Bifurcation/Ball Roll Back Discussion

[nv00021]

On 2/2/2021 at 10:07 AM, Shapotomous said:

I never really understood the distress over bifurcation. 

Most sports have rules & equipment differences between professional and non professional ranks, between mens and womens leagues of the same sport and rules differences between USA leagues and international play for some sports as well.  Whatever level you want to play at just use the approved equipment and play by the rules established for that competition.  

 

I am going to have to disagree that it will not hurt the game respectfully. First, there is nothing broken about golf. They have capped the length of the drivers, and the ball is now where the focus has shifted and can also be capped at this point. I don't know where to begin with so many points here. Let's start with other sports. There are so many complaints that we do not have enough scoring or excitement in our pro sports....not many want to go to a baseball game and see a 1-0 game (I am a purist and love defence, so I am not in this category) or a 6-3 NFL game. Several rule changes have increased the excitement/scoring in all professional sports. Direct correlation.... no one wants to pay to see a PGA pro hit a 280-yard drive..... hell I can do that!!! Golf is NOT broken.... it's actually getting much better. LIV has escalated the level that the PGA Tour is paying their members and, in turn, more drama in the events this year. Also..... amateur golf is also thriving. I am in Toronto, Canada, and our courses are packed.... Junior and Mid-Am events have 100-deep wait lists. Sadly, the price of golf has exploded with it. Golf is thriving.

Now why bifurcation is bad..... Pros today are athletes of the highest calibre. They are not the pros of even 20 years ago. They train extensively, and it shows. Hitting drives of 330+ are amazing to watch.... all being done with the exact same equipment I can use!!!! This is a great thing. I don't want the pros using a different ball or even clubs that I can not obtain. This is something that is so perfect about golf. I can play Sawgrass the week after they play it..... it's almost the same condition with the same ProV1 at a length that my 55-year-old swing can handle, and see what I can do.... it's pure sports. I can not play at Yankee Stadium or the Boston Garden, but I can play Copperhead on Tuesday.  Why would bifurcation benefit the sport in any way? Do we cap how hard a baseball player can hit a ball? Decompress a puck? I get we cannot have 8,000-yard courses, and in some insane logic, we are preserving the environment more by maintaining the length of courses (I can't get my head around that). 

There is no benefit to bifurcation, and it will disincentivise players to train harder and to improve their game. Grow the rough out and firm up the greens.....you want a -1 to win a pro tournament; there are different ways to do it. Look at the US Open.... enough said. 

Stop messing with something that is not broken and only getting better. 

Sorry for the scrambled rant, but this one pissed me off!!!

[SCFlyGuy]

This is an interesting discussion (I confess I didn’t read all 35 pages!), but I wonder how many people (including the tour pros railing against the proposal) have actually taken the time to read the position paper?  The manufacturers could change the ball to comply with the new standard and 99% of golfers would never know!!

[DaveP043]

13 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

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.

Let's look at the numbers posted, the USGA has estimated that a drive that goes 350 now will go 335 with the "new" golf ball, a loss of just over 4%.  That's an estimate, but still well below the 6.5% you talk about.  It might be 6.5%, it might be 10%, we don't know.  And it might be non-linear, the decrease at slower swing speeds may be minimal.  Again, I'd like to see some real projections, all I've read so far as those presented by the USGA.

3 hours ago, Dog Faced Pony Soldier said:

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? 

Who cares what players use when they're not competing?  Most "casual non-competitive" players choose not to follow the rules a great deal of the time, why should we expect their adherence to the Equipment Rules be any better?

1 hour ago, IzakFouche said:

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.

As someone who's taken the time to read the Distance Insights reports, going back almost 4 years now, I'd say I'm the opposite of "small minded."  I can understand the concern over continually increasing distance.  Whether something "needs" to be done to slow or roll-back the increases is a separate opinion, and the USGA and R&A have made that evaluation.  As for growing rough and narrowing the fairways, the USGA and R&A have exactly the same authority to require that as they have to limit physical conditioning, or club fitting, or instruction.  None.  They have exactly one tool to use, and that's the Equipment Rules.  

As much as I understand that distance is not a problem for the vast majority of golfers, I'm starting to think that any reduction would be best if it applies to all of us.  Sure, we'd take a hit, maybe we'd lose 10 yards or so off our drives, but we'd still get to "play what the pros play".  Heck, maybe that little loss of distance would encourage a lot more people to move up and play the appropriate tees.

