Your take on limiting technology in a golf ball?

[oiler3535]

Again, I like hitting a 280 yard drive. Why should I be forced to hit a 230 yard drive? All because Bubba hits the ball farther than Ken Venturi?

So don't hit conforming balls. Hit what you want. If they roll the ball back you can be just as impressed with a 230 yard drive if you're 10 yards past your playing partners than being 15 past now. It's only in your head that it's different. Your game as compared to others won't change much/at all.

How about they change nothing?

I think the change is a great idea. Many courses are struggling financially b/c they need so much space and money to spend maintaining said space. Roll back the ball and they can stop making 7000+ yard courses. Great idea.

 

[wadesworld]

They're going to have to change the ball before too much longer. You simply can't keep expanding courses.

 

[ImaBeRealReal]

So don't hit conforming balls. Hit what you want. If they roll the ball back you can be just as impressed with a 230 yard drive if you're 10 yards past your playing partners than being 15 past now. It's only in your head that it's different. Your game as compared to others won't change much/at all.



I think the change is a great idea. Many courses are struggling financially b/c they need so much space and money to spend maintaining said space. Roll back the ball and they can stop making 7000+ yard courses. Great idea.

Make the fairways tighter and discourage people from pulling driver on every tee. Tomato Tomato.

 

[Spahrticus]

I would absolutely be for a rollback on ball tech at the PGA level. I do not think it's called for or would be healthy for the sport to roll back the ball significantly at the amateur level. If they wanted to 'cap' ball tech for amateurs, I could probably get behind such a move, as long as the cap is not regressive.

But I totally understand why the regulatory bodies would want to limit the top players. Golf is not supposed to be an easy sport. For most amateurs, that remains as true today as it was hundreds of years ago. For the pros, the game has gotten too easy (IMHO).

It's time to bifurcate the rules. We need (the equivalent of) wooden bats for pros and aluminum bats for amateurs.

 

[blugold]

So don't hit conforming balls. Hit what you want. If they roll the ball back you can be just as impressed with a 230 yard drive if you're 10 yards past your playing partners than being 15 past now. It's only in your head that it's different. Your game as compared to others won't change much/at all.



I think the change is a great idea. Many courses are struggling financially b/c they need so much space and money to spend maintaining said space. Roll back the ball and they can stop making 7000+ yard courses. Great idea.

How about instead of me having to giveaway 50 yards off the tee, the USGA just admits that club designers are smarter than they are.

What courses are lengthening because amateurs are over powering them?

 

[blugold]

I would absolutely be for a rollback on ball tech at the PGA level. I do not think it's called for or would be healthy for the sport to roll back the ball significantly at the amateur level. If they wanted to 'cap' ball tech for amateurs, I could probably get behind such a move, as long as the cap is not regressive.

But I totally understand why the regulatory bodies would want to limit the top players. Golf is not supposed to be an easy sport. For most amateurs, that remains as true today as it was hundreds of years ago. For the pros, the game has gotten too easy (IMHO).

It's time to bifurcate the rules. We need (the equivalent of) wooden bats for pros and aluminum bats for amateurs.

As much as I agree with you, look at the longest hitters on tour. And then look at the scoring averages. They don't coincide.

 

[Speedliner]

I wouldn't care if they went back to wound balls. That's what the best balls were not so long ago. My favorite then was a Titleist DT 90 and I hit it about the same as I hit modern balls. I doubt a change will impact amateurs much.

 

[bulldog]

To me that's like complaining that kids don't have to walk uphill to school both ways.

I see it the other way.
Kid complaining that he can't have a engine in his soapbox car

tappin from my big as note2

 

[blugold]

I wouldn't care if they went back to wound balls. That's what the best balls were not so long ago. My favorite then was a Titleist DT 90 and I hit it about the same as I hit modern balls. I doubt a change will impact amateurs much.

But that wasn't a rule thing. That was a design engineer making things better.

