Planned 2030 Golf Ball Rollback

[Shapotomous]

Somewhere in the 95 pages of this thread there was a mention of pros hitting persimmon drivers 300 yards.  Maybe somebody did but I came across this video comparison of Rory hitting a persimmon vs modern driver.  I wish they would have listed the modern driver he used, I guess it would have been his gamer at the time of the video, I didn't see a date on it.  255  vs 316 carry, big difference in ball speed and spin.

 

 

[fixyurdivot]

9 minutes ago, Shapotomous said:

Somewhere in the 95 pages of this thread there was a mention of pros hitting persimmon drivers 300 yards.  Maybe somebody did but I came across this video comparison of Rory hitting a persimmon vs modern driver.  I wish they would have listed the modern driver he used, I guess it would have been his gamer at the time of the video, I didn't see a date on it.  255  vs 316 carry, big difference in ball speed and spin.

 

 

Yup.  They were part of the problem while the goose was laying golden eggs.  Probably thought things were in runaway mode but dared not pull on the reigns for fear of pitchforks and riots.  Now it's time to try and put the toothpaste back in the tube .

[cnosil]

19 minutes ago, Shapotomous said:

Somewhere in the 95 pages of this thread there was a mention of pros hitting persimmon drivers 300 yards.  

 

https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2018/08/29/dustin-johnson-hits-jack-nicklaus-old-persimmon-driver-1-iron/

 

[Shapotomous]

6 minutes ago, cnosil said:

https://golfweek.usatoday.com/2018/08/29/dustin-johnson-hits-jack-nicklaus-old-persimmon-driver-1-iron/

 

Thanks!  290 carry.  Would have been neat to see ball speed and spin comparisons like Rory's.

Edited December 19, 2023 by Shapotomous

[cnosil]

14 minutes ago, Shapotomous said:

Thanks!  290 carry.  Would have been neat to see ball speed and spin comparisons like Rory's.

Agree.  Your video was prior to this years Scottish open.

 

Here's another with an older pro; about 15 yards different

 

This video is probably a little more realistic where the persimmon driver is more optimized for the player and not just a club handed to the player and being told to hit it.   While not a pro,  he was within a few MPH between an modern and a persimmon

 

Edited December 19, 2023 by cnosil

[storm319]

40 minutes ago, Shapotomous said:

Somewhere in the 95 pages of this thread there was a mention of pros hitting persimmon drivers 300 yards.  Maybe somebody did but I came across this video comparison of Rory hitting a persimmon vs modern driver.  I wish they would have listed the modern driver he used, I guess it would have been his gamer at the time of the video, I didn't see a date on it.  255  vs 316 carry, big difference in ball speed and spin.

 

 

ESPN did a sports science segment with Rory 10 years ago:

https://www.espn.com/video/clip/_/id/10737949

[Shapotomous]

40 minutes ago, cnosil said:

Agree.  Your video was prior to this years Scottish open.

 

Here's another with an older pro; about 15 yards different

 

This video is probably a little more realistic where the persimmon driver is more optimized for the player and not just a club handed to the player and being told to hit it.   While not a pro,  he was within a few MPH between an modern and a persimmon

 

For some reason I couldnt hear the audio very well.  Did he have a graphite shaft in the persimmon head?

I am about 25 yards shorter when I take the vintage bag out for a round.  Wilson Staff persimmon driver... I use a softer ball when playing the old clubs so that makes a difference too.

Edited December 19, 2023 by Shapotomous

[cnosil]

1 hour ago, Shapotomous said:

For some reason I couldnt hear the audio very well.  Did he have a graphite shaft in the persimmon head?

I am about 25 yards shorter when I take the vintage bag out for a round.  Wilson Staff persimmon driver... I use a softer ball when playing the old clubs so that makes a difference too.

 

Yes,  75 Gram graphite shaft but it is a little shorter than the others.  

[Subdiver1]

On 12/14/2023 at 10:41 AM, BigBoiGolf said:

Uh yeah, because 300 / 18 is 16 yards, or for the pros 1 club. 1 club isn't going to have some disastorous effect on the best golfers to ever walk the planet.

