Planned 2030 Golf Ball Rollback

[chisag]

40 minutes ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

It still kinda shocks me that this is so far away and that without question this will be a hot topic for a long time to come. 

 

... Only on golf forums. I play 4 to 5 times a week and get paired up with strangers on 1 or 2 of those days. My regular group and anyone joining me has talked about golf, equipment and tournaments but not a single mention of the ball roll back. In fact 2 of my 5 normal pards didn't know anything about it the only time I mentioned it. 

[GolfSpy_APH]

https://mygolfspy.com/news-opinion/the-golf-ball-rollback-four-common-sense-alternatives/

[RickyBobby_PR]

It’s funny that the 2022 Open was the breaking point yet the USGA chose that course for the 2023 walker cup. So it’s either an issue or it’s not for elite male competition.

the option of growing the fairways and such isn’t really an option. If it was the tours would do that but it’s actually not what the tours want. They setup the course to promote distance and lower scores, they aren’t going to change their product when they don’t see an issue. 
 

The statement from Whan about amateurs not obsoleting a course anytime soon explains it all. The ruling bodies don’t like the current pro game which is an entertainment product and that they’re not willing to move on from a handful of courses that have nostalgia attached for their championships. So since they couldn’t get the tours to go along with their ill thought out MLR they are forcing them to change by forcing everyone to change.

Not sure the lower tee height impacts the pros like people think. Most pros aren’t hitting up that much on the ball and aren’t teeing it that high. They will easily adapt and if need be sworn to a ball and head that spin less and the OEMs will make adjustments to the design to offset that tee height.

The best option has alway been to leave things where they are. The increase in average distance between 2003 and 2023 want the equipment it was the golfer which the USGA admitted is the case. They can’t control the golfers workout routine and nutrition so they punish the guys that work hard and gained distance like Fitzpatrick. The change will only see more people do what Fitzpatrick did and the ones that can’t will be gone, then you end up with more golfers closer to the leader in distance and defeating what tne rollback is trying to do.

What will they do when the average driving distance is 305-310 on tour with the new ball

[d.lama]

On 2/6/2024 at 10:17 PM, Vertical said:

Bad idea to make the game shorter and take the fun out of hitting the occasional 300+ yard drive when you really nut it. It appears that the vast majority of golfers are against it. Who’s for it and what’s their rationale?

What was your fun distance in 1980 when you really crushed it?

And the short game will not be changing, the ball can be engineered to behave within the specs without taking away any shortgame control.  

[Vertical]

16 hours ago, d.lama said:

What was your fun distance in 1980 when you really crushed it?

And the short game will not be changing, the ball can be engineered to behave within the specs without taking away any shortgame control.  

240 when I hit the persimmon right on the screws. Which wasn’t very often because drivers in those days were not very forgiving. As long as we’re being “purists”, should we roll back golf club technology too? Shorter and less forgiving drivers and irons? Roll back graphite shaft technology? What about high MOI putter heads? 
 

Just let the “experts” figure it out and follow the rules!

[d.lama]

21 minutes ago, Vertical said:

240 when I hit the persimmon right on the screws. Which wasn’t very often because drivers in those days were not very forgiving. As long as we’re being “purists”, should we roll back golf club technology too? Shorter and less forgiving drivers and irons? Roll back graphite shaft technology? What about high MOI putter heads? 

My support of the change and future support if other equipment changes are not rooted in a purist bias, it is rooted in the belief that skill should be more important than technology.

In the past when you mishit the persimmon because you caught it on the toe - say you missed the middle by a full 1cm - you were given and much shorter drive and a more offline drive as well, you didn't have the skill on that one swing to 'hit it right on the screws'. With modern drivers you can miss by 2cm and still end up 270 near the fairway (heck, Callaway is touting that fact now), you didn't have the skill on that one swing and ended up fine. Technology allows you to have less skill. 

It's a balancing act, unfortunately the ruling bodies have realized that they allowed tech a little too much leeway and are working to bring things under control. Frank Thomas was of the belief that no pro would ever swing 460cc drivers and said so in an interview, he and the USGA/RA set that size because they wanted amateurs to be able to play a more forgiving driver - he had good intentions. However, it then became an "Oh s***" moment because elite players DID start playing the biggest drivers they could because they could put a lightweight 48" shaft in that forgiving 460cc head swing out of their shoes, miss the center and still be 300 down the fairway. Oops. 

