Bifurcation/Ball Roll Back Discussion

[PMookie]

3 hours ago, LICC said:

4 iron to 7 iron is a thirty-plus yard difference. That is an unrealistic straw man argument. Yes if someone outdrives you by 35 yards you are at a disadvantage regardless. 

And that was my original point………..

[mardukes]

2 hours ago, storm319 said:

Actually the test launch conditions are only used for calibration using a control ball manufactured by Bridgestone. From there, the calibrated swing is used to test the submitted ball and technically the only limitation for the sample ball is the total distance under that calibrated swing. Dean Snell mentioned a carry time limit in the past, but there is no mention of it in the USGA's test procedure. 

So basically this proposal will change the speed and delivery of the club in their test procedure (the distance limit will remain the same).

https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/pdf/2019/equipment-standards/TPX3006 Overall Distance and Symmetry Test Protocol.pdf

IIRC, what I read was that they were planning to change the spec on speed of head for testing from 120 mph to 127 while spin and angle were unchanged.  Spin may be a standard -- I can't see how that can be a test condition.

[cnosil]

11 minutes ago, mardukes said:

IIRC, what I read was that they were planning to change the spec on speed of head for testing from 120 mph to 127 while spin and angle were unchanged.  Spin may be a standard -- I can't see how that can be a test condition.

Launch and spin were changed also.

Current protocol - 120 MPH swing speed, 10* vertical launch, 2520 RPM and maximum carry of 317

New Protocol - 127 MPH swing speed, 11* vertical launch, 2200 RPM and maximum carry of 317

[LICC]

1 hour ago, PMookie said:

And that was my original point………..

How often do you see someone outdriven by 35 yards?

[RickyBobby_PR]

7 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

You're guessing here, none of us know exactly what will happen.  

I'm basing it on the USGA/R&A news release.  The only time I've read 15% decrease was from some numbskull who quoted a 15-yard distance loss, per the same press release, and later in the article said something about a 15% loss of distance.  Math is apparently not his strong suit.  If you can find a responsible prediction for 15% distance loss, I'd be interested to read it.  

Since we don’t know what will bappen, yes it’s a guess but rumors are AJGA are on board with it, once these types of organizations go to it there will be a trickle down effect and eventually the ball will have to be sold to the public so that there is access to the ball.

Right now the ball manufacturers have no financial incentive to make the ball. Tour pros don’t pay for their balls. It takes away marketing and commercials as well. Their only incentive to make it is if there’s a market to sell too which would become any amateur with the desire to play in these higher level comps, there won’t be anything from clubs saying their club championships will use the mlr. Now when most of the club plays in that event they will have to switch. Once that ball gets rolling there’s no incentive to sell the current balls and now the usga has changed the game for all golfers

350 is a convenient number for the usga to use to make a point since there’s nobody averaging 350 on tour nor has there been. But even with those numbers that’s just over 6.5% decrease in distance. Distance isn’t only impacted in the driver with this change it will cause a loss of distance throughout the bag.

5 hours ago, Albatrass said:

According to the USGA greens committee report of 2022 there are 2,300 golf courses in the U.S. that have 18 holes over 7,000 yards.  Something needs to be done to change the mindset that courses need to longer.  They are not finically sustainable unless they are only considering a more affluent golfer.  I do not have that kind of budget.  I belive that increasing the size of the ball will help.  They can still modify dimple patterns to make them straighter.  It has been done in the past.  Thanks and have a very nice day.

 

Courses that the everyday golfer plays aren’t even remotely in danger of having to increase their tee boxes due to distance. The average golfer hits the ball under 250 yards. 
 

Of all the courses that are tour which is less than 100 there’s a very small percentage of them that are in danger of this supposed distance issue. So no there’s no courses that can’t sustain their course and if there’s anyone having to pay more it’s new course owners that are trying to get a pga tour event because they have to buy more land to build the course. If they used creative design they wouldn’t need to buy more property. 
 

So again this is a contrived problem by the ruling bodies to come up with a solution.

[GolfSpy BOS]

39 minutes ago, LICC said:

How often do you see someone outdriven by 35 yards?

