We've launched the new forums! Read more here

Jack Nicklaus vs the golf ball

I still think its a moronic idea.
 
Jman said:
I still think its a moronic idea.
Click to expand...

100% is. Unfortunately, you can't spell horrifically stupid effing idea without USGA. I'm sure they'll ponder it.
 
MWard said:
100% is. Unfortunately, you can't spell horrifically stupid effing idea without USGA. I'm sure they'll ponder it.
Click to expand...

Absolutely they will, they muck everything up.

Truth be told, I'd have no problem rolling it back for the PGA only, but honestly, leave the LPGA and even Champions Tour alone IMO.
 
Jman said:
Absolutely they will, they muck everything up.

Truth be told, I'd have no problem rolling it back for the PGA only, but honestly, leave the LPGA and even Champions Tour alone IMO.
Click to expand...

I think it would hurt all levels of the game. Hard to grow the game when you're already telling newbies they hit it too far.
 
MWard said:
I think it would hurt all levels of the game. Hard to grow the game when you're already telling newbies they hit it too far.
Click to expand...

I think the thing I hate most about it, is it comes off as pure GET OFF MY LAWN from the old regime as they watch the new breed just physically do things they couldn't.
 
Jman said:
I think the thing I hate most about it, is it comes off as pure GET OFF MY LAWN from the old regime as they watch the new breed just physically do things they couldn't.
Click to expand...

It is. Sorry Jack and Gary, these fellas are literally stronger than you were, and using equipment optimized to hit it as far as possible. Even with old equipment, they'd still hammer it by you.
 
Novel idea...If the players are hitting it too long, make the courses shorter or the same and change par.
They already do it in spots, do it further and more extreme. Then it does not hamper innovation, does not hamper golfers wanting to play what the pros play.
 
This irritates me to no end and the more I hear Jack talk about it, the more disconnected and "get off my lawn!" he sounds.

If they did something, the longer hitter would….STILL BE LONGER. The shorter hitter would….STILL BE SHORTER!

And what's his deal with trying to use the wound golf ball of 1995 as a standard? Like, is golf so exclusive that it cannot embrace technology? It's 2018, not 1995.

You cannot *attempt* penalize someone for being faster, stronger, a better athlete, etc… This whole thing is just ignorance and the old timers have lost the plot.


If…IF they do anything…..just set some sort of rebound/speed maximum for the ball like they do on drivers, then be DONE with it. They cannot afford to look foolish again like they did with the groove rule, because that proved to be a non-issue.

Beyond that, you KNOW all the golf ball manufacturers would lawyer up & band together to fight this to the death.
 
JB said:
Novel idea...If the players are hitting it too long, make the courses shorter or the same and change par.
They already do it in spots, do it further and more extreme. Then it does not hamper innovation, does not hamper golfers wanting to play what the pros play.
Click to expand...

Do you mean like what PGA National does with the 6th and 10th holes turning them from Par 5s everyday to Par 4s when the tour rolls in, making it a par 70? Or the other way?

The shorter course could cut into the pace of play just based on sheer yardage for walking distance/time.
 
TM_Bobby723 said:
This irritates me to no end and the more I hear Jack talk about it, the more disconnected and "get off my lawn!" he sounds.

If they did something, the longer hitter would….STILL BE LONGER. The shorter hitter would….STILL BE SHORTER!

And what's his deal with trying to use the wound golf ball of 1995 as a standard? Like, is golf so exclusive that it cannot embrace technology? It's 2018, not 1995.

You cannot penalize someone for being faster, stronger, a better athlete, etc… This whole thing is just ignorance and the old timers have lost the plot.
Click to expand...

Based on his argument, and how you stated in your post, you would not be penalizing anybody for being faster, stronger and a better athlete. As you said, they would still be longer.
 
tpluff said:
Do you mean like what PGA National does with the 6th and 10th holes turning them from Par 5s everyday to Par 4s when the tour rolls in, making it a par 70? Or the other way?

The shorter course could cut into the pace of play just based on sheer yardage for walking distance/time.
Click to expand...

I think it is what you said. It’s easier and probably still fair to the players to just bump up a couple tee boxes but change the par on the scorecard. The sixth hole for example, still played it pretty fair as a par four, because it was only 437 yards. It’s not like they kept it around that 500 yard mark and made them have to hit into a smallish green with mid irons
 
JB said:
Based on his argument, and how you stated in your post, you would not be penalizing anybody for being faster, stronger and a better athlete. As you said, they would still be longer.
Click to expand...


