JB is the most well spoken and rational person on the board.
Your take on limiting technology in a golf ball?
The idea that if the ball makes the golfer 20% shorter, the courses will charge less, is whimsical.
Tadashi70
Well-known member
Golf is an ever evolving game. It will reach its limits sooner or later. The ball isn't making the top three driver on tour long, it's there swings, clubs and ball. It's been this was since jack was hitting 300 yard bombs. The perfect marriage of the three produces a long ball.
oiler3535
Active member
I don't think slow play and rising maintenance costs and golf courses closing are perceived pro level problems, I think they're all very very real.
oiler3535
Active member
A lot of courses are closing, and a lot are only getting by with overpacked tee sheets, which often results in slow play and people not going back or not staying with the game. Golf is not an across the board healthy business. I know here in Canada there have been a bunch of courses close recently, more threatening to do so, and only a handful of opening. Of course, one of those opening I'm hoping to play in Cape Breton at Cabot Links this summer
Made by the people who did Bandon and supposed to be just as good."Golf Course Openings and Closings (according to NGF)
- In 2010 there were 46 Course Openings and 107 Closings
- In 2011 there were 19 Course Openings and 157.5 Closings"
- Admin
- #131
Using a stat like that in this economy and what the country has been through over the last 5 years is like me saying Pizza Hut closed by my house, therefore all pizza should be changed forever. The economy is what has killed golf courses. Choices are what has killed golf courses.
Tee it forward campaign spent ridiculously on marketing. But we are all hitting it too far. Makes sense.
golf4life
Grip n rip
A lot of courses are closing, and a lot are only getting by with overpacked tee sheets, which often results in slow play and people not going back or not staying with the game. Golf is not an across the board healthy business. I know here in Canada there have been a bunch of courses close recently, more threatening to do so, and only a handful of opening. Of course, one of those opening I'm hoping to play in Cape Breton at Cabot Links this summer
"Golf Course Openings and Closings (according to NGF)
http://www.golf2020.com/research/golf-business-indicators.aspx
- In 2010 there were 46 Course Openings and 107 Closings
- In 2011 there were 19 Course Openings and 157.5 Closings"
Yes, I think most would agree that the golfing industry has seen slightly better times. I don't understand at ALL how you think making golf harder for average players will help this scenario.
Lets take the avid golfer for instance, the one who plays the nicest courses, many of which have tees well over 7000 yards. That average golfer generally plays from the middle tees though because over 7000 is ludicrous for him. I believe even you admitted you may play the tips on a nice new course the first time but would not do it on subsequent visits because it makes golf too hard and rounds too long.
Well, take away 50 yards from that average golfer's drive and guess what? From the tees he's currently playing he's now essentially playing a game equivalent to the tips. So rounds will get MUCH LONGER and golf with get MUCH HARDER. How does this help at all? Please explain. Do you really think these avid golfers are going to start playing the Lady's tees at their home club? Really? No, the hard core sadistic bunch will keep playing the same tees for 6 hour, frustrating rounds causing problems for the course and anyone who does choose to move up to the Lady's tees. Most will start to quit in frustration. A very few humble ones who love the game will move up to the forward tees, and the golf course will go under.
You want to shorten the golf ball because some old codger golfers wax about the good old days and want clubs like Merion to play the same today as way back when? Fine, that's an argument.
You want to shorten the golf ball to revive the industry? Insane!
oiler3535
Active member
Here's why the argument is happening. People seem to think they'll get shorter and other people won't. People are impressed if you are say 50 yards past them now? They'll be just as impressed is 30 past them in the future. It's purely an ego argument.
Bad swings will give bad results, but a flight restricted ball will go less off line just because it has less time to fly into trouble. Now, if they were to change balls by making them spin a lot more off the tee, that would cause huge problems! As for NBA, there are discussions of raising the bucket up a foot or two. And I agree with that too, I get flack all the time from my buddies who like basketball when these behemoths of men dunk a ball and get on the highlight shows despite barely having to jump. Seriously, they're mostly near 7ft, then have another 2 feet of reach with their long arms, and dunking on a 10 foot net is impressive? Please.