[RickyBobby_PR]

1 hour ago, d.lama said:

Oh s***" moment because elite players DID start playing the biggest drivers they could because they could put a lightweight 48" shaft in that forgiving 460cc head swing out of their shoes, miss the center and still be 300 down the fairway. Oops. 

And yet most pros are under 45” and only Phil dabbled with 47” and Brooke Henderson went 48”

and there’s not a pro swinging out of their shoes on tour even when they step on one because despite the claim that’s barely missing the center isn’t penalizing it actually is pretty penalizing for high swing speed golfers. It’s why Bryson never went 100% on the course and even at the speeds he was swinging at had trouble controlling the ball and why he was constantly switching drivers. Then went on the rant about the current designs not being able to hold up to high ball speeds. It’s why Finau only drives it on average 304 yards. There is too much risk going all out.

This notion of pros swinging all out is wrong and hopefully one day dies.

and to the subject of skill it takes great skill to swing fast and keep the ball in play. If it was easy to swing fast everyone would be doing get the average club head speed on tour is only 115.

[d.lama]

2 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

And yet most pros are under 45” and only Phil dabbled with 47” and Brooke Henderson went 48”

And most pro's rarely went over 44" (Tigers was 43.5" and he was in his prime) with the older heavier steel shafts and smaller heads. The point still stands that technology has allowed longer shafts, larger and lighter heads, and therefore more clubhead speed. 

2 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

and there’s not a pro swinging out of their shoes on tour even when they step on one because despite the claim that’s barely missing the center isn’t penalizing it actually is pretty penalizing for high swing speed golfers. It’s why Bryson never went 100% on the course and even at the speeds he was swinging at had trouble controlling the ball and why he was constantly switching drivers. Then went on the rant about the current designs not being able to hold up to high ball speeds. It’s why Finau only drives it on average 304 yards. There is too much risk going all out.

This notion of pros swinging all out is wrong and hopefully one day dies.

and to the subject of skill it takes great skill to swing fast and keep the ball in play. If it was easy to swing fast everyone would be doing get the average club head speed on tour is only 115.

They do and can swing harder than before: have you been paying attention to the numerous articles, video's and products out there for how to swing faster and speed training...I guess you have dismissed those as ether. The fact is that people are working to get faster without worrying about strike and face control, and they are doing it more often than in the past - why and how?...because the modern 460cc driver is lighter than previous generation heads and more forgiving than ever before. The USGA/RA suspect that they are not going to be able to get rid of 460cc limit, they might be able to adjust some MOI parameters to lessen the forgiveness that the massive heads allows. The low hanging fruit is the ball, so what they are doing is working to change to ball to cut down a bit of speed and adjusted spin characteristics. 

Hit it that far on the toe and GAIN 12 yards, hit it that far on the heel and GAIN 11 yards - Hell, I'll just swing as fast as I want now without any worry...That is what has been happening in the past 20 years and with new tech it will become even more prevalent. Technology is becoming more important than skill. 

  

Edited February 22 by d.lama
grammar

[RickyBobby_PR]

7 hours ago, d.lama said:

And most pro's rarely went over 44" (Tigers was 43.5" and he was in his prime) with the older heavier steel shafts and smaller heads. The point still stands that technology has allowed longer shafts, larger and lighter heads, and therefore more clubhead speed. 

Never disputed this. They can also swing faster because they are in better shape and their bodies can handle faster speeds but there is still a limit and 180ish ball speed is where pros have settled and not many are going over that.

7 hours ago, d.lama said:

They do and can swing harder than before: have you been paying attention to the numerous articles, video's and products out there for how to swing faster and speed training...I guess you have dismissed those as ether. The fact is that people are working to get faster without worrying about strike and face control, and they are doing it more often than in the past - why and how?...

I have and a so mentioned Fitzpatrick worked hatd to gain extra speed, Phil used it too as he tried to maintain or gain speed as he aged, but how many pros are actually using the products? It’s not going to be the guys who have speed already because they don’t need more easily when they aren’t maxing out their swings on the course. Its the ones who have seen the advantage distance gives and are working to gain more.

none of this proves my point as wrong that pros aren’t swinging out of their shoes and even the guys who are near max like a brain Harmon are swing out of their shoes. They may be swinging above 90% but they are still in control and balanced during the swing.

7 hours ago, d.lama said:

The USGA/RA suspect that they are not going to be able to get rid of 460cc limit, they might be able to adjust some MOI parameters to lessen the forgiveness that the massive heads allows. The low hanging fruit is the ball, so what they are doing is working to change to ball to cut down a bit of speed and adjusted spin characteristics. 