 

[Damaikis]

I think it's stupid. I like watching these guys year it up. Why is it a bad thing if someone on Tour shoots 59 while hitting 350 yard drives? That's fun to watch. Plus, I like hitting the ball as far as I can. I don't want to lose distance. Lame idea. Just because the R&D guys at golf companies are awesome and smart doesn't mean you should handicap them.

 

[blugold]

I see it the other way.
Kid complaining that he can't have a engine in his soapbox car

tappin from my big as note2

Ok. But if we're are going apples to apples, it would be like saying that kids now have to make their soapbox cars squares because the round ones are faster than the car 50 years ago.

 

[Rhyno]

Good post Rhyno. Seems like they could change Size, weight, or speed off the face pretty easily. I think if they changed the size that would bug people the most, and get away from the tradition so seems least likely. I think changing the weight maximum down a bit would be easiest to affect the performance myself. I originally though the speed off the face would be most likely changed, but now I think about it I think mass would be easier to change.

Basically in 2008 what the USGA said was, "we don't know what's going to happen in the future so what we are going to do is not tell you how we test stuff and what the requirements are, and then leave really open ended should we decide we don't like what we see in the future."

Instead of saying at that time "your golf ball can't got x distance at x swing speed and x compression" and end it all right then and there in 2008, they choose to be morons, and now they are complaining about their own idiocy.

The fact is that right now someone hidden better then cokes secret recipe there are limits on golf balls, and every current legal golf ball as approved by the governing body meets those requirements.

The top echelon of players are able to do things now that they didn't see and they think the game is being hurt because of it, despite there being more and more amateurs playing the game (I think).

Personally I can see the negatives of limiting the ball flight, or expanding courses (which both does the same thing) it makes golf slow, and it sucks.

Back in the days home course was very manageable with two tee boxes, then this kid new John Hurley came, his dad got on the board of the course and because this kid could hit 400 yard drives the course was lengthened. Our red (ladies) tee boxes play as long as most people's men's around us. If you can't hit the long ball here it's not a lot of fun, because of that decision less and less people are members because their scores rose, and now they are hitting driver 3 w and still being short of the greens on par 4s. And now the club is going broke.

And the same thing would have happened if you took 20% off of a ball.

~Joseph~
Via Tapatalk

 

[Kobey]

I still don't think it would affect the average golfer. Here's what the USGA has to say on how they test distance:

In its efforts to continually improve its testing methods, the USGA has developed an Indoor Test Range to test golf balls for the “overall distance” limit.
A mechanical golfer with a 120 mph swing speed hits balls with a titanium driver, and a launch monitor measures each ball’s speed, launch angle, and spin. This is the first ingredient to measuring ball distance.
The USGA system then uses an array of sensors that accurately measure the flight of a golf ball during a short, indoor trajectory from a ball launcher. From this flight data, a computer calculates the lift and drag forces that are generated by the speed, spin, and dimple pattern of the ball.
Balls are tested at high speeds, like a ball is hit off the tee, at lower speeds, like a ball during flight, down to the speeds a ball might encounter at the top of a drive.
The computer puts all of this aerodynamic and launch information together to create an accurate simulation of the golf ball trajectory. This test is repeatable to within 3 yards (better than 99 percent), more repeatable than outdoor testing could ever be.
The distance limit is 317 yards

 

[oiler3535]

How about instead of me having to giveaway 50 yards off the tee, the USGA just admits that club designers are smarter than they are.

What courses are lengthening because amateurs are over powering them?

Never said they were lengthening b/c amateurs are overpowering them, but amateurs are mainly delusional people who play the wrong set of tees b/c they want to play the same way the pros play (for the record, I count myself in this group somewhat, b/c if I'm playing a new course, I'll play the tips regardless, then if play again I'll play the proper set of tees). If the pros start playing shorter courses other courses wouldn't feel the need to keep growing.