P.S. I am 100% for bifurcated rules on this issue, but if they didn't do that I'm still for the change is what I'm getting at. My only problem with bifurcation is that kids who are top level amateurs will grow up with long balls and then at some point have to switch. Where do you switch? College level when kids are trying to keep scholarships? Web.com level when people are trying to make huge changes to make a living and keep their card while other guys have made the change and are used to it already? Only the PGA level? Making that jump would be so hard I think they'll decide to not bifurcate the rules here either. Which is why my conspiracy theory that the anchored putter ban is their attempt at a warm up, done deliberately to see how everybody reacts and gets used to it.
oiler3535
Active member
Distance isn't a huge issue at Augusta b/c they massively lengthened it when Tiger came out and embarrassed them repeatedly.
- Admin
- #135
You mean like they do in baseball, basketball, football and so many other sports? It seems to work fine there.
golf4life
Grip n rip
So, your argument is that by reducing the length of the ball, people will still be happy because they will still be longer than their buddy off the tee. By your logic, that's the only driving factor in why people play golf? Honestly, then only 1 person in a foursome is going to enjoy his round anyway? I enjoy playing a round in about 4 hours. I enjoy reaching par 4s in 2 shots. I enjoy scoring well. While its nice to outdrive your buddy on occaision it is so far down the list of what I like about golf that its hardly worth mentioning.
Please address in your arguments how the shorter ball is going to revive the golfing industry.
Mulligan9111
Go Skers!!
The problem isn't just the golf ball. Players are becoming a lot stronger as well. Even back in 1997 Tiger was hitting it well over 300 yards. How far back are you going to roll back golf ball technology?
Dear LeBron,
You're just too good at basketball. The new shoes and jersey material are ruining the sport. Your training and eating habits are unfair. Your genes too perfect. The poor 10 foot hoop stands no chance.
We are in discussions to raise the hoop to 12 feet but in the meantime please wear the included ankle weights.
Sincerely,
Michael Jordan
You're just too good at basketball. The new shoes and jersey material are ruining the sport. Your training and eating habits are unfair. Your genes too perfect. The poor 10 foot hoop stands no chance.
We are in discussions to raise the hoop to 12 feet but in the meantime please wear the included ankle weights.
Sincerely,
Michael Jordan
oiler3535
Active member
I agree 100%. If people would just tee it forward most of the problems would go away (and again, I agree many people can't because even the front boxes are too far for many-I've played with a lot of people who from the fronts are not physically capable of hitting any of the greens in reg). But many people won't. They see the pros hitting 300+ drives and think they can do it, and want to hit from the tips b/c of it. I don't think the stat is indicative of the overall health of the game, but I do think the powers that be do, and that's all I'm using it for.
My points, again, are this, and are based on the premise that the people in charge of the game think there is something wrong with the business model and are desperate to re-actively change something to try and 'fix' it:
1-I think the pros should be forced to use flight restricted balls
2-I don't think the powers that be will bifurcate, and as such
3-I think we're going to see the roll back
4-Nobody is stupid enough to think this is a short term solution (though i never want to speak for the people in charge lol). Long term, imo, players and courses will adjust just fine. Courses will shorten up, tee boxes will be moved around, and everybody will move on. Shorter courses will lower their bills, and while it might not make it to the green fee-er, the ideas behind capitalism say it likely will (or at least will keep prices from rising as quickly as they otherwise would). But I'm sure a shorter ball will shorten the time of rounds. This is entirely my opinion, but who tends to hit the ball shorter? Seniors and women. I have played a lot with both groups, and unless stuck behind a group, I have never had a round with them go over 4hrs. Their balls just never go far into trouble, and if in trouble they're always easier to find b/c they're closer to the margins. Playing with testosterone driven men who insist on hitting big stick whenever possible, I've rarely broken 4hrs, and am often well over 5. Unless adding spin to the balls, shorter ball flights must have less time to get in trouble, so less time will be spent looking for balls in trouble.
