Off Course: Episode 15: Does Golf Have a Distance Problem?

Josh Babbitt July 24, 2020 90 Comments

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

Go to discussion...

Podcast: Play in new window | Download

Subscribe: Spotify | RSS

Josh Babbitt

View More Posts

Josh Babbitt is the Publisher of The Hackers Paradise and co-founder of THP Media. He has a passion for the game and the equipment and travels the country hosting THP Experiences bringing the golf industry together with our forum community.

90 Comments

Canadan says:

July 24, 2020 at 1:40 pm

[QUOTE=”HipCheck, post: 9439426, member: 58068″]
I know I know. I left out Grow the Grass.

[media=giphy]QLXPK5HFpzCjS[/media]
[/QUOTE]
We can definitely act like 20% of total distance on the ground is NOT a problem. That’s fine.

[media=giphy]Nw8z2olm0nGHC[/media]
HipCheck says:

July 24, 2020 at 1:41 pm

[QUOTE=”jdtox, post: 9439431, member: 5944″]
But why do you have to be shotmaker? Being able to control a ball at that speed and distance is pretty impressive to me. Heck before him Bubba Watson hit the ball pretty damn far and took some different lines and was able to control his shot shape a bit for a while. I still am not sure others can do what Bryson is doing, I guess we will see. I don’t understand the logic of wanting to go backwards in ball tech or equipment though. Whats next go from iPhones back to Motorola flip phones?
[/QUOTE]

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.

[QUOTE=”Canadan, post: 9439481, member: 2320″]
We can definitely act like 20% of total distance on the ground is NOT a problem. That’s fine.

[media=giphy]Nw8z2olm0nGHC[/media]
[/QUOTE]

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.
Canadan says:

July 24, 2020 at 1:49 pm

[QUOTE=”HipCheck, post: 9439485, member: 58068″]
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.
[/QUOTE]
Yep. The same holes that offer up 10% of that same roll weeks outside the event…
JB says:

July 24, 2020 at 1:51 pm

[QUOTE=”HipCheck, post: 9439485, member: 58068″]
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.
[/QUOTE]

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. :ROFLMAO:
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.
HipCheck says:

July 24, 2020 at 1:54 pm

[QUOTE=”Canadan, post: 9439500, member: 2320″]
Yep. The same holes that offer up 10% of that same roll weeks outside the event…
[/QUOTE]

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.
HipCheck says:

July 24, 2020 at 1:57 pm

[QUOTE=”JB, post: 9439503, member: 3″]
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. :ROFLMAO:
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.
[/QUOTE]

We’re talking pros, not Joe’s. Not talking typical golfer at all. Otherwise, grow the grass for them too, right? :p

[ATTACH type=”full”]8954857[/ATTACH]
Canadan says:

July 24, 2020 at 1:59 pm

[QUOTE=”HipCheck, post: 9439507, member: 58068″]
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.
[/QUOTE]
You are so far gone on this I don’t even know what you’re trying to argue anymore hahahaha
JB says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:01 pm

[QUOTE=”HipCheck, post: 9439511, member: 58068″]
We’re talking pros, not Joe’s. Not talking typical golfer at all. Otherwise, grow the grass for them too, right? :p

[ATTACH type=”full” alt=”joes.jpg”]8954857[/ATTACH]
[/QUOTE]
They already do grow the grass. So where do you cut the line? What about top notch college players? Mini tours? LPGA?
NVGOLFER80 says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:04 pm

This was one of my fav off course episodes. Great listen.