The USGA is trying to control the way the game is played. They want the pros to play golf how they think it should be played and because they don’t like the way the tour setup courses. Despite their talking points there isn’t a problem with distance. If there was an actual problem then the tours would be the ones leading the push to rollback not telling the RBs to shove off with their nonsense 

7 hours ago, d.lama said:

Hit it that far on the toe and GAIN 12 yards, hit it that far on the heel and GAIN 11 yards - Hell, I'll just swing as fast as I want now without any worry...That is what has been happening in the past 20 years and with new tech it will become even more prevalent. Technology is becoming more important than skill. 

Again there isn’t any pro just swinging away. They want control. If they wanted to just sing away and full send the ball you would see your average aoa being on the positive side and you would see very few to no golfers with a negative 1-2° aoa.

Despite all the technology advancements with club face design, materials used in the head, improved shaft manufacturing and the availability of new carbon fiber materials top end distance hasn’t changed and average distance has gone up because there are more golfer who can get to 300 while the older shorter guys are moving on to the champions tour. More guys hitting 300 moves the average. And when we look at actual numbers swing speed between 2019-2021 stayed stagnant and for the two years after that it dropped so more proof that guys aren’t swinging out of their shoes and have been dial in speed back.

 

Edited February 23 by RickyBobby_PR

[d.lama]

On 2/22/2024 at 7:12 PM, RickyBobby_PR said:

Never disputed this. They can also swing faster because they are in better shape and their bodies can handle faster speeds

You are trying to dispute it every time you say, 'well athletes!'  The old equipment could not give the same speeds off the face and the ball could not react like it does now. Some examples are how fast the ball came off the face when Rory hit the old driver at the Scottish open (he said he smashed it) It came off the face 12.5mph slow than when the Rory hit his driver 1min later. Same athlete, did he suddenly become a better athlete within minutes? Later at the Emirates, multiple players teed off with old school steel/titanium drivers. Rory was only able to get the ball going 171 with a Callaway from around 1996, Tyrel got it going 172 with a smothered pull-hook into the left tree's, Højgaard got one up to 177 - his normal ball speed is 194 off his modern driver. They were all hitting modern balls, give them a tour ball from 1995 and the speeds would have been slower. 

On 2/22/2024 at 7:12 PM, RickyBobby_PR said:

but there is still a limit and 180ish ball speed is where pros have settled and not many are going over that.

The issue isn't that they are going to go over 180 it's that the modern equipment has allowed the ball to come off the face at 180. 181.1 in Rory's case at the Scottish and 194 for Højgaard.

On 2/22/2024 at 7:12 PM, RickyBobby_PR said:

I have and a so mentioned Fitzpatrick worked hatd to gain extra speed, Phil used it too as he tried to maintain or gain speed as he aged, but how many pros are actually using the products? It’s not going to be the guys who have speed already because they don’t need more easily when they aren’t maxing out their swings on the course. Its the ones who have seen the advantage distance gives and are working to gain more.

So what, some shorter hitters have always tried to hit it further and some shorter hitters played with their shortness and upped their other skills. What does that have to do with modern equipment being faster? 

On 2/22/2024 at 7:12 PM, RickyBobby_PR said:

none of this proves my point as wrong that pros aren’t swinging out of their shoes and even the guys who are near max like a brain Harmon are swing out of their shoes. They may be swinging above 90% but they are still in control and balanced during the swing.

The USGA is trying to control the way the game is played. They want the pros to play golf how they think it should be played and because they don’t like the way the tour setup courses. Despite their talking points there isn’t a problem with distance. If there was an actual problem then the tours would be the ones leading the push to rollback not telling the RBs to shove off with their nonsense 

Again there isn’t any pro just swinging away. They want control. If they wanted to just sing away and full send the ball you would see your average aoa being on the positive side and you would see very few to no golfers with a negative 1-2° aoa.

They 'are' swinging away with the modern 460cc driver, you just don't think they are. With the older equipment they would swing away on occassion; but it was a high-risk-reward situation, mishit it a bit and you were in trouble, smash it and the ball flew 168mph vs the 160mph that it did with the control swing. With modern drivers and balls, guys swing at full steam ahead all day long and it's not an issue. 

On 2/22/2024 at 7:12 PM, RickyBobby_PR said:

Despite all the technology advancements with club face design, materials used in the head, improved shaft manufacturing and the availability of new carbon fiber materials top end distance hasn’t changed and average distance has gone up because there are more golfer who can get to 300 while the older shorter guys are moving on to the champions tour. More guys hitting 300 moves the average. And when we look at actual numbers swing speed between 2019-2021 stayed stagnant and for the two years after that it dropped so more proof that guys aren’t swinging out of their shoes and have been dial in speed back.

Distance and ball speeds have changed from the time the USGA distance insight began the data analysis going back 40 years, you keep picking more recent times from 2000 on or 2019-2021 for your argument, why are you ignoring 1980-2000? And as far as the Champions tour guys are concerned, they are hitting it farther at old age than they did in their athletic prime from 1990, that's weird.

[silver & black]

Golf.... the one sport where advancement in technology and athleticism is frowned on.

 

That said:  why not do like MLB and just keep things where they are, currently? Why is that such a bad thing? What is going to happen when the players inevitably get stronger and more athleteic with advancement in fitness technology? Will they roll the ball back some more... or just mandate that players aren't allowed to work out anymore?...lol.

This whole thing is ridiculous. Just let things be where they are now and put a lid on it.

What will equipment Manufactureres do now that distance will be outlawed? How will they market new stuff? Will everyone just keep what they play now and/or just buy used equipment because it no longer matters... or just buy new that isn't any better than the old because the old just wore out?

This is a solution looking for a problem, IMO.

Edited February 24 by silver & black

[TylorJudd]

They certainly go further than those round hunks of birch or maple they were hitting! 
 

Land is a premium and we need to remember that, the ball does go a bananas distance now. As a longer hitter, I’m certainly in favour of the ball going a shorter distance. One thing that isn’t fun…. Not hitting your driver. Doing this with the ball will allow manufacturers to push the bounds of technology while using the ball as the means to reign in back in when needed. One thing we don’t want to see is golf courses disappearing. 
 

If you’d like to hit it further, incorporate stretching, yoga, and exercise into your daily routine. Get your irons bent stronger. We have to be mindful of what we are leaving for those who will come behind us

[fixyurdivot]

5 hours ago, silver & black said:

Golf.... the one sport where advancement in technology and athleticism is frowned on.

 

That said:  why not do like MLB and just keep things where they are, currently? Why is that such a bad thing? What is going to happen when the players inevitably get stronger and more athleteic with advancement in fitness technology? Will they roll the ball back some more... or just mandate that players aren't allowed to work out anymore?...lol.

This whole thing is ridiculous. Just let things be where they are now and put a lid on it.

What will equipment Manufactureres do now that distance will be outlawed? How will they market new stuff? Will everyone just keep what they play now and/or just buy used equipment because it no longer matters... or just buy new that isn't any better than the old because the old just wore out?

This is a solution looking for a problem, IMO.

This is simply a case of being out of touch with the populous you represent (or supposed to represent).  They cannot control the players ability to refine swing and physical strength, so yes they will likely need to implement roll back part two.  Again, for the umteenth time, this is an issue associated with less than 1% of all golfers.  Why those supporting the change cannot understand this escapes me.  Someone please explain on what planet this rollback makes sense for non tour/eleite amateur level players .

[d.lama]

4 hours ago, fixyurdivot said:

This is simply a case of being out of touch with the populous you represent (or supposed to represent).  They cannot control the players ability to refine swing and physical strength, so yes they will likely need to implement roll back part two. 

Again, your so-called elite athlete with a refined swing and superior strength will, without any doubt, lose clubhead speed and ballspeed playing equipment that is pre-1994. IF it was only the athlete that mattered, they would still be playing 43.5 heavy steel shafted 190cc persimmon heads and would balata balls and they would be averaging the same distance they average with the modern super-equipment ....hint: They are not. Another question; IF the modern equipment is not the leading cause of increased distance then why do they need to play the modern equipment? 

4 hours ago, fixyurdivot said:

Again, for the umteenth time, this is an issue associated with less than 1% of all golfers.  Why those supporting the change cannot understand this escapes me.  Someone please explain on what planet this rollback makes sense for non tour/eleite amateur level players .

It has been debated and decided that Bifurcation would not be good for the game. 

[fixyurdivot]

8 hours ago, d.lama said:

Again, your so-called elite athlete with a refined swing and superior strength will, without any doubt, lose clubhead speed and ballspeed playing equipment that is pre-1994. IF it was only the athlete that mattered, they would still be playing 43.5 heavy steel shafted 190cc persimmon heads and would balata balls and they would be averaging the same distance they average with the modern super-equipment ....hint: They are not. Another question; IF the modern equipment is not the leading cause of increased distance then why do they need to play the modern equipment? 