EDITED… I meant to say "attempt to penalize" because that, to me, feels like what they're doing. Hitting shorter surely isn't going to dramatically reduce time of play.
 
MWard said:
I think it is what you said. It’s easier and probably still fair to the players to just bump up a couple tee boxes but change the par on the scorecard. The sixth hole for example, still played it pretty fair as a par four, because it was only 437 yards. It’s not like they kept it around that 500 yard mark and made them have to hit into a smallish green with mid irons
Click to expand...

Theoretically a par 70 should take less time to complete than a par 72, so I get this argument.

They do a very good job there with that setup. Loved playing it. Ironic that it is a Nicklaus design....
 
I think Jack is getting too much respect. Because he's Jack nobody is challenging him on this stupid ass idea.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
reachluke said:
to be fair, I think what he means is that when u roll back the ball, u will then also shorten golf courses, which in turn leads to shorter game times - it should theoretically take a shorter time to finish a 5000 yard than 7000 yard course

I can see how it is hard for people in general (not only youngsters) to set aside 5 hours a day for a game

having said that, I dont agree that the golf ball is the main problem or that rolling back the golf ball is the most logical or necessary solution. If one follows the argument that hitting the ball shorter will lead to shorter courses and shorter rounds, then why not also roll back golf club technology?

The main reason for "slow play" or games that take too long is I think the lack of golf etiquette - golfers who take way too many practice swings, golfers who don't play "ready golf", golfers who dont have the sense to pick up the ball and move on after crossing a certain number of strokes per hole.
Click to expand...


I agree with the above... it's a combination of factors, etiquette definitely among them, and I'd agree that the shorter the course; the less time it takes to play... my home track is very short - pretty old - built around 1900. Only 5500 yards, but quite difficult. narrow fairways, postage stamp greens, never a flat lie. There is little water, but the bunkers get tricky. It's target golf. We can bang out a quick round in 3 1/2 hours (if we're really moving) and a 4 hr. round is easily done.

The course record was set in the days of balata balls and persimmon woods and hasn't been cracked since (and the member who set it is still there and still shoots lights out many days). I'm only aware of a few near matches of it, and those in the last few years by members playing the latest and greatest equipment, carrying between 0 and very low single digit handicaps. (Is this an argument that the ball doesn't matter?? perhaps - but my point being, on a shorter course like this, I don't think the ball does matter as much. Make us play a shorter ball on this same course, and I don't think you'd see scores go up appreciably.) It seems once the ball started flying farther, courses opened up length-wise and now technology and course design are at odds with each other in a never ending cycle. It all increases the cost and time involved. I THINK that is what all this talk is about.


Shorter courses = less playing time = less maintenance cost = less expensive golf and perhaps a more enjoyable time for those of us with short attention spans and/or family responsibilities. It isn't 1955 anymore. While clubs are also a part of it , the ball is the easiest, most cost effective fix, I would think. Exactly how this is supposed to happen is beyond me. Seems like putting toothpaste back in the tube.
 
NeverWiff said:
I agree with the above... it's a combination of factors, etiquette definitely among them, and I'd agree that the shorter the course; the less time it takes to play... my home track is very short - pretty old - built around 1900. Only 5500 yards, but quite difficult. narrow fairways, postage stamp greens, never a flat lie. There is little water, but the bunkers get tricky. It's target golf. We can bang out a quick round in 3 1/2 hours (if we're really moving) and a 4 hr. round is easily done.

The course record was set in the days of balata balls and persimmon woods and hasn't been cracked since (and the member who set it is still there and still shoots lights out many days). I'm only aware of a few near matches of it, and those in the last few years by members playing the latest and greatest equipment, carrying between 0 and very low single digit handicaps. (Is this an argument that the ball doesn't matter?? perhaps - but my point being, on a shorter course like this, I don't think the ball does matter as much. Make us play a shorter ball on this same course, and I don't think you'd see scores go up appreciably.) It seems once the ball started flying farther, courses opened up length-wise and now technology and course design are at odds with each other in a never ending cycle. It all increases the cost and time involved. I THINK that is what all this talk is about.