But to counter your point, green speeds have also tremendously gone up, Augusta in 77 was ~8 and today is 12 and sometimes can reach as high as 15, but hey I guess I need to point that out otherwise that's "misleading". Iron lofts have also gone down. The 52 PW and 40 7 iron is no more. Turns out physics doesn't actually change in 50 years, so lower loft hits the ball farther.

Don't worry, I'll go fetch even more data, don't wanna be "misleading" people here.

I am a data guy.  Love data.  It bugs me when people leave data out to try and twist it like we see happening in some of the articles and postings out there on this topic.  I've pulled some of the same data and when Amateur distance has essentially not changed while we have access to the same equipment something really smells funny.  I find it ironic that you mention the green speeds at Augusta as I played a tournament last year or so where the greens on each course were in the 12-14 range; I had trouble getting the ball to the hole on the faster greens because I was so scared of them.  

Your point on the club lofts makes sense to me.  I pulled the data on my old Titleist irons earlier in the year and played a tournament with them just for fun.  Everything was about 2 clubs off (e.g. old 3I was carrying new 5I distance).  There are so many points going into this that one can pick and chose one or more to try and show support for one side or another, but in aggregate, I agree with you that there is no "distance problem."  Especially when you go back and show how little Amateur distance has changed.  I'll include the relevant part of my post from Dec 4th:

In March 2022 the USGA and R&A released "a wide-ranging and detailed look at distance in the game of golf" providing a picture of how amateur performance has  changed over the years form 1996 to 2019 (https://golf.com/instruction/driving/driving-distance-average-golfers-new-report/).  The report shows that, despite access to the same (or very similar) equipment and fitting that the Pros have access to and showing ~30 yards for the elite players, driving distance has stayed pretty stable (~10 yards gained across handicaps over 25 years for us lowly amateur/recreational players).  How come we have't gained 30 yards as well if it is all equipment driven?  I wonder what would happen to that stat if all of us played on tour conditioned fairways that were set up to roll, and roll, and roll, and roll, and roll...  Which goes back to the fact that changes in course grooming and design is also a factor that needs to be considered when trying to determine the Root Cause of this horrendous problem of herculean distance  

[Franc38]

To be honest course conditions and even more design are the ONLY points that could limit the perpetual race for added distance.
Sure, you'll always be better off with a gap wedge in your hand than with a 6i when attacking a green... Except that's "from the fairway". If you need, in order to have a gap wedge in hand risk a 80% chance of loosing your ball, 10% chance of being in the rough, 5% chance in a bunker and 5% chance on the fairwy, you'll choose the short club from the tee and then attack with a 6i.

As already stated before, my home course is short and quirky, very narrow with OoB and deep woods where balls are effectively lost close to fairways. I could, potentially drive the green on 3 of the five par 4, and I did try this method before: my scoring average on 9 holes was 4 shots more! Then there's our long par 4, 415 yards. Even on this I tend to not use driver and prefer my 4 wood. After 230 yards  the fairway narrows down even more and becomes a strip 75 feet wide, with a sliver on rough on each side and then OoB immediately to the left and a 45° steep bank to the right with thick bushes on it (swallows balls often, if you find it you'll have the worse lie ever, ball knee high, etc.). Then the green is elongated, 25 feet wide with OoB 1 yard left and a water hasard back and left... Even for "longer hitters" it's statistically better to play it like a par 5!!! (which I do in competitions... )

I've played once a course just after the Challenge tour (the European equivalent to the Korn Ferry) had played it, and was amazed at "how long I drive it"... Well, turns out the balls were rolling for ages. At the same time, the fairways were quite wide and the rough wide as well and really not that deep (akin to a normal course fairway on days where they don't mow, I'd say). Yikes, I got my first drive past 350 yards! Not that I ever do that in real life...

 

If the R&A and USGA have the power to regulate the equipment and define things for course setup they could as well have the power (or seize it) to define things in the rules, like minimum height of grass in the fairway, maximum stimp for the fairway (or greens, for that matter... slower greens are "more difficult" for lowly amateurs, but actually slow greens are very hard for every one on longer putts since the uncertainty grows  massively). That could solve the distance problem, if there is one...  Obviously most courses and the PGA tour don't want that, just as they don't want the pros loosing balls often, teeing of with mid irons on par 4 and 5 etc. But that would penalize us way less since our daily courses already more than comply with rules for slow fairways and unkempt rough

[Franc38]

To sum it up, if you want less distance, don't try to regulate/block distance by rules on equipment but make distance less desirable by setting the courses and designing them in ways that stop rewarding the longest hitters who spread the ball. If they manage to be long and straight, good, they should be rewarded!

