NEWS The USGA Distance Insights Project

[Canadan]

I'm not trying to change your mind here, if you feel it's insane that's totally fine. Again as I mentioned before, I am in favor of bifurcation to make the entertainment of golf more interesting.

In regards to the water consumption issues, I do feel that it is disingenuous to say "We already have over 15,000 courses in the US (based on a quick google search), and that provides ample options for all golfers" in one post and then say "Do I have sympathy for locations that have no business having grass let alone golf courses exist in their region? I'm hard pressed to say I do." In another.

My point with the amount of courses was that even if a course plays “shorter” than someone wants, it’s not a big deal because we have a ton of courses in this country already that would accommodate them.

My thoughts on indifference between water consumption and courses that don’t belong in certain locations (ie desert etc) are unrelated to that original thought. Not sure why they’d be combined.

 

[Dr. Double]

My point with the amount of courses was that even if a course plays “shorter” than someone wants, it’s not a big deal because we have a ton of courses in this country already that would accommodate them.

My thoughts on indifference between water consumption and courses that don’t belong in certain locations (ie desert etc) are unrelated to that original thought. Not sure why they’d be combined.

They are related because with a limited golf ball shorter courses are more viable options in regions with less water availability. From what I am reading, and I may be misunderstanding your point, you don't see a shorter golf ball as a good idea because there are a ton of different course options for people who want longer courses, but you also say that courses shouldn't be located in regions without a good water supply. Those points seem contradictory to me. Thats all I'm saying.

My point was that a shorter golf ball provides better options for the entire golf community, regardless of where you live.

Also "low spin" is not a disease. You can't suffer from it lol. I do understand your point, but I will again say that I believe the rules should be bifurcated.

Also, also, I'm not trying to attack anyone. I really want the game to be tougher for the pro's so it's more interesting to watch on TV. I'm tired of watching driver, wedge, putt hole after hole.

 

[Canadan]

They are related because with a limited golf ball shorter courses are more viable options in regions with less water availability. From what I am reading, and I may be misunderstanding your point, you don't see a shorter golf ball as a good idea because there are a ton of different course options for people who want longer courses, but you also say that courses shouldn't be located in regions without a good water supply. Those points seem contradictory to me. Thats all I'm saying.

My point was that a shorter golf ball provides better options for the entire golf community, regardless of where you live.

Also "low spin" is not a disease. You can't suffer from it lol. I do understand your point, but I will again say that I believe the rules should be bifurcated.

Also, also, I'm not trying to attack anyone. I really want the game to be tougher for the pro's so it's more interesting to watch on TV. I'm tired of watching driver, wedge, putt hole after hole.

I love the debate, man. Keep it up!

When it comes to shortening the golf ball, are there any guys you know that would benefit from it? Local hacks to club champions, I don’t know anyone here who would need it to enjoy any course in my region.

I don’t care where golf courses are located - My point was that if we start to worry about water usage, my course definitely isn’t one that is contributing to the problem. It’s not a national solution. That’s all.

 

[Turtlerancher]

My point with the amount of courses was that even if a course plays “shorter” than someone wants, it’s not a big deal because we have a ton of courses in this country already that would accommodate them.

My thoughts on indifference between water consumption and courses that don’t belong in certain locations (ie desert etc) are unrelated to that original thought. Not sure why they’d be combined.

They could kill two birds with one stone if they just let the desert/water challenged courses revert back to natural at say 300 yds, make it a forced layup for the bombers. Saves water and solves the distance issue.

 

[MWard]

Just gonna throw this out there about water usage. Hear me out: Let the courses be a little baked out. Brown can actually be pretty damn beautiful if you let it. Raise your hand if you wouldn't play this golf course just because it's brown?

 

[Turtlerancher]

Just gonna throw this out there about water usage. Hear me out: Let the courses be a little baked out. Brown can actually be pretty damn beautiful if you let it. Raise your hand if you wouldn't play this golf course just because it's brown?

View attachment 8927412

I would die to play that course about now, it's not white!?

 

[MWard]

I would die to play that course about now, it's not white!?

Fair enough, consider it the last round before the white stuff fell haha

 

[Daddio]

It doesn't have to be water. The easier solution IMO is to change mowing practices. If they continue to insist on shaving and rolling those fairways for the Tour they'll require more water. But if they grow the longer rough in tighter to the fairways where the bombers hit it and bump the blades up a setting or two for the fairways the ball won't roll out like it does now. The maintenance/water costs will be lower not higher. AND all that extra rough can be easily undone for the membership once the Tour leaves for the next stop. Easy Peasy IMO.

 

[Canadan]

Maybe they should make golf illegal in the high elevation states because you can hit the ball way further there.

 

[RetiredBoomer]

Every so many posts, I suppose I should chime in and opine that absolutely nothