We've launched the new forums! Read more here

USGA Rolled Back Golf Balls - What If?

SuperStroke
Something like this happening might usher in the NXT Tour S as the new premium ball, in which I would vomit. That thing is awful.
 
This may not be a good comparison but F1 racing has been continuously regulated in terms of how fast a car could go. Then engineers figured out other ways to make it faster again without breaking the rules over and over.
So, at the end chances are golf balls companies will come up with new ways to charge the prices they are charging now (after all, it is not the club sales but accessaries including the balls where they make real money)
 
I would hate if they got rid of urethane covers. I love that stuff. I'd hoard old balls.
 
Very interesting topic. Let me ask you this JB, which of these scenarios in regards to the future of golf balls do you think would be more likely to occur? I realize that this is just a hypothetical, just curious on your thoughts.
 
What if the USGA said you can continue to develop golf balls as they are now, but the tour player must play a ball which is sub $35 per dozen.

So amateur players and anyone willing to spend the money can still purchase distance and spinning balls, so called 'tour' level balls. You then have tour players using less technologically advanced balls which brings in the restrictions that the USGA are looking for. Or all the ball manufacturers drop their pricing :0)
 
I know that at the end of the day, the equipment used by the layman and the equipment used by the pro is very rarely the same. The only thing in common is the woods (sans a whole lot of lead tape and back weight) and the golf ball (though even this is debatable). It would not shock me in the least to see the usga punish the lay man with a ruling on the golfball, what is more shocking is that it hasnt already happened. Jack was screaming this stuff 10-12 years ago. Bifurication may be neccesary, but considering there is still that illusion that the average lay golfer is playing the same stuff as the pro, there will be something lost if the tour adopts a "different game" mentality.
 
This is a very interesting "what if", mainly because one of the games greatest players, Jack Nicklaus, has been saying for several years now that he thought that the ball changing was one of the problems with golf...the fact that tour pros hit the ball 70 yards futher than the average player.

I don't really care for option #1 because that would lead to issues, although as JB pointed out, it's not that different than what already goes one with tour level versions of some clubs and some guys playing clubs and balls that arent available to the general public.

Option #2 is interesting because as several have pointed out, they aren't going to lower the price on premium balls, it would just change what "premium" reffered to. Titliest and others would just spin tons of money on R&D so they could say our surlyn cover is longer and spinnier than yours.
 
I dont even want to think about ball restrictions like this. Especially no more urethane covers and distance restrictions because the Pros hit it to far. Why make the average golfer suffer because "Tour Players" hit it to far and spin it to easy.
 
Jack Nicklaus has been suggesting for years that the tour switch to a limited flight ball. His suggestion goes that brand names are maintained on balls and for sponsorships but a single spec is used. Using his suggestion the ball could be adjusted on a tournament by tournament basis to match the course length.
I kinda like that idea. It could bring back some shorter classic courses to the tour rotation. It would also bring back having to be accurate as it could bring fairway bunkers back into play that pros drive over now. It would make par 5's true par 5's.

Last but not least the PGA wouldn't have to run greens to 17 -20 on the stimp meter and shave greens and fringes so balls roll away if the target is missed slightly just to keep the pros from posting embarrassingly low scores on tournament courses.
 
Honestly wouldn't bother me. I think there would still be plenty of good options for the average golfer and it may reduce prices if they weren't spending so much on year to year development.
That being said I think the game is over regulated as it is. Sometimes it feels like you need a degree just to understand the rules. I think they need to take a step back. Pros are fitter and stronger now than they have ever been so its no surprise they hit it further. They may be hitting it 30% longer but scores aren't dropping by that much (don't know the exact figures just pulled one out of the air) . Point is golf is still not an easy game whether rules are changed or not. We will adapt either way.

I said a tap tap tappity tap
 
Tedfroop said:
Jack Nicklaus has been suggesting for years that the tour switch to a limited flight ball. His suggestion goes that brand names are maintained on balls and for sponsorships but a single spec is used. Using his suggestion the ball could be adjusted on a tournament by tournament basis to match the course length.
I kinda like that idea. It could bring back some shorter classic courses to the tour rotation. It would also bring back having to be accurate as it could bring fairway bunkers back into play that pros drive over now. It would make par 5's true par 5's.

Last but not least the PGA wouldn't have to run greens to 17 -20 on the stimp meter and shave greens and fringes so balls roll away if the target is missed slightly just to keep the pros from posting embarrassingly low scores on tournament courses.
Click to expand...

But they already do post absurd scores on very hard courses.

I don't see the point in trying to hold these guys back. They're damn good at golf. Let them show it and experience it. That's why they're pros. Should we strap weights on to the ankles of football and basketball players because they're too good?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top