Shorter courses = less playing time = less maintenance cost = less expensive golf and perhaps a more enjoyable time for those of us with short attention spans and/or family responsibilities. It isn't 1955 anymore. While clubs are also a part of it , the ball is the easiest, most cost effective fix, I would think. Exactly how this is supposed to happen is beyond me. Seems like putting toothpaste back in the tube.
Click to expand...

That is what all of the talk is about.
The problem is, the mouthpiece is being hypocritical. He could have drawn a line in the sand, instead he continues to design the longest courses out there, and still has a ball with his name on it.

I would say a shorter course CAN lead to less playing time, but its not always about distance. There are plenty of hard courses that are short and take a while and longer courses that can be a breeze. All of the contributing factors play a role in slow golf. Jack is failing to mention how much of a role fast/hard greens play in the slowing down of a round.

The easiest and most cost effective fix is to start with the same 1% they want to make all the rules of golf around. Make them play faster. Add awareness to speed, by adding a shot clock. Penalize through Fedex Points slower players. All of which brings awareness to the problem, because frankly, NOBODY thinks they are slow.
 
JB said:
That is what all of the talk is about.
The problem is, the mouthpiece is being hypocritical. He could have drawn a line in the sand, instead he continues to design the longest courses out there, and still has a ball with his name on it.

I would say a shorter course CAN lead to less playing time, but its not always about distance. There are plenty of hard courses that are short and take a while and longer courses that can be a breeze. All of the contributing factors play a role in slow golf. Jack is failing to mention how much of a role fast/hard greens play in the slowing down of a round.

The easiest and most cost effective fix is to start with the same 1% they want to make all the rules of golf around. Make them play faster. Add awareness to speed, by adding a shot clock. Penalize through Fedex Points slower players. All of which brings awareness to the problem, because frankly, NOBODY thinks they are slow.
Click to expand...

The PGATOUR needs to take the lead on this, but so far they have been resistant. Like JB said, take away some FedEx points, and players will get the message pretty quick.
 
In general, I don't disagree with a limit. In baseball for example, there aren't competing ball manufactures endeavoring to advance tech and performance. The game is the game, the ball is generally the same as it was a decade ago and the one before that.

I actually think the whole chasing of the carrot in golf wrt clubs and balls as to distance especially is generally silly and I'd prefer things to be more standardized. I'm aware that advances in the game have always been, but never before has there been an era so capable of technological advances to further that end. Exotic materials, pinpoint computer graphics and design, robotic testing and laser focused simulators, etc.

For any sport with only modest restrictions for advancement, it's only natural to think that distance in this case would outgrow present courses and that's a shame.

But fully aware that a leveling would never happen, I don't really advocate for impossible change and I don't buy into the ball affecting slow play really at all.

That tired old adage applies here, "it is what it is."
 
golfinnut said:
https://www.golfchannel.com/video/nicklaus-titleist-controls-game/

https://www.golfchannel.com/video/nicklaus-wants-help-usga-roll-back-golf-ball-distance/

Here he is being interviewed at the Honda.
Click to expand...


I guess I just don't understand his thinking of "hitting shorter = quicker play." If you're hitting shorter shots, isn't there a higher possibility you're going to have to hit more shots, which would not speed up play.

Also, it sure sounds like he wants this applied to the ENTIRE game of golf for ALL players. I can understand maybe (mayyyyyyyyybe) slightly limiting the Pro balls to bring play to some classic, shorter courses, but I DO NOT understand restricting everyone. He just seems to talk in circles.
 
Last edited:
I think hes lost a few marbles to be honest and he doesn't want to admit it

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
 
I'd like for Dustin Johnson to go out and smash a wound ball with a persimmon driver and see how it compares to Jacks drives. I'd hazard a guess that it's farther than what Jack could do, by a large margin.

The case against distance is dumb anyway. But the fact that ball manufacturers are being singled out for being the only contributing factor to distance gains is just right out.

And I still don't really understand how this has anything to do with pace of play.

The new shorter courses will still play to the same relative length if you shorten the golf ball too. Playing long courses with a shorter ball will just make things slower.

The PGA Tour rule book (somewhere in rule 6 I think) is pretty fair on pace of play I think. It's just not enforced. If you're looking for your starting point - try that, Jack.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
No equipment change is going to speed up the drunk foursome, who are all destined to shoot 113.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk
 
I cant remember where I read it but there were a few big names trying to widen the hole. Which would mean more made putts and chip-ins and holes in one. That would speed up golf and make it more fun for most players.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top