It is interesting that You have [USER=34546]@golfunfiltered[/USER] on one side [USER=2320]@Canadan[/USER] on the other and [USER=58068]@HipCheck[/USER] 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.
HipCheck says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:04 pm

[QUOTE=”JB, post: 9439517, member: 3″]
They already do grow the grass. So where do you cut the line? What about top notch college players? Mini tours? LPGA?
[/QUOTE]

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.
JB says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:06 pm

[QUOTE=”HipCheck, post: 9439520, member: 58068″]
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.
[/QUOTE]
But the argument the woke is making is about course design. Other sports shouldn’t really come into play.
Canadan says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:16 pm

[QUOTE=”JB, post: 9439524, member: 3″]
But the argument the woke is making is about course design. Other sports shouldn’t really come into play.
[/QUOTE]
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.
OldandStiff says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:22 pm

[QUOTE=”NVGOLFER80, post: 9439181, member: 53139″]
I don’t want golf courses to … ….have bunkers in the middle of fairways, forced layups. ETC..
[/QUOTE]

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.
NVGOLFER80 says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:24 pm

[QUOTE=”Canadan, post: 9439541, member: 2320″]
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.
[/QUOTE]

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.
Canadan says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:26 pm

[QUOTE=”NVGOLFER80, post: 9439548, member: 53139″]
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.
[/QUOTE]
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.
NVGOLFER80 says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:27 pm

[QUOTE=”Canadan, post: 9439552, member: 2320″]
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.
[/QUOTE]

agreed, I am just showing that sports change.
golfunfiltered says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:27 pm

[QUOTE=”Canadan, post: 9439513, member: 2320″]
You are so far gone on this I don’t even know what you’re trying to argue anymore hahahaha
[/QUOTE]
[media=giphy]8SxGru3XzElqg[/media]
RealPretendPsychic says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:29 pm

[QUOTE=”Canadan, post: 9439552, member: 2320″]
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.
[/QUOTE]
There is a big conspiracy theory about juiced baseballs in recent years ? but still not relevant to golf.
HipCheck says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:32 pm

[QUOTE=”JB, post: 9439524, member: 3″]
But the argument the woke is making is about course design. Other sports shouldn’t really come into play.
[/QUOTE]

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. 😉
Canadan says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:37 pm

[QUOTE=”HipCheck, post: 9439566, member: 58068″]
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. 😉
[/QUOTE]
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.
HipCheck says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:38 pm

[QUOTE=”Canadan, post: 9439541, member: 2320″]
Tennis players rallies are too long. They should shrink the court and raise the net.

[/QUOTE]

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.
Canadan says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:38 pm

Not to mention the Tour will never go for it.

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.
JB says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:44 pm

[QUOTE=”HipCheck, post: 9439566, member: 58068″]
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. 😉
[/QUOTE]

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 [USER=34546]@golfunfiltered[/USER] :ROFLMAO:). 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?
HipCheck says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:46 pm

[QUOTE=”Canadan, post: 9439569, member: 2320″]
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.
[/QUOTE]

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.
NVGOLFER80 says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:47 pm

[QUOTE=”JB, post: 9439584, member: 3″]
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. [B][I][U]Maybe its time to not play the same dozen courses anymore or improve them for pros to play. [/U][/I][/B] 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 [USER=34546]@golfunfiltered[/USER] :ROFLMAO:). 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?
[/QUOTE]

YES!!!! While still impossible, I love this answer the most.
golfunfiltered says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:47 pm

To be clear, there’s no question distance and control are skills. More accurately, outcomes of skillsets.
HipCheck says:

July 24, 2020 at 2:48 pm

[QUOTE=”JB, post: 9439584, member: 3″]
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?
[/QUOTE]

Any tour where you wear sandals, there should be ZERO equipment limits. :p
shanewu says:

July 24, 2020 at 3:34 pm

Haven’t listened but don’t think there is a distance problem. I do think golf has a “talk about the same shit for decades and decades and decades” problem. :sleep:
Jman says:

July 24, 2020 at 4:14 pm

I enjoyed this one! Not so much Adam’s take, but that’s ok! :ROFLMAO:
[QUOTE=”Canadan, post: 9439481, member: 2320″]
We can definitely act like 20% of total distance on the ground is NOT a problem. That’s fine.