It has been debated and decided that Bifurcation would not be good for the game. 

Again, you and others are side stepping the fact that this issue is only associated with less than 1% of players.  Not exactly a trivial fact but conveniently ignored.  Adversely affecting virtually all players to address a "problem" of roughly 30 feet is ridiculous.  This decision is akin to removing the arm to remedy a papercut. 

Advances in equipment tech, both clubs and ancillary, have most certainly contributed to increased distance - I've not argued otherwise.  The USGA and R&A could have stepped in at anytime to throttle what they could clearly see but they didn't because no one wanted to mess with the goose laying golden eggs... Tigermania.

The best thing to do is simply freeze design limits where they are now.  That solves the "bi-furcation is not good for the game" claim. Once again, they cannot control the players ability to improve swing and gain speed... so what happens when the ball rollback distance is eclipsed by the elite players?  

Can't speak for you but at 63 and having worked hard over the past couple of years to gain distance and lower my index, I find it an affront that the ruling bodies want to essentially take that away from me to solve a problem that does not involve me.  They are out of touch with those they are supposedly in place to represent.

[cnosil]

10 hours ago, d.lama said:

Again, your so-called elite athlete with a refined swing and superior strength will, without any doubt, lose clubhead speed and ballspeed playing equipment that is pre-1994. IF it was only the athlete that mattered, they would still be playing 43.5 heavy steel shafted 190cc persimmon heads and would balata balls and they would be averaging the same distance they average with the modern super-equipment ....hint: They are not. Another question; IF the modern equipment is not the leading cause of increased distance then why do they need to play the modern equipment? 

yes,  equipment has helped players generate more ball speed.  You seem to want to go back to equipment from pre-1994 which is even more rollback that is being proposed but yes,  since that timeframe manufacturing and technology improvements have greatly increase the consistency of equipment and a players performance..   

 If we look at "modern" equipment,   460cc drivers has been the max size since 2004 .  CT/COR has been regulated since 2008.  The ball has been regulated to the current standard since 2004.    PGA pros do not miss the center of the clubface by very much so the "forgiveness" of drivers is largely for the benefit of amateur players.    Technology like launch monitors has helped players learn how to hit the ball better and to enable fitters to better fit the player to equipment that will optimize performance.     Players are doing speed training to increase their cruising driver swing speed.  

So with the equipment limitations that have been in place since the early 2000s, there has to be more than just the equipment that is causing distance to increase and that is the result of the athlete.  If it was solely the equipment why doesn't every PGA player hit the ball the same distance?    Put them in pre-1994 equipment would they hit is the same distance?   Would the athlete not learn and develop to hit those pre-1994 clubs farther?   Would they hit is farther than the pre-1994 athlete?

[TylorJudd]

Why not move up tee boxes? I’m not trying to be rude, nor inconsiderate, but as you would be approaching 70 by the time this takes effect, that would more than likely even itself out. At 3.5, you’re no slouch around the course, but the body does what the body does over time. This is something non of us have control over, and making assumptions here, won’t prevent any of us from playing this great game. If all out distance is how you enjoy this game, then maybe it’s time to find other ways to.
 

Not speaking to anyone specifically here, but if we can’t break or shoot par from the tees we’re playing, then we should move up a box. Myself sitting at a 3.5 don’t play the tips at every course because it’s insanity sometimes, or at courses I struggle with. 
 

Look at the TP5/x this year, if that actually provides the half club it claims, do we think that’s ok? Our technology advances at an exponential rate, so we have to take that into consideration. 

[d.lama]

2 hours ago, fixyurdivot said:

Again, you and others are side stepping the fact that this issue is only associated with less than 1% of players.  Not exactly a trivial fact but conveniently ignored.  Adversely affecting virtually all players to address a "problem" of roughly 30 feet is ridiculous.  This decision is akin to removing the arm to remedy a papercut. 

Advances in equipment tech, both clubs and ancillary, have most certainly contributed to increased distance - I've not argued otherwise.  The USGA and R&A could have stepped in at anytime to throttle what they could clearly see but they didn't because no one wanted to mess with the goose laying golden eggs... Tigermania.

The best thing to do is simply freeze design limits where they are now.  That solves the "bi-furcation is not good for the game" claim. Once again, they cannot control the players ability to improve swing and gain speed... so what happens when the ball rollback distance is eclipsed by the elite players?  

