Off Course is back this week with a fantastic show including discussing some polarizing topics including the idea of a distance problem in golf. Hosted by Dan Edwards and Rob Miller, each Friday the hosts give you a deep look into the world of golf and equipment in a way unlike any other podcast has done before.
Episode 15 is here and Rob and Dan are joined by Golf Unfiltered to discuss the following topics.
Club Building as a Hobby
Does Golf Have a Distance Problem
Should the Ball Be Rolled Back
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
We can definitely act like 20% of total distance on the ground is NOT a problem. That’s fine.
OK here we go. "Why go backwards in tech?" There are limits now (COR, CT, Ball etc). So, why even limit these? If these limits were there for Jack, Arnie, etc. why have them at all? Because when they were set, they were based on facts, existing tech, data at a certain point in time. Jack used to shave the heel of his driver for more gear effect. Now AI makes the face the MAVRIK.
Manufacturers have found ways to meet certain limits, yet create distance gains. Pros have become true athletes with 5 different coaches in their corner.
Essentially, the USGA & R&A are admitting they’ve miscalculated without actually admitting it when limits are set.
Balls roll. It’s crazy, I know. It’s almost like the guys on Tour know the EXACT carry yardages and how to hit the ball properly to maximize roll on holes that allow tons of rollout.
Yep. The same holes that offer up 10% of that same roll weeks outside the event…
Because there are 25 million golfers and out of that 1000 hit it really far.
This is like saying all highways should be 35 MPH Speed Limits because lane squatters from NJ and NY go to FL and drive 35 in the left lane.
People should do some research on when COR went into effect too. its not as if the same things applied today that did in the sixties. Lots of courses have been built and designed with modern tech around.
Are you telling me they change course setups for pros? Stop this crazy talk. I mean, it’s almost like they’re trying to give shorter hitters a chance.
We’re talking pros, not Joe’s. Not talking typical golfer at all. Otherwise, grow the grass for them too, right?
View attachment 8954857
You are so far gone on this I don’t even know what you’re trying to argue anymore hahahaha
They already do grow the grass. So where do you cut the line? What about top notch college players? Mini tours? LPGA?
It is interesting that You have @golfunfiltered on one side @Canadan on the other and @HipCheck seems to be kinda in the middle. I was at one point very firmly in the nothing needs to be done camp. I am not so sure anymore. I think something should be done. I just have no idea what that is..
We all have to realize though, that the rollback crowd is largely an aesthetics thing. Score is really not part of the conversation. It is a "how is the game played" deal. Unless we start playing all events on tight tall tree lined courses like Harbor Town. You have to find a way to protect the course.
I do feel that in may ways the PGA wants this. If you play all your events on cookie cutter TPC of name your fav town. They are all going to look the same and be played the same.
I’m not sure, but there are lots of differences between college sports and their pro counterparts to look at, including the size and shape of a college vs. pro football. It’s not close to being unprecedented.
But the argument the woke is making is about course design. Other sports shouldn’t really come into play.
NBA Players hit too many three pointers. They should probably move it back.
Kickers make to many field goals, they should probably shrink the posts.
Pitchers throw the ball too hard. They should move them back.
Hitters hit the ball too easily, they should add a wobble to the ball.
Tennis players rallies are too long. They should shrink the court and raise the net.
etc etc etc etc etc.
You’ve never played courses that already have those? I get the caddyshack 2 stuff, but I see a lot of those ^ two examples. They usually just introduce risk/rewards scenarios, which I’m okay with.
The three point line went from none existence, to existence, and was actually moved forward in the mid 90s in an attempt to increase scoring, then back again a couple years later.
And the moved the PAT attempts back for Kickers what? Two years ago and misses increased dramatically.
Baseball reduced the height of the mound. Largely due to Bob Gibson in an attempt to slow pitchers.
Not tennis but competitive table tennis increased the size of the ball from 38mm to 40mm in the mid 2000s. Then just a few years ago switched from celuloid to plastic all in an attempt to slow the ball. Also at that time the banned the use of speed glue.
lots of precedent for change.
they didn’t make kicking harder in football, they made the PAT less irrelevant.
My point was that there is no real comfort zone for change from sport to sport. relating any of it to golf is tough because the conditions are so different.
agreed, I am just showing that sports change.
There is a big conspiracy theory about juiced baseballs in recent years ? but still not relevant to golf.
I was using it as a "pros could get used to a different ball" argument, but if we want to talk varied playing playing fields, baseball is like that.
There’s a reason aluminum bats aren’t allowed on the pro level. If they were, Fenway Park and the right field at Yankee Stadium would give up who knows how many home runs a game. Hell, someone might even hit one out at Citi Field.
But you cannot simply change the condition of a product like a golf ball without companies losing their minds.
It’s all about realistic change, not change that would heavily impact the industry. While the USGA and R&A seem to collectively have a lot of nerve, I cannot fathom them doing something like that. It’s just not realistic to me.
Tennis is a good tech scenario. Back in the McEnroe era, there was a lot of shotmaking and artistry. Wilson introduced the Profile racquet in 1987 that was WIDE (talking frame thickness) and much more stiff than wood, graphite and ceramic counterparts. It fundamentally changed the game. Try and watch a pro tennis match on hardcourt now. It sucks. It’s all serve and aces. Super stiffer racquets. Balls hit too fast for players to react. Aces and shanks.