[GolfSpy_APH]

32 minutes ago, Franc38 said:

To sum it up, if you want less distance, don't try to regulate/block distance by rules on equipment but make distance less desirable by setting the courses and designing them in ways that stop rewarding the longest hitters who spread the ball. If they manage to be long and straight, good, they should be rewarded!

Unfortunately strokes gained argues against this in basically every measurement. Rough or no rough the closer it can be to the hole the better. 

The grow the rough is also a tough one because of all the places that can't. 

Finally while maybe not as important I think that the make the course different or change that puts pressure on the individual courses and adds to their financial burden.

I just think this whole thing is a no win for anyone. 

Stay tuned for tomorrow when our forum article comes out!

[Shapotomous]

10 hours ago, storm319 said:

ESPN did a sports science segment with Rory 10 years ago:

https://www.espn.com/video/clip/_/id/10737949

Rory seems to have a big dropoff when going back to a persimmon driver compared to DJ.  Maybe DJs swing is more optimized for an old driver than Rory.

[Franc38]

14 minutes ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

Unfortunately strokes gained argues against this in basically every measurement. Rough or no rough the closer it can be to the hole the better. 

The grow the rough is also a tough one because of all the places that can't. 

Finally while maybe not as important I think that the make the course different or change that puts pressure on the individual courses and adds to their financial burden.

I just think this whole thing is a no win for anyone. 

Stay tuned for tomorrow when our forum article comes out!

Nobody said that distance isn't important, or shouldn't be important, or whatever. They just pretend that some people hit "too far". You just have to make it so that it's dangerous to hit too far for the incentive to be reduced.
Strokes gained show at the moment that "for tour courses as they are" you're the same 125 yards from the fairway to 100 yards (ish) from the rough. Just make it so that in order to compare to 125 yards from the fairway you need to be 50 yards from the rough. And that partial shots from the fairway can't hold the greens as much a full shots from the same fairways. Also, make the fairways (much) narrower at 300 to 370 yards so that the risk when you're long is higher.Sure enough long players will still have an advantage, but they'll bomb less from the tee. Which is supposedly "the problem".

Now courses make money, we pay it. Plus, if anything, a less manicured/maintained course would incentivize being on the fairways more, and cost less. Making fairways smaller also limits costs and makes the "bomb and gouge" a less attractive option. The reason why a lot of munis don't have the set up of the tour courses is not because it would be hard for players (like they cared) but because it's cheaper!

Edited December 19, 2023 by Franc38

[Franc38]

7 minutes ago, Shapotomous said:

Rory seems to have a big dropoff when going back to a persimmon driver compared to DJ.  Maybe DJs swing is more optimized for an old driver than Rory.

Yep.
Give them persimmons only and they'll try to optimize for that. Shafts, balls, swings... And within a short amount of time, they'll hit it as far as today. Possibly more often offline, though. Us, on the other hand...

[RickyBobby_PR]

1 hour ago, Franc38 said:

To be honest course conditions and even more design are the ONLY points that could limit the perpetual race for added distance.
Sure, you'll always be better off with a gap wedge in your hand than with a 6i when attacking a green... Except that's "from the fairway". If you need, in order to have a gap wedge in hand risk a 80% chance of loosing your ball, 10% chance of being in the rough, 5% chance in a bunker and 5% chance on the fairwy, you'll choose the short club from the tee and then attack with a 6i.

There’s not necessarily a perpetual race for distance. There is a limit of where distance becomes detrimental. Se Tony Finau and his comments about why he doesn’t hit it further, or look at the data from 2019-2021 that shows speed stagnated and then dropped from 2022-2023. Distance is pretty much capped at this point and max distance has remained unchanged since 2003.