[garyt1957]

  I have no idea about golf ball make up, but would it be possible to design a ball that goes the same distance off the driver that it does now but doesn't go nearly as far with irons? Some type of spin profile maybe? Something where guys can't hit 150 yard wedges? Sort of a have your cake and eat it too thing, you still get the big drives but guys have to hit more club into the green.  I realize I'm completely talking out of my ass so it might not be possible.

[RickyBobby_PR]

1 hour ago, joedeausen said:

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."

Exactly. As of right now there is no financial incentive for the ball companies to make the ball retail available. Pros will get the ball for free. The number of amateurs that play elite level tournaments is a very small percentage so as you say they aren’t marketing the ball for the amateur golfer and more than likely it will cost more than the current ball because of the limited use of it. So if all elite level tournaments/events make the move it will force the hands of the ball companies and then it will trickle down from the elite amateur level to all amateurs and there won’t be any current balls because they will lose incentive to make them because the mlr ball will become the defacto ball 

[RickyBobby_PR]

2 minutes ago, garyt1957 said:

  I have no idea about golf ball make up, but would it be possible to design a ball that goes the same distance off the driver that it does now but doesn't go nearly as far with irons? Some type of spin profile maybe? Something where guys can't hit 150 yard wedges? Sort of a have your cake and eat it too thing, you still get the big drives but guys have to hit more club into the green.  I realize I'm completely talking out of my ass so it might not be possible.

They are trying to cut down driver distance what purpose would it be to make a ball that goes the same distance as the current ball

[garyt1957]

And it might be non-linear, the decrease at slower swing speeds may be minimal

 

Now that to me would be wrong. You shouldn't punish guys who are longer than others. If the ball goes shorter for some it should go shorter the same for everybody, or at least very, very close to the same. That would be like having two 3 point lines in basketball. One for the kids who can make a conventional 3 and one for kids who can't shoot from that far.

[ZackS]

My biggest thing with their explanation is about protecting where is will be in 10 to 20 years. So I get just caping where is is at right now but why roll it back. I also think their new standard for speed/launch/spin is a bit unrealistic even on the tour so I think it will bring it back further then they think. 

[garyt1957]

2 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

They are trying to cut down driver distance what purpose would it be to make a ball that goes the same distance as the current ball

Isn't the problem bomb and gouge? So you'd still have the (very popular) bomb without the  (not so popular) gouge. And if you can't hit wedge from the rough and a longer iron might not hold the green, accuracy would become more important. Or I might be totally wrong,lol.

[tortise]

I think most golfers who are playing a brand of ball they think their favorite tour player are playing are really disillusion because those balls are made especially for them. They don’t go in to the pro shop and say give me a bag of tees and a couple sleeves of those pro V1 they so we’re not playing the same balls so do why they are at it get rid of any putter over 36 inches if you are going to ban long putters ban them totally. We noticed they didn’t care until they started winning with them. The only way to level the playing field is to is to put ever one on the green 20 ft away from the hole with Wilson 8802s and the best putters wins.When I started playing golf golfer we’re not athletes they smoked cigarettes drank beer while they played. Today’s golfers are truly athletes they eat right exercise do strength training those Will away have an advantage


Sent from my iPhone using MyGolfSpy

[RickyBobby_PR]

10 minutes ago, garyt1957 said:

Isn't the problem bomb and gouge? So you'd still have the (very popular) bomb without the  (not so popular) gouge. And if you can't hit wedge from the rough and a longer iron might not hold the green, accuracy would become more important. Or I might be totally wrong,lol.

They are trying to reduce the bomb part. The gouge comes as a result.

They claim the issue is having to have more real estate for courses so they have to reduce the distance the ball goes off the tee not how far it goes on approach shots

[LarryG]

It is insulting & unfair.

1. A youngish scratch golfer is going to try & qualify for the US Open. Will he have to use the MLR ball? He has never played it. Is it accessible? Not fair to him.

2. Most golfers watch the "elite" events and the PGA Tour to see the game played at the highest level & to compare their games to the best. If they play a different ball than me THERE IS NO RELEVANCE!!  Therefore my interest wanes.- INSULTING!!

[TitleistMike]

If I read correctly, the majority of premium balls are non compliant at FUTURE club head speed vs distance specs.

If ball flies 317 or less at 120mph club head robot speed ball passes.

 

If ball flies 317 or more @127mph, fail in future. If the ball goes further at speed over 120, it fails.

 

This doesn't bifurcate. It puts a limit on balls, and dials balls back 5% or so. 