[media=giphy]Nw8z2olm0nGHC[/media]
[/QUOTE]
BINGO. But hey, what’s 20% between friends. :unsure:
Gman79 says:

July 24, 2020 at 4:19 pm

Fire and Bourbon Friday night?! seems like a good way to listen and is becoming a moment of destressing for the week.
blueonblack says:

July 25, 2020 at 12:52 pm

[QUOTE=”HipCheck, post: 9439566, member: 58068″]
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. 😉
[/QUOTE]
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. :confused:
“Fore!”
blueonblack says:

July 25, 2020 at 1:00 pm

You guys love your stats, and even when I post them to show very modest gains in distance over the decades as [USER=3]@JB[/USER] is referencing, it falls on deaf ears. :unsure:

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.
baylrballa says:

July 25, 2020 at 1:12 pm

[QUOTE=”JB, post: 9439584, member: 3″]
The Aluminum bat isn’t allowed in MLB because of safety.
[/QUOTE]

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)
wadesworld says:

July 25, 2020 at 1:16 pm

What will be interesting about this experiment is what happens should Bryson be unable to sustain it.

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?
PapaJohick says:

July 28, 2020 at 5:29 pm

[QUOTE=”NVGOLFER80, post: 9439181, member: 53139″]
I don’t want golf courses to turn into the equivalent of caddyshack two with clown carts, and wind mills. Where we have bunkers in the middle of fairways, forced layups. ETC..
[/QUOTE]
Whoah. Centerline bunkering is an awesome design feature in course architecture imo haha. The rest, ok.
PapaJohick says:

July 28, 2020 at 5:44 pm

A lot of what I was going to add has been discussed already, but I still don’t see changing equipment for pros being that big a deal. Bifurcate the game equipment wise. I’m no genius in terms of sales numbers and what not, but [USER=3]@JB[/USER] would that actually cause an issue sales wise for companies? I mean golfers like the fine people here and other forums would know the difference but half of them already think buying off the rack stuff is nonsense anyways and only look for tour issue/spec or like here, they know to get fit
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.
ntanygd760 says:

July 28, 2020 at 10:19 pm

[QUOTE=”JB, post: 9439517, member: 3″]
They already do grow the grass. So where do you cut the line? What about top notch college players? Mini tours? LPGA?
[/QUOTE]
Simple way is if the tournament would cause someone to lose am status that event would require the limited ball.
Snowman says:

July 28, 2020 at 11:59 pm

[QUOTE=”PapaJohick, post: 9444505, member: 41182″]
A lot of what I was going to add has been discussed already, but I still don’t see changing equipment for pros being that big a deal. Bifurcate the game equipment wise. I’m no genius in terms of sales numbers and what not, but [USER=3]@JB[/USER] would that actually cause an issue sales wise for companies? I mean golfers like the fine people here and other forums would know the difference but half of them already think buying off the rack stuff is nonsense anyways and only look for tour issue/spec or like here, they know to get fit
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.
[/QUOTE]
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!). :ROFLMAO:
??????? says:

July 29, 2020 at 2:57 am

This website really has all of the information I needed concerning

this subject and didn’t know who to ask. https://woori777.com
PapaJohick says:

July 29, 2020 at 7:20 am

[QUOTE=”Snowman, post: 9444840, member: 3386″]
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!). :ROFLMAO:
[/QUOTE]

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.
DG_1234 says:

July 29, 2020 at 8:27 am

If Tour pros were to start having wedge to every green and, or, routinely shoot 58’s that’s o.k. , not a problem.

Off Course – A Material Breakthrough in Shafts?

Looking For Testers – Cleveland CBZ Wedges

Signup Now – The 2026 Cobra Classic

Vokey SM11 Fitting at TPI

Off Course – A Material Breakthrough in Shafts?

Looking For Testers – Cleveland CBZ Wedges

Signup Now – The 2026 Cobra Classic

Vokey SM11 Fitting at TPI

Off Course: Episode 15: Does Golf Have a Distance Problem?