I guess any tournament that Rory is playing against on of these guys… on average this year he is 35+ yards longer.

 

[LICC]

1 hour ago, GolfSpy_BOS said:

I guess any tournament that Rory is playing against on of these guys… on average this year he is 35+ yards longer.

 

200 player difference. You just supported my point. 

[GolfSpy_APH]

Almost wish I could retroactively have made a poll for this thread to see where it all lays out and get an overview on how everyone feels on this although from reading most the comments I think I can see where the majority lies. 

[Dog Faced Pony Soldier]

I believe bifurcation will result in non-conforming equipment becoming more common and accepted by casual golfers. If bifurcation becomes reality, why would casual non-competitive players care if they had conforming grooves in their wedges, or an extra-capable driver? 

[GolfSpy_APH]

Me being torn on both sides of this and trying to sort out which way I want to really lean into. 

[Dog Faced Pony Soldier]

Bifurcation will probably ruin the already-limited interest in long drive competitions. 

[Golfzilla70]

The bifurcation thoughts are all about strategy.  At one time, probably as late as 2000 or earlier, it was very important to be able to hit the ball both long and accurate (in the fairway).  With the advent of the prov1-ball types, and the 460 cc face-flexing drivers that technology has given us today, the game has gotten imbalanced.  It's a given that all the guys on tour can chip and putt.  You have to almost have mastery of that to even be on the tour.  That hasn't changed.  Abilities to hit irons accurately hasn't really changed.  Sure, with science we have irons that are able to launch higher or lower, and spin more or less, are out there, but just because a number is stamped on the bottom of an iron hasn't really changed player skill levels.  But the pros ability to just swing a driver with abandon, seemingly without worry about accuracy, is where the game has gone.  Sure, they could fix the courses to punish inaccurate shots.  But with the "temporary immovable object" rule allowing those guys to take free drops basically sideways, it's a problem.

[IzakFouche]

I can not believe how small minded some people are.  Why not just narrow up the fairways, build smaller greens and grow out the rough.  Like real rough, not this hit me in the rough and the ball actually goes further.  Build smaller greens or at least narrow you cutting down for tournaments,  will put the focus back on accurate second shots.. Before anyone attacks me, I come from a green keeping background as well and you can my the golf courses so touch even pros will struggle.  Distance is not the problem.

[Bunkershotbirdie]

Why change the ball when all you need to do is make the fairway grass length longer so the ball does not roll 40 yards.  You can also make the greens smaller by adding more fringe or rough around the edges.  All that saves on some maintenance cost.  Also, any changes to the ball will just add more cost for us mortals to pay for the R&D for the pros.

[joedeausen]

On 3/15/2023 at 9:03 AM, GolfSpy_APH said:

I doubt that one ball will be for all. Or one company. Various companies will make balls that meet the new standards. Still will have different characteristics, spin windows and more. 

Agree unfair for one company to make all of them.

How's this even going to work at the retail level?  If I'm trying to qualify as an amateur for the US Open, I suppose I would have to comply with the "reduced distance ball" at all the qualifying events.  Are retailers going to stock their shelves with the reduced distance ball?  I can see this now.  .... Come to the PGA Tour Store/Dicks/mom&pop to buy your "reduced distance ball"?  Right, who is gonna buy it?  And, the mom and pop stores aren't gonna have the shelf space for a product with a very limited customer base.  As for the smaller golf ball manufacturers (i.e, Direct to Consumer), how are they gonna handle the logistics of being in the "reduced distance" golf ball market?   They're gonna make a golf ball that almost no one buys.  I highly doubt it.     For something like this to work, the major ball manufacturers would be the only likely producers due to the limited target customer for "reduced distance" golf balls.    For the Professionals, they would have to keep two stocks of golf balls:  One for events using the "reduced distance" golf ball, and the other for the rest of the tournaments with the regular distance golf ball.  Bifurcation is going to be a logistics nightmare for the golf ball manufacturers, golf professionals, and regular "joe" golfers wishing to qualify for the "elite golf tournaments."