You might want to do some reading on strokes gained because your premise of shorter off the tee to have a longer club into the green to avoid risk ain’t true. Strokes gained shows a gap wedge from the rough is better than a 6i from the fairway and that risk is considered when choosing clubs off the tee. So the guys who are hitting driver have already considered the risk of where they will be. 
 

1 hour ago, Franc38 said:

If the R&A and USGA have the power to regulate the equipment and define things for course setup they could as well have the power (or seize it) to define things in the rules, like minimum height of grass in the fairway, maximum stimp for the fairway (or greens, for that matter... slower greens are "more difficult" for lowly amateurs, but actually slow greens are very hard for every one on longer putts since the uncertainty grows  massively). That could solve the distance problem, if there is one...  Obviously most courses and the PGA tour don't want that, just as they don't want the pros loosing balls often, teeing of with mid irons on par 4 and 5 etc. But that would penalize us way less since our daily courses already more than comply with rules for slow fairways and unkempt rough

They don’t have the power to define course setups. The USGA has recommendations for fairway and rough heights but there are no rules that state it must be X. They can do what they want in their events like the U.S. Open or The Open but they can’t tell the PGA tour how to setup their courses which is why they are going to the ball route. If they tried to seize it they would pretty much put themselves out of business. 
 

not sure what courses you play but I play quite a few that have far from slow fairways and unkempt rough. Now they aren’t playing oga tour fast in the fairways because that type of setup isn’t good for year round maintenance of the course. Definitely plays multiple courses that have above average speed on the greens.

 

[cnosil]

46 minutes ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

Unfortunately strokes gained argues against this in basically every measurement. Rough or no rough the closer it can be to the hole the better. 

 

Yes strokes gained argues against laying back.  But if you follow DECADE type approaches, there is consideration for penalties and adjustments need to be made like moving your target or dropping back from driver off the tee.   

[cnosil]

1 hour ago, Shapotomous said:

Rory seems to have a big dropoff when going back to a persimmon driver compared to DJ.  Maybe DJs swing is more optimized for an old driver than Rory.

I would say that DJ hit more shots with the driver than Rory and adjusted his swing.   What is missing from the pros hit persimmon and lose x amount of yards is optimization in shaft, swing, loft, etc..  That is why I posted that other video where the guy optimized the persimmon driver and kind of equalized the performance.   

Edited December 19, 2023 by cnosil

[RickyBobby_PR]

1 hour ago, Franc38 said:

To sum it up, if you want less distance, don't try to regulate/block distance by rules on equipment but make distance less desirable by setting the courses and designing them in ways that stop rewarding the longest hitters who spread the ball. If they manage to be long and straight, good, they should be rewarded!

This way of thinking is gone. Strokes gained is out of the box and distance is an advantage. Many knew it but there wasn’t data to show it. Now we have it and everyone knows it. Being closer is better than being father away. That doesn’t mean tae unnecessary risks, but getting closer to the hole is better

45 minutes ago, Shapotomous said:

Rory seems to have a big dropoff when going back to a persimmon driver compared to DJ.  Maybe DJs swing is more optimized for an old driver than Rory.

Rory had 4400 spin with the club he hit. It also looks like he tried to just fireaway at it. 169 ball speed with a club not optimized to him is still pretty good.

38 minutes ago, Franc38 said:

Nobody said that distance isn't important, or shouldn't be important, or whatever. They just pretend that some people hit "too far". You just have to make it so that it's dangerous to hit too far for the incentive to be reduced.
Strokes gained show at the moment that "for tour courses as they are" you're the same 125 yards from the fairway to 100 yards (ish) from the rough. Just make it so that in order to compare to 125 yards from the fairway you need to be 50 yards from the rough. And that partial shots from the fairway can't hold the greens as much a full shots from the same fairways. Also, make the fairways (much) narrower at 300 to 370 yards so that the risk when you're long is higher.Sure enough long players will still have an advantage, but they'll bomb less from the tee. Which is supposedly "the problem".

Now courses make money, we pay it. Plus, if anything, a less manicured/maintained course would incentivize being on the fairways more, and cost less. Making fairways smaller also limits costs and makes the "bomb and gouge" a less attractive option. The reason why a lot of munis don't have the set up of the tour courses is not because it would be hard for players (like they cared) but because it's cheaper!

