

Driver --- Honma G1-X Stock R Flex----  3W Callaway Steelhead UST Pro Force Gold 65 stiff--- 2 iron 1980 Macgregor VIP Nike R flex-------- Irons 3 thru PW 1980 Macgregor VIP Hogan Apex shafts--- SW Cleveland 588 Sensicore S-400-- Putter Rusty Santa Fe Bulls Eye Fluted shaft-- Bag Old School Hoofer I had in the stash--- Goes along with my raggety persona

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/2/2021 at 9:30 PM, FrogginBullfish said:

For me it's less about the actual bifurcation than it is that I just flat-out disagree with the reasoning they're pushing for implementing it. I don't think distance is an issue, but rather people are making it an issue by refusing to adapt to the way the modern game is played. When you have architects who are unwilling to adapt their so-called design intent, which is another rabbit hole I don't wish to go down at this point, but would instead just rather take the hard earned distance advantage away from someone like Bryson so they feel better about the number on the bottom of the club he hit into a green, it's not something I can get behind.

Golf is a game built around getting the ball in the hole in the fewest strokes possible. How you get there shouldn't matter. There's a lot of ways to shoot the same score in golf. But it still takes a complete game to win on tour. Time and time again we see this reflected in the player hoisting the trophy at the end of the week.

This is just my opinion of course and I've gotten involved in far too many Twitter discussions on the topic in the past that have basically gone nowhere. I don't expect my take to sway any opinions here either on this topic but I'm sharing it anyway<a href="https://hithills.com/">.</a>

Sent from my Pixel 2 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

nice to read this

Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, alina robert said:

nice to read this

Architects changing course design to deal with only the .001% of Tour golfers would lead to an even worse result than when Trent Jones started doing just that years ago- boring one-dimensional courses. Having courses with strategic choices, risk-reward decisions, choices on angles, etc is preferable to penal, one target setups. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, LICC said:

Architects changing course design to deal with only the .001% of Tour golfers

Architects are changing course designs to make the new courses marketable to consumers like us.  Too many golfers don't want to visit or join a course unless its "championship caliber", and a big part of that judgement is based on length from the tips.  It doesn't matter that players will never play the tips, they want a championship experience.

  • Like 4

:titelist-small: Irons Titleist AP2 714, KBS Tour S, 3 flat

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

:vokey-small: 52, 56, and 60 wedges

:ping-small: B60 G5i putter

Right handed

Reston, Virginia

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

Architects are changing course designs to make the new courses marketable to consumers like us.  Too many golfers don't want to visit or join a course unless its "championship caliber", and a big part of that judgement is based on length from the tips.  It doesn't matter that players will never play the tips, they want a championship experience.

The trend for twenty+ years has been away from the “Championship”, Tour-ready difficulty course designs toward more minimalist, naturalist, wider fairways, and more strategic option designs. Design has moved away from the Trent Jones, Rees Jones, early Nicklaus styles to the Coore and Crenshaw, Tim Doak, Gil Hanse styles. David McClay Kidd started that way, got heavy criticism for moving to more difficult setups, and responded with changing again to courses with the massively wide fairways and different playing options. Nicklaus has adjusted his style with the times. The highest profile courses, public and private, in the last 20 years have been in this style. 

Edited by LICC
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, LICC said:

The trend for twenty+ years has been away from the “Championship”, Tour-ready difficulty course designs toward more minimalist, naturalist, wider fairways, and more strategic option designs. Design has moved away from the Trent Jones, Rees Jones, early Nicklaus styles to the Coore and Crenshaw, Tim Doak, Gil Hanse styles. David McClay Kidd started that way, got heavy criticism for moving to more difficult setups, and responded with changing again to courses with the massively wide fairways and different playing options. Nicklaus has adjusted his style with the times. The highest profile courses, public and private, in the last 20 years have been in this style. 

Yea gonna disagree there. Can kind of sim it up better from this article. Last paragraph on putting in championship conditions. I would be willing to bet if a local course claimed “these conditions are like (insert any professional course) come down and play” we would all go down and play.....
A705D7CA-9C16-4E2A-97BC-541E6396DD63.jpeg.91403ee8cedcdd7845ba600434971276.jpeg

https://www.google.com/amp/s/golf.com/travel/5-key-golf-course-design-features-pros-amateurs/amp/

  • Like 5

Check out my reviews

 :ping-small: G710 Irons Lacassem official review

WITB:

 :taylormade-small: FlexTech is filled with all this shiny metal and tracked by :Arccos::

:cobra-small: RadSpeed 8* - MotoreX F1 6X I :taylormade-small: SIM 3W - Project X HZRDUS Green 

 :taylormade-small: 2019 P790 4-PW - Project X 6.5 LZ I :titelist-small: 48 SM8 - Nippon Modus 125 S 

:titelist-small: 52, 56, 60 SM7 - Nippon Modus 125 S :odyssey-small: O-Works 1W I :titelist-small: PROV1X #19 

🇺🇸Thank you to all those that have served/are serving and God Bless America 🇺🇸

Link to post
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.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.

×
×
  • Create New...