Can't speak for you but at 63 and having worked hard over the past couple of years to gain distance and lower my index, I find it an affront that the ruling bodies want to essentially take that away from me to solve a problem that does not involve me.  They are out of touch with those they are supposedly in place to represent.

Those poor 63 year old's that played the game, prior to 1993 ... how could they ever handle hitting slower equipment, how did the game survive. Also, the estimates are that you will probably lose 3-5 yards with the ball rollback, unless you swing at 120mph, not the 15 yards you think you will lose. 

[chisag]

1 hour ago, cnosil said:

  PGA pros do not miss the center of the clubface by very much so the "forgiveness" of drivers is largely for the benefit of amateur players. 

 

... Just nit picking but if you have played with elite Ams or Pros, you have probably seen their degree of miss is  so much more important than the typical Am. I have said this before but on a given line off the tee, my 81 yr old pard hitting a 200yd drive just a little off the toe will be on the edge of the fairway. If I hit on the same line with a slight toe miss I am in the rough with a 240yd drive. Again same line for an Outlaw Tour player I shared 18 with that averaged around 350 off the tee and with that slight to miss he would be well into the desert. So I would make the argument a small miss is more egregious for the Pro than the Am. To your point, obviously the Am reaps the benefits of a very forgiving 460cc driver with bigger misses that Pro's don't have. Although we have all seen the best players in the world shank iron shots and hit some horrendously bad drives. 

... The point being a slight miss on the toe or heel that produces a really good drive for the average player will turn the club face just enough to throw a Tour Pro's drive off line. So I agree they don't miss the center anywhere near as much as Am's but when they miss it just a little with drives over 300yds it can be the difference between being in the fairway or the rough as well as trees/hazards/desert. 

Edited February 25 by chisag

[d.lama]

54 minutes ago, cnosil said:

yes,  equipment has helped players generate more ball speed.  You seem to want to go back to equipment from pre-1994 which is even more rollback that is being proposed but yes,  since that timeframe manufacturing and technology improvements have greatly increase the consistency of equipment and a players performance..   

I'm using Pre-1994 equipment and distances in order to point out that the 3-5 yards you and I will lose is nothing when compared to those older distances. The ruling bodies are rolling it back a small portion and people are acting like the sky is falling. Also, what does equipment consistency have to do with slowing the equipment down?

54 minutes ago, cnosil said:

 If we look at "modern" equipment,   460cc drivers has been the max size since 2004 .  CT/COR has been regulated since 2008.  The ball has been regulated to the current standard since 2004.    PGA pros do not miss the center of the clubface by very much so the "forgiveness" of drivers is largely for the benefit of amateur players.    Technology like launch monitors has helped players learn how to hit the ball better and to enable fitters to better fit the player to equipment that will optimize performance.     Players are doing speed training to increase their cruising driver swing speed.  

They can do all the speed training they want or need to, nobody is saying they can't. 

54 minutes ago, cnosil said:

So with the equipment limitations that have been in place since the early 2000s, there has to be more than just the equipment that is causing distance to increase and that is the result of the athlete.  If it was solely the equipment why doesn't every PGA player hit the ball the same distance?    Put them in pre-1994 equipment would they hit is the same distance?   Would the athlete not learn and develop to hit those pre-1994 clubs farther?   Would they hit is farther than the pre-1994 athlete?

Since 2000 there has been a 24.75 average gain. N. Højgaard only managed to get 177mph ball-speed from a 1999 Callaway Hawkeye driver when his normal ball speed is around 194mph. I propose that if he got that driver fit and specked for him he would probably get the ball speed up to mid 180's with his swing but he'd never hit 194 and would therefore be shorter than he is right now. 

[chisag]

1 hour ago, TylorJudd said:

Why not move up tee boxes? I’m not trying to be rude, nor inconsiderate, but as you would be approaching 70 by the time this takes effect, that would more than likely even itself out. At 3.5, you’re no slouch around the course, but the body does what the body does over time. This is something non of us have control over, and making assumptions here, won’t prevent any of us from playing this great game. If all out distance is how you enjoy this game, then maybe it’s time to find other ways to.

 

... Some people will complain about any and everything.   It is pretty interesting reading some responses that seem to be worded like the USGA came right to their door and said "We have decided to attack your game personally. Won't make a difference for the Pro's in the long run but at least we can ruin your game".   Some may not agree with the rollback and that's their right of course and I have no problem at all with their opinions but when Nicklaus, Woods and McIlroy are all in favor of a ball rollback, maybe it isn't such a ridiculous idea. 