 

A prov1(x) will be modified to conform. Recreational players will buy conforming or non conforming balls. 

 

99% of people I play with will use a CONFORMING ball. They won't use a cheater ball.

[fixyurdivot]

30 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

As much as I understand that distance is not a problem for the vast majority of golfers, I'm starting to think that any reduction would be best if it applies to all of us.  Sure, we'd take a hit, maybe we'd lose 10 yards or so off our drives, but we'd still get to "play what the pros play".  Heck, maybe that little loss of distance would encourage a lot more people to move up and play the appropriate tees.

Looking for the "booooo" reaction icon .  Seriously Dave, really like all your in-depth insights on rules, but this one is a stinker .  I for one don't care whether I play the exact equipment pros play.  99% of us are playing wildly different games than tour players.  Why should the vast majority of golfers take a hit on distance just because the conforming bodies of golf have created a tour play hitting distance issue? 

I get that the governing bodies are attempting to pull the levers they have control over, but isn't it odd that the tours and course event management haven't already tried some of the less cumbersome and costly options?  To what extent do the tours and the players have in boycotting the proposed ball change?  I'll be surprised if there isn't a push-back.

[funkyjudge]

One thing that I know for sure: Yesterday, in my winter golf tour event, we were forced to play from the black tees (a/k/a the “tips”). No modern golf ball was going to help me reach the longer par 4 holes (445 to 478 yards) in two and never mind reaching any of the par 5 holes in two (most of them were barely reachable in three by all but one guy in my foursome).  We played behind a group of four PGA professionals (none play on tour, but one did play on both the PGA Tour and what is now known as the Korn Ferry Tour), and a couple of those pros were having trouble reaching some of the longer uphill par fours in two.  A few of them play in “elite competitions” and one has played in several U.S. Open Qualifiers and made it to final stage qualifying for our Open. I wonder how they would feel about a golf ball roll- back for those competitions.

[cnosil]

2 minutes ago, TitleistMike said:

If I read correctly, the majority of premium balls are non compliant at FUTURE club head speed vs distance specs.

This doesn't bifurcate. It puts a limit on balls, and dials balls back 5% or so. 

99% of people I play with will use a CONFORMING ball. They won't use a cheater ball.

This conformance is only require for competitions where the model local rule is invoked.  If the competition doesn’t invoke the MRL current balls are conforming and will remain conforming.  
 

it does add to the existing bifurcation because it is enforcing different rules at different levels.   Does your group invoke the one ball rule and the rule that prohibits distance measuring devices? 

[DaveP043]

3 minutes ago, fixyurdivot said:

Looking for the "booooo" reaction icon .  Seriously Dave, really like all your in-depth insights on rules, but this one is a stinker .  I for one don't care whether I play the exact equipment pros play.  99% of us are playing wildly different games than tour players.  Why should the vast majority of golfers take a hit on distance just because the conforming bodies of golf have created a tour play hitting distance issue? 

I get that the governing bodies are attempting to pull the levers they have control over, but isn't it odd that the tours and course event management haven't already tried some of the less cumbersome and costly options?  To what extent do the tours and the players have in boycotting the proposed ball change?  I'll be surprised if there isn't a push-back.

Hahahaha, maybe the admins can get a "boo" reaction for us.  Having two separate rules for golf balls (I know, testing methods, but really two different rules) does cause complications.  R&D and manufacturing, marketing, players playing different balls in different events, its certainly not an ideal solution.  And I have no doubt there will be push back, we've already seen that.  As I have read over the past years, the USGA and R&A have specifically reached out to manufacturers and professional tours for input all along.  I don't know whether pro tours will choose not to use the "short" ball, but it would surprise me.  Manufacturers will fall in line, they won't want to be the manufacturer without a ball being played by on TV.  

I don't know what will happen, or which is the least problematic route, but it appears something will change within the rules to lower driving distance a bit.  Any choice made will upset someone.  And no matter what route is taken, most of us will adapt pretty quickly, while others will hold a grudge for the rest of their lives.

[LICC]

2 hours ago, BlackjackMWV said:

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.

Bifurcation is already part of golf. Recreational players don't use the same tee boxes at anywhere near the lengths of the courses that pros play. 

[BlackjackMWV]

Really.  Not even worth a response.

[LICC]

1 hour ago, GolfSpy_BOS said:

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.

Sure, anything can happen with mishits. But for the most part, among the top golfers on Tour, you will very rarely see anything close to a 35 yard difference on a drive on any given hole.