And this is by no means a point I would try to argue, but didn't I just read recently the PGA tour or USGA come out and say they've done a statistical analysis and in the last 10 years clubs haven't gotten longer? I could be 100% wrong on this and have no backup, but thought I read such a thing in the not too distant past.

Ima, I agree the courses could discourage driver, but generally I would guess that would just cut down on repeat business so is unlikely to happen. I know a lot of people who won't play courses with hard to hit fairways or shorter courses because they want to hit the idiot stick 14 times a round. I think they will do something to the ball, and since they're going to do something, they're going to roll it back somewhat.

 

[MWard]

Let's see..

Charlie Wi played the 6th hole by hitting driver 271yds, having 178 left in. He hit his next shot to 4ft and made 3. He shot 67 today and is 2 back.

Keegan Bradley played the 6th hole by hitting driver 334, having 115yds left. He hit his next long, then long again, and made 5. He shot 71 and is 6 back.

Distance is nice, but these guys are pretty good even when they're 50yds behind each other. On the flip side, they can still make bogeys when 50yds longer than their competitors.

 

[bulldog]

It is a delicate matter in alot of sports where technology can take over. And it aint limited to equipment, better training & health habits etc. also plays into the equation.

tappin from my big as note2

 

[golf4life]

So don't hit conforming balls. Hit what you want. If they roll the ball back you can be just as impressed with a 230 yard drive if you're 10 yards past your playing partners than being 15 past now. It's only in your head that it's different. Your game as compared to others won't change much/at all.



I think the change is a great idea. Many courses are struggling financially b/c they need so much space and money to spend maintaining said space. Roll back the ball and they can stop making 7000+ yard courses. Great idea.

Some of the most popular courses near me top out around 6000 yards. I can't remember the last time I played a course at tees over 7000 yards and I'm one of the longer hitters. The average player is not clamoring for longer courses. I cant think of one time i was picking a course with my playing partners and we said, "whoops, this course only has tees at to 6,800 yards, we're not playing that kiddie's track". Only courses with aspirations of a pga event need build tees reaching over 7,0000.

And I rather enjoy the new technology that lets me hit the ball a long way. Makes the game more enjoyable. Would I enjoy playing as much with 20% distance loss? No. Would I enjoy having to move up a tee box because of the shorter ball? Probably not. Will I enjoy watching PGA pros hit little dinky drives on Sunday after being spoiled with what they can do now? Heck No!!!

For the pros, they play, what, about 45 unique courses a year out of the thousands in America. None of which are struggling financially while they're 7500 hundred yards long. For the other 5000+ absolutely no need to build and maintain 7,500 yard monsters. Golf is hard enough with the great stuff we get to play today. The ball is already limited and driving distance has leveled out. Leave it alone and don't wreck what we have.

 

[blugold]

Never said they were lengthening b/c amateurs are overpowering them, but amateurs are mainly delusional people who play the wrong set of tees b/c they want to play the same way the pros play (for the record, I count myself in this group somewhat, b/c if I'm playing a new course, I'll play the tips regardless, then if play again I'll play the proper set of tees). If the pros start playing shorter courses other courses wouldn't feel the need to keep growing.

And this is by no means a point I would try to argue, but didn't I just read recently the PGA tour or USGA come out and say they've done a statistical analysis and in the last 10 years clubs haven't gotten longer? I could be 100% wrong on this and have no backup, but thought I read such a thing in the not too distant past.

Ima, I agree the courses could discourage driver, but generally I would guess that would just cut down on repeat business so is unlikely to happen. I know a lot of people who won't play courses with hard to hit fairways or shorter courses because they want to hit the idiot stick 14 times a round. I think they will do something to the ball, and since they're going to do something, they're going to roll it back somewhat.

If a course lengthens itself because the pros over power Augusta National, then that course Is run by morons.

 

[blugold]

Let's see..

Charlie Wi played the 6th hole by hitting driver 271yds, having 178 left in. He hit his next shot to 4ft and made 3. He shot 67 today and is 2 back.