... I would add there are just so many factors addressing distance. I am probably on average about 25yds longer in the desert with hard fast fairways than I would be back in the Chicago burbs with lush, soft fairways. Add another 15yds if I played in Colorado. And as far as 3-5 yds loss with the new ball if implemented, show me any Am that isn't a + index that doesn't produce drives that are easily 10-20 yds longer or shorter with any given drive. So I think we are looking at the glass being half full or half empty with some here screaming The USGA Stole My Water! But again, nothing written here will probably change anyones opinion, especially if they are vehemently opposed to the change and don't understand how anyone could disagree with them. 

 

[cnosil]

40 minutes ago, chisag said:

 

... Just nit picking but if you have played with elite Ams or Pros, you have probably seen their degree of miss is  so much more important than the typical Am.

Yep,  that math and geometry thing.  The farther you get from the point of impact the wider that 1* angle gets.   

 

[cnosil]

36 minutes ago, d.lama said:

I'm using Pre-1994 equipment and distances in order to point out that the 3-5 yards you and I will lose is nothing when compared to those older distances. The ruling bodies are rolling it back a small portion and people are acting like the sky is falling. Also, what does equipment consistency have to do with slowing the equipment down?

No one knows what the loss will be; there is only speculation.  I haven't seen any actual ball data and if you have please provide the reference.   Todays manufacturing processes are better and therefore their are smaller error tolerances which means equipment is more consistent and better.   Two clubs from the era you are referring to could perform significantly different.   Comparing a player hitting a modern club versus a random 90s era club  shows nothing as that persimmon club made today would be significantly better.  

The point people are making is that there is no reason to roll anything back.  They don't believe there is a problem with the game and equipment has already been regulated.   They also believe that once rollback starts they will continue to rollback other pieces of equipment.   The increased distance over the last 20ish years is more about the player than the equipment.  Pre 2000/current equipment regulations is  was more about the equipment.   

[chisag]

18 minutes ago, cnosil said:

Yep,  that math and geometry thing.  The farther you get from the point of impact the wider that 1* angle gets.   

 

... Yup, so mind blowing for me when I played with that Outlaw Tour winner that was hitting a stinger 3 iron past my driver playing a tee box in front of him.  #10 is a reachable par 5 for me at 499 yds with a downslope about 240 off the tee and the sides of the downslope in the rough funnel the ball back into the fairway. I aim for the edge of the fairway and if I hit the rough I can get some 300yd drives with a ton of roll when it only carried maybe 235 yds. Jamie hit a drive from the tips at 531 a few yards inside the left rough that looked absolutely perfect. But he hits the ball so far he flew it past the slope hitting the flat at the bottom of the slope so no funneling back to the fairway and we measured his drive at 370yds and it ended up in a bush.  Perfect example of the math and geometry thing and when I truly realized how little margin of error the truly big hitters really have. 

[silver & black]

2 hours ago, TylorJudd said:

Why not move up tee boxes? I’m not trying to be rude, nor inconsiderate, but as you would be approaching 70 by the time this takes effect, that would more than likely even itself out. At 3.5, you’re no slouch around the course, but the body does what the body does over time. This is something non of us have control over, and making assumptions here, won’t prevent any of us from playing this great game. If all out distance is how you enjoy this game, then maybe it’s time to find other ways to.
 

Not speaking to anyone specifically here, but if we can’t break or shoot par from the tees we’re playing, then we should move up a box. Myself sitting at a 3.5 don’t play the tips at every course because it’s insanity sometimes, or at courses I struggle with. 
 

Look at the TP5/x this year, if that actually provides the half club it claims, do we think that’s ok? Our technology advances at an exponential rate, so we have to take that into consideration. 

I could move up to the women's tees and still not shoot even/under most times.

I quit keeping a HC a few years ago. My last HC was at 8.3.... not the best player, but certainly good enough to get around a golf course and have fun.

[silver & black]

Another thing to consider:

What will happen to equpiment manufacturers when the bright minds that work for them leave because they have been stagnated in their creativity, and their expertise is no longer needed to devlope new product? I mean, you have chemists, metallurgists, engineers, etc... that work for these companies. If there is no need of them for developing new product, do we just get the same old, same old every  year with new lipstick on it that does the same thing the previous stuff did/does for the last decade? 