[Albatrossx3]

First I dont get all the whining about this, JT and Spieth et al are dead wrong.  20 yards off the tee will do nothing to change the pro game, one more club into holes will do little.  But the change will do a whole lot to protect the overall health of the game.  Golf is at a cross roads, and has been, yes it has grown because of covid, but the environmental impact of golf courses has constantly been under attack.  Land water and chemical use is critical to the health of the game, if it is perceived to be using too much of these resources  (add in fuel for mowers) the backlash could kill the game.  It is this sustainability factor that has brought us here,  You can not keep lengthening courses (even if you just look at those used for pro and college events, which is 100's in the US alone)  The cost in acquiring land if available and in many areas it is not would make these courses too expensive to survive.  Do you want to play somewhere like Copperhead, for 6 or 700 to cover the increased cost?  Pebble 2 grand,  see my point.   

And growing the rough is not a solution, it still costs water and chemicals that are sometimes scarce, and takes weeks, do you want to spend your hard earned money to play a course getting ready for a tour event where you lose a ball every time you miss the fairway or a green.  I think not.

Ohio did this in 2006 for the Ohio Open, one ball, shorter the players still scored well, look it up, sure there was some adjustment, but is there not every week.   

But mark my words, if the USGA/RA dont get the ball manufacturers on board this is either dead, or everyone will be playing the slightly shorter ball (did anyone notice the last change in ball specifications, no they did not)   Because something has to be done to protect the game in general, sure nobody wants to lose a few yards off the tee, but is it worth a few yards ( that is easier to adjust the courses for) than to kill the game.   Both financially and due to increased environmental oversight.  Already I have seen several local courses purchased by the tax payer and turned into wildlife areas,  Without some adjustment in equipment (and the ball is the easiest,) the game will lose in the end. classic courses will no longer be seen, And others will be lengthened even if they are not relevant to the pro game, because the PROS play 8000  8500 yard courses.  

Nicklaus invented the Cayman ball, and a shorter course, it did not take off, but it was visionary when it came to land and resource use.   By doing nothing the USGA/RA is insuring the death of the game, mark my words.

 

[Mark In Land O Lakes]

On 2/2/2021 at 9:24 AM, PMookie said:

Well, folks, the folks at the R&A and USGA are dead-set on limiting distance now. Bifurcation is coming.

These folks are SO out-of-touch with the recreational golfer, the 99% of golfers they SUPPOSEDLY serve!

 
https://www.nationalclubgolfer.com/news/r-and-a-bifurcation-in-golf-reduce-hitting-distances/

That's ridiculous.  This won't affect recreational golfers at all right now.  The goal is to reduce the need for courses to get longer over the next 10-20 years, which increases costs for maintenance.  And guess what!  If course costs go up, greens fees go up!

[BlackjackMWV]

I disagree with the proposal.   There is no need to reign in the distance.  You can adapt golf courses for the elite to be more difficult within the tracts they play using hazards and rough.  Bifurcation should never be part of golf.

[Swing Pastor]

There's so many details left out. At what stage of their career does the ball change? Professional only? Does that include LPGA and Champions Tours? How much shorter do we need the LPGA players to be? They surely won't like this change.

Is the US Am going to go to it? Many young players will be good with the normal ball, then potentially be horrible with the slower ball. This isn't an even playing field. I have some young players that are shorter than others but have tremendous short games to make up the difference. They too, will be shorter off the tee with a new ball, still keeping them at a disadvantage. I'm already getting the questions from my high school players, they would need to get the ball now. Those kids will NEED to start playing the shorter ball in high school, so now they are going to shift their play between two sets of yardages. That's IF they are allowed to purchase the balls. If that's the case, will US Kids need to introduce the ball, making it less fun for them?

Growing the game?

Narrow the fairway. Grow the rough. Slow down the greens.

[GolfSpy BOS]

11 hours ago, LICC said:

200 player difference. You just supported my point. 

I'm not arguing for either side because I don't really know what should be done at this point.  You asked a question, so I answered it.

And those are just averages.  Which means someone hits a bomb and someone catches it a little of the toe 35 yards is quite easily possible during any given round.