The bolded part goes against what the pga tour is trying to do. 
 

This is where the problem/disconnect is happening.

The ruling bodies can’t get out of their own way. There is no distance issue at the regular golfing ranks, they said so with the tee it forward program. They use the PGA tour as their main data for distance and claim there is a problem. They tell everyone there is a problem and a small subset of the golfing public buy it. Yet the PGA tour where this supposed issue of distance exists have yet to state there is a problem, nor have they attempted to change their course setups each week to curb it if there was. So where is the problem? There isn’t one. The problem is the suits at the ruling bodies don’t like the the modern athletic golfer who has worked out, used the technology available like launch monitors and fittings to fine tune their setups. They admit it’s the average distance that has increased while never admitting max distance is pretty much stagnant for 20 years. The stage distance has been on the rise for the last 20,30,40 years. We’ll no duh Sherlock. The ball, technology, materials and manufacturing processes have all improved. Not to mention a guy named Tiger came into the scene and was fit and worked out hard (maybe too hard) and it showed people that being fit and strong is possible And great golf can be played that way. DL3 did an interview where he said he as going to go home and saw guys like Rickie heading to the gym so he switched heads grabbed his workout clothes and went to the gym.

Then add in strokes gained, speed training and the way the game is played has changed and isn’t going back to lay up to a number off the tee.

So people are trying to solve a problem that doesn’t exist on the pro tour.

 

[RickyBobby_PR]

1 hour ago, Franc38 said:

Yep.
Give them persimmons only and they'll try to optimize for that. Shafts, balls, swings... And within a short amount of time, they'll hit it as far as today. Possibly more often offline, though. Us, on the other hand...

When a club is optimized the offline part probably won’t be true. There will always be some dispersion pattern but when fitting a golfer the end result allows for them to minimize the dispersion while maintaining optimized launch to maximize their distance both carry and roll out. If a certain distance is causing more dispersion it’s dialed back.

they aren’t going back to persimmon. If you want to see what the pros do wit a smaller head just watch them hit their 3w

Edited December 19, 2023 by RickyBobby_PR

[DaveP043]

5 hours ago, Franc38 said:

If the R&A and USGA have the power to regulate the equipment and define things for course setup they could as well have the power (or seize it) to define things in the rules, like minimum height of grass in the fairway, maximum stimp for the fairway (or greens, for that matter... slower greens are "more difficult" for lowly amateurs, but actually slow greens are very hard for every one on longer putts since the uncertainty grows  massively). That could solve the distance problem, if there is one...  

 

3 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

They don’t have the power to define course setups. The USGA has recommendations for fairway and rough heights but there are no rules that state it must be X. They can do what they want in their events like the U.S. Open or The Open but they can’t tell the PGA tour how to setup their courses which is why they are going to the ball route. If they tried to seize it they would pretty much put themselves out of business. 

In general, I agree with @RickyBobby_PR here, the USGA and R&A have never had the power to regulate course set-up.  I don't believe the reason is as he describes.  Golf is played in every climate and every continent, jungles and deserts and links and forests.  Its played on courses with multi-million dollar maintenance budgets, and courses with volunteers doing most of the mowing.  Even for a single course, weather varies tremendously through a year, and from year to year, significantly influencing the ability of a staff to maintain conditions.  There's simply no realistic way to write rules to apply to all of these situations.  

Edited December 19, 2023 by DaveP043

[golfsdp1957]

How many of the current balls on the market today confirm to the new rules?

[RickyBobby_PR]

21 minutes ago, golfsdp1957 said:

How many of the current balls on the market today confirm to the new rules?

The ruling bodies claim 30% but they have not provided a list of them. They are going to be the softer balls on the market. Which will hurt be higher swing players a lot. 

[revkev]

I wish the survey had asked the million dollar question of will you follow the new rule in 2030.

 

I answered it as if I would but I most certainly won't.  My guess is that this will change by then but should it remain the same I simply won't play by the rules and won't maintain a handicap at that point.  

 

I play golf for fun - losing 7 or so yards off of driver and a like number off of irons is not helpful in that regard. I don't' hit the ball far enough as it is and I'm as long as or longer than many of the people whom I play with, even those younger than me.  They are taking what's not broke, in fact what is working the best that it has in decades and running the risk of ruining it.  