I see nothing good coming from this. IMO, they put the cart before the horse on this.... kinda like electric cars...lol. if that last bit is considered political, please delete it.

 

[d.lama]

47 minutes ago, cnosil said:

No one knows what the loss will be; there is only speculation.  I haven't seen any actual ball data and if you have please provide the reference.   

I guarantee that plenty of computer modeling has been done and it's known what the new test conditions will do; perhaps this year the results will be readily available. 

47 minutes ago, cnosil said:

Todays manufacturing processes are better and therefore their are smaller error tolerances which means equipment is more consistent and better.  Two clubs from the era you are referring to could perform significantly different.   Comparing a player hitting a modern club versus a random 90s era club  shows nothing as that persimmon club made today would be significantly better.  

I'm still not following why consistency is even being brought up. Persimmon clubs are still made today and they hit shorter than the super equipment put out by Callaway and Taylormade. 

47 minutes ago, cnosil said:

The point people are making is that there is no reason to roll anything back. 

There is a reason to rollback, you just don't agree with the reasoning. 

47 minutes ago, cnosil said:

They don't believe there is a problem with the game and equipment has already been regulated. 

Now they have set up new regulations for the ball.

47 minutes ago, cnosil said:

They also believe that once rollback starts they will continue to rollback other pieces of equipment.   

Maybe.

47 minutes ago, cnosil said:

The increased distance over the last 20ish years is more about the player than the equipment.  Pre 2000/current equipment regulations is  was more about the equipment.   

I just posted two video that show that is not the case.

[cnosil]

2 minutes ago, d.lama said:

 

There is a reason to rollback, you just don't agree with the reasoning. 

 

Of course there is a "reason".  Some people agree with the reasoning and some people don't.    Both sides will post information that show/validate their point of view.      Maybe in 6 years when this goes into effect everyone will say that a big deal was made out of nothing.   

[chisag]

41 minutes ago, silver & black said:

Another thing to consider:

What will happen to equpiment manufacturers when the bright minds that work for them leave because they have been stagnated in their creativity, and their expertise is no longer needed to devlope new product? I mean, you have chemists, metallurgists, engineers, etc... that work for these companies. If there is no need of them for developing new product, do we just get the same old, same old every  year with new lipstick on it that does the same thing the previous stuff did/does for the last decade? 

I see nothing good coming from this. IMO, they put the cart before the horse on this.... kinda like electric cars...lol. if that last bit is considered political, please delete it.

 

 

... Tough argument when soooooo many complain Oems come out with NEW! and IMPROVED! equipment every year that really isn't new or improved. And I think you underestimate the role the new ball will have as there will be a need for more engineering, not less. You will have every ball manufacturer trying to improve distance through materials, dimples, layers and anything else they can come up with to combat a lower initial velocity. 

... And I LOVE my electric car. Especially driving by lines selling gas for $4 a gallon while I take 15 seconds to plug my car into my charger overnight when rates are the lowest and the next morning I am ready to roll. I charge about once every 10 days or so. It is soooo much faster, smoother riding with a very low center of gravity and I won't get into the other advantages. But I have owned my GV60 for a full year now and easy to say it is by far the best car I have ever owned. And of course pun intended: your milage may vary 

[silver & black]

24 minutes ago, chisag said:

 

... Tough argument when soooooo many complain Oems come out with NEW! and IMPROVED! equipment every year that really isn't new or improved. And I think you underestimate the role the new ball will have as there will be a need for more engineering, not less. You will have every ball manufacturer trying to improve distance through materials, dimples, layers and anything else they can come up with to combat a lower initial velocity. 

... And I LOVE my electric car. Especially driving by lines selling gas for $4 a gallon while I take 15 seconds to plug my car into my charger overnight when rates are the lowest and the next morning I am ready to roll. I charge about once every 10 days or so. It is soooo much faster, smoother riding with a very low center of gravity and I won't get into the other advantages. But I have owned my GV60 for a full year now and easy to say it is by far the best car I have ever owned. And of course pun intended: your milage may vary 

What good will chasing distance do if distance is no longer allowed? If they get the ball to where the distance is right now, what was the point of the roll back? Is the end game to get us all the way back to wound balls and hickory shafts? I'm just not getting what they are trying to achieve. The simplest thing to do would be to just let things be as they are. I will continue to play no matter what, so anything I think really doesn't matter...lol.

I have nothing aginst electric cars, but neither they nor the country is ready for mass use of them. We'll just let this one alone.