5-I don't like the idea myself, but I do think it's coming and I understand why.
oiler3535
Active member
Philly Golf Guy
#PGG
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2012
- Messages
- 9,103
- Reaction score
- 7
- Handicap
- USGA 14
I'm not sure the game would adjust to a shorter ball. R & D would figure out different ways to get the distances lost by the ball and then we'd hear the USGA contemplating going back to hickory shafts.
oiler3535
Active member
Nope. But people are saying they like hitting it long, and I'm just saying long is purely a qualitative measurement. People will adjust. 300, 280, 250, whatever it is that you consider long now, it's just a number. I'm saying that many people are anti ball change b/c in their minds they lose some machoness by changing a number. I bet if we were discussing changing all courses to metric (which of course should be done, especially here in Canada), many of the same people would again be anti-change b/c a 300 yard drive would instantly turn into 275 metre drive and they would feel ripped off. I'm just saying changing a number is just a bad argument against the change.
oiler3535
Active member
Bad argument. That's the equivalent of saying they want only Tiger to use a flight-restricted ball.
oiler3535
Active member
You jest, but I bet if they did change the ball, and distances started creeping back up, I bet shaft design would be next.
So wait, courses are barely surviving so restricting a ball will save them because they would have to do none of the following:
1:create at least one new set of tee boxes for ladies
2ossibly rework the layout of the course. Because I f ball flight doesn't match how far the tees are moved forward bunkers, hazards, dogleg, ponds ect might not be in play anymore
3: which would lead to possibly moving every tee box
4: either get rid of or maintain current tee boxes
5: either way your still going yo have to water, cut, and fertilize possibly replant those areas.
Just to name a few.
~Joseph~
Via Tapatalk
1:create at least one new set of tee boxes for ladies
2
ossibly rework the layout of the course. Because I f ball flight doesn't match how far the tees are moved forward bunkers, hazards, dogleg, ponds ect might not be in play anymore3: which would lead to possibly moving every tee box
4: either get rid of or maintain current tee boxes
5: either way your still going yo have to water, cut, and fertilize possibly replant those areas.
Just to name a few.
~Joseph~
Via Tapatalk
oiler3535
Active member
So wait, courses are barely surviving so restricting a ball will save them because they would have to do none of the following:
1:create at least one new set of tee boxes for ladies
2
3: which would lead to possibly moving every tee box
4: either get rid of or maintain current tee boxes
5: either way your still going yo have to water, cut, and fertilize possibly replant those areas.
I think they should be doing number 1 anyway. Most are way too long for the ladies/seniors.
I think our disconnect is that I have faith in people's ability to adapt and be creative. Yes I think a lot of tee boxes will need to be moved, but given enough warning it can be done economically. New courses will be designed differently, and since all courses need to be heavily maintained at points, I have faith they can be creative in their maintenance to make things work. Not a short term solution. But give them a decade to adapt and they shouldn't have trouble doing so if they have any sort of brains behind their operations.
Which is also a dumb idea.
Why would the usga punish an r&d department for exceeding expectations?
Not the case. It's the fact that old timers are upset with the "new" game.
If distance won tournaments, John Daly would have been one of the best ever.
The FACT is that distance does NOT win. The best from 120ish and in wins.
Do you remember a few years back when the masters winning score was right around par? It was the most boring masters to date. There was such an outcry that we are now back to winning scores around -12.
Courses can play harder without having to lengthen themselves. They can also play harder with the current technology left in place.
Penalize people for bad shots. Long rough, long bunker shots and water will all deter people from "spray and pray" type playing.
I am a long hitter. 300y drives are normal and have been since I was using a Callaway steelhead plus 3 wood over 10 years ago. People can say what they want but I'm not hitting the ball any farther even with all the "technology" in place.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 4 Beta
Philly Golf Guy
#PGG
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2012
- Messages
- 9,103
- Reaction score
- 7
- Handicap
- USGA 14
I was only half joking though, because I agree. Trying to limit technology in any way simply puts them in a never ending position of retroactively curbing a growing industry any time it gets too successful. If shafts are next, R & D will focus on getting more distance from the club head, and on and on it will go. I believe JB posted a while ago that one way to address any type of distance issue is to design options off the tee. There are a lot of courses that tempt longer hitters with a risk/reward shot while providing short/safer options as well. And do the same to the green; make these guys think their way around the course. The pros love those courses more anyways.
oiler3535
Active member
you weren't arguing old timers vs new timers, you said they should make it harder for only 1 player. That's not what anybody is suggesting. I agree with the rest, but this conversation isn't about easier vs harder courses, it's longer vs shorter