Go watch a broadcast. How many times do they celebrate a perfectly accurate drive vs a drive that goes a specific distance?
How interested are you in watching a top professional hit the ball 270 with roll?
It’s just not realistic.
The Aluminum bat isn’t allowed in MLB because of safety.
The argument being made about pros to play different equipment is that they aren’t playing the course how it is designed. yet modern courses since limits were set have been in place. Maybe its time to not play the same dozen courses anymore or improve them for pros to play. Its not the length, its the layout, combined with the 40 yards of roll weekly for those highlight watchers that don’t watch the golf, but choose to pick a stat or two (see @golfunfiltered ). Some of the hardest courses on tour are not the longest.
Then it shifted to CT debate, as if that was how clubs were measured in the 60s and 70s.
Then it shifted to land being available. Then it was about par being made foolish.
All for less than a 15 yard difference in over a decade.
People are making it out to be that distance and speed is not a skill and anybody can do it, yet so few actually do. Setting a random line as you said works in theory, but what about the KF Tour? Mini tour? US Am? Collegiate? LPGA? Mexican Mini Tour?
I hear what you’re saying completely. I think companies would adapt. You can play the ball DJ plays, but aren’t limited to distance. A commercial w/an Am hitting it as far as him. They’ll work it out.
I think the bigger "issue" w/bifurcation is OEMs will say "OK we need to dial back the ball for pros, then why can we move it forward for amateurs? Why limit them? That line in the sand no longer has value."
That will be be a mess.
YES!!!! While still impossible, I love this answer the most.
Any tour where you wear sandals, there should be ZERO equipment limits.
BINGO. But hey, what’s 20% between friends.
As a former 3rd baseman, this is one half of a aluminum bats argument.
The other is the pitcher or infielders having to be carted off the field every night after line drives.
"Fore!"
The guys testing the gear here are literally telling you that there has not been enough increase in distances with clubs to merit tearing apart or invalidating courses.
This is especially true with amateur players.
There are agendas involved with this yet-again renewed "distance" debate, and unfortunately, they do not end up benefitting the average golfer.
Not totally true, they could deaden bats more. They have in college baseball. (College baseball only uses aluminum due to cost of wood bats being prohibitive for most programs)
If his body starts breaking down, will he be able to go back to a smooth, controlled swing? Or will he stand over every tee ball thinking he can get a bit more out of it and struggle with consistency as a result?
Whoah. Centerline bunkering is an awesome design feature in course architecture imo haha. The rest, ok.
The majority of consumers (the ones you and dan keep referring to would be hurt by this) wouldn’t know what the hell was going on.
A lot of these people I pair up with in the wild could probably tell you what company the bigger players are staff members of, but if I say what ball or driver or wedge they are playing, literally less than 10% would actually know anything besides prov1 and just saying the newest driver that’s out.
OEMs already spend a ton of money on making one offs, make the equipment regulated for them internally but keep the looks, majority of the consumers buying product have no idea. Unless I’m just in a shell haha.
Literally had a guy try to tell me tiger must love playing his prov1 again (which we all know he never played a prov 1 ever) and that Bridgestone was a just a small company trying to make a buck besides their tire sales.
Simple way is if the tournament would cause someone to lose am status that event would require the limited ball.
I play a lot of golf, watch a lot of golf, and spend a lot of time here on the forum. I’d be hard pressed to tell you which pros are on staff for which OEM – clubs, balls or otherwise. If there was a quiz listing 20 pros, I’d venture to guess that I’d get maybe 3 or 4 of them right (hello Pat Perez, Bubba, Bryson and Phil, off the top of my head). As far as balls, I’d guess ProV1 for all of them and probably be 90% right, since Titleist seems to sponsor anybody and everybody who’ll play their ball just so they can say they’re the most played ball on Tour.
I don’t pay a lot of attention to Tour WITBs, and I don’t base my buying decisions off what pro is playing what gear. I’m not a pro, we’re not playing the same game, and what we buy in the stores isn’t what they’re playing anyway, for the most part. I’m an old guy who isn’t very good at golf, and I can use all the distance and forgiveness I can get. I don’t have the talent, strength, speed or coordination to hit butter knives with sweet spots the size of a pinhead and shafts stiffer than rebar.
Bifurcate the equipment – the OEMs could market a Pro line and an Amateur line. People who are bound and determined to play whatever their heroes are playing could buy the pro stuff, with the full knowledge that they’re not going to hit it as far and/or have as much control. The rest of us who aren’t trying to pretend we’re Tour players and don’t want to deal with that can buy stuff from the Amateur line, where distance and forgiveness are still emphasized/improved. That’s actually not too different from how they already market clubs, so not a huge change. The biggest change would be for the ball manufacturers, and as long as they clearly state that their "Pro" balls are reduced flight and control, people already know what they’re getting before they plunk their money down so there’s no surprises. Maybe they could put a Circle T on them and label them "Tour Use Only" – it might even drive sales for them (hi Scotty!).
this subject and didn’t know who to ask. https://woori777.com
no need to mass produce the standardized equipment. My point is, most consumers wouldn’t evenknow. Also I’m not for flight restricting the ball. I’m for making the pros have to control it better by adding spin off the tee. When they list the witb they can do what they already do anyhow. In terms of drivers and balls most of them are not retail anyways. Digitally lifted and weighted fit their preferences.