Keegan Bradley played the 6th hole by hitting driver 334, having 115yds left. He hit his next long, then long again, and made 5. He shot 71 and is 6 back.

Distance is nice, but these guys are pretty good even when they're 50yds behind each other. On the flip side, they can still make bogeys when 50yds longer than their competitors.

You are so smart and rational. I am happy you posted in this thread.

 

[blugold]

It is a delicate matter in alot of sports where technology can take over. And it aint limited to equipment, better training & health habits etc. also plays into the equation.

tappin from my big as note2

And I agree that it isn't just the ball that I increasing distances. How about players are getting better. How come the usga just can't admit that.

 

[MWard]

You are so smart and rational. I am happy you posted in this thread.

Not to worry, I'll redeem myself by saying something stupid in another thread. This was my Wi moment, and the Bradley one will be coming up soon I'm sure.

 

[oiler3535]

The top echelon of players are able to do things now that they didn't see and they think the game is being hurt because of it, despite there being more and more amateurs playing the game (I think).

Personally I can see the negatives of limiting the ball flight, or expanding courses (which both does the same thing) it makes golf slow, and it sucks.

Back in the days home course was very manageable with two tee boxes, then this kid new John Hurley came, his dad got on the board of the course and because this kid could hit 400 yard drives the course was lengthened. Our red (ladies) tee boxes play as long as most people's men's around us. If you can't hit the long ball here it's not a lot of fun, because of that decision less and less people are members because their scores rose, and now they are hitting driver 3 w and still being short of the greens on par 4s. And now the club is going broke.

And the same thing would have happened if you took 20% off of a ball.

~Joseph~
Via Tapatalk

I think this is the crux of the case, and that if they do roll back balls they'll have to do a lot of PR getting people to move up tees and courses to do the same. I am, I believe, naively optimistic when it comes to people. I give them more credit than they probably deserve. I think, if the powers that be do this well, they'll announce in 2016 that for the 2020 year, competitions will require the restricted golf balls, but that (just like the groove rule) the companies can keep making old balls until 2026, and new balls won't be mandatory for amateurs until 2028. That will give everybody a ton of time to get used to it. As an optimist, I think that after the first few months, debate will die down, and only to start the 2020 year will there be any significant hoopla again, and it'll only last a few months again. People will adjust and move on. I don't think golf will lose any regular players over it, and I don't think it will lose any casual players b/c they won't even know about the change.

 

[oiler3535]

For the pros, they play, what, about 45 unique courses a year out of the thousands in America. None of which are struggling financially while they're 7500 hundred yards long. For the other 5000+ absolutely no need to build and maintain 7,500 yard monsters. Golf is hard enough with the great stuff we get to play today. The ball is already limited and driving distance has leveled out. Leave it alone and don't wreck what we have.

i agree no need, but they absolutely are building them that long. If they were smart they wouldn't, but also, if people didn't demand the longer courses they wouldn't build them.

 

[blugold]

I think this is the crux of the case, and that if they do roll back balls they'll have to do a lot of PR getting people to move up tees and courses to do the same. I am, I believe, naively optimistic when it comes to people. I give them more credit than they probably deserve. I think, if the powers that be do this well, they'll announce in 2016 that for the 2020 year, competitions will require the restricted golf balls, but that (just like the groove rule) the companies can keep making old balls until 2026, and new balls won't be mandatory for amateurs until 2028. That will give everybody a ton of time to get used to it. As an optimist, I think that after the first few months, debate will die down, and only to start the 2020 year will there be any significant hoopla again, and it'll only last a few months again. People will adjust and move on. I don't think golf will lose any regular players over it, and I don't think it will lose any casual players b/c they won't even know about the change.

Last year the PGA and OEMs pleaded with people to move up one tee box just so they would enjoy the game more. Guess what didn't happen?

 

[Kobey]

I wish we could get our hands on testing results. I'm curious as to how far a ball designed for slower swing speeds like the B330RX would go when hit on a machine with a 120mph swing speed.