 

Good luck 

Edited December 19, 2023 by revkev

[RickyBobby_PR]

7 minutes ago, revkev said:

They are taking what's not broke, in fact what is working the best that it has in decades and running the risk of ruining it.  

This is the sort that bothers most. The game is in a good place and even Mike Whan agrees. They are trying to do something that risks ruining the game over a rollback that won’t have the impact on the pro game 

[Stuka44]

8 minutes ago, revkev said:

I play golf for fun

I will simply add non-conforming ball, to the 15th club I am going to add to my bag.  This completely arrogant decision has made it clear, that the powers that be don't care about me, and my enjoyment of the game, so I am no longer going to concern myself with them AT ALL. 

[GolfSpy_APH]

1 hour ago, revkev said:

I wish the survey had asked the million dollar question of will you follow the new rule in 2030.

 

I answered it as if I would but I most certainly won't.  My guess is that this will change by then but should it remain the same I simply won't play by the rules and won't maintain a handicap at that point.  

 

I play golf for fun - losing 7 or so yards off of driver and a like number off of irons is not helpful in that regard. I don't' hit the ball far enough as it is and I'm as long as or longer than many of the people whom I play with, even those younger than me.  They are taking what's not broke, in fact what is working the best that it has in decades and running the risk of ruining it.  

 

Good luck 

I can always do a follow up poll in 2024, 2025, 2026, 2027, 2028, 2029 and then finally 2030

[BigBoiGolf]

5 hours ago, Franc38 said:

I've played once a course just after the Challenge tour (the European equivalent to the Korn Ferry) had played it, and was amazed at "how long I drive it"... Well, turns out the balls were rolling for ages. At the same time, the fairways were quite wide and the rough wide as well and really not that deep (akin to a normal course fairway on days where they don't mow, I'd say). Yikes, I got my first drive past 350 yards! Not that I ever do that in real life...

We have a hole like that when it gets dried out in August it basically gives you free 350+ yard drives. Honestly, the bunker placement is kinda genius because it all funnels down there. I was a league guest at a shorter, cheaper course with clay, almost every drive plugged with 0 rollout. Some even bounced backwards a few inches where they hit the lumpy ground! Made the greens super easy though since the ball stayed where it impacted.

Nobody will watch Pro golf where they get a plugged mud ball at 280 every tee shot.

[BigBoiGolf]

4 hours ago, cnosil said:

I would say that DJ hit more shots with the driver than Rory and adjusted his swing.   What is missing from the pros hit persimmon and lose x amount of yards is optimization in shaft, swing, loft, etc..  That is why I posted that other video where the guy optimized the persimmon driver and kind of equalized the performance.   

Yeah, it's always going to be ballistics

"Golly Gee! That persimmon lost me 60 yards!"

Uh yeah, because it's 4500 spin, wtf did you think was going to happen?

Reminds me of that stupid Taylormade Commercial where Trottie talks about Stealth 2 Fargiveness getting 290 total yards when Scottie Scheffler is swinging like 125mph. Yeah, if you cram enough head speed to accomodate for the 1.4 smash factor on the toe, you will eventually get to 290 total. That doesn't make the club good, you just stuffed it until you got the result you wanted.

 

Every notice how they never show you ball speed or clubhead speed? It's because they're liars by omission, not that that's ever stopped anyone before. I'd bet good money they messed with the LM settings too.

[fixyurdivot]

1 hour ago, revkev said:

I wish the survey had asked the million dollar question of will you follow the new rule in 2030.

 

I answered it as if I would but I most certainly won't.  My guess is that this will change by then but should it remain the same I simply won't play by the rules and won't maintain a handicap at that point.  

 

I play golf for fun - losing 7 or so yards off of driver and a like number off of irons is not helpful in that regard. I don't' hit the ball far enough as it is and I'm as long as or longer than many of the people whom I play with, even those younger than me.  They are taking what's not broke, in fact what is working the best that it has in decades and running the risk of ruining it.  

 

Good luck 

Hey Rev, can I steal your game plan?   The scuttle-butt in our men's league here is that we'll continue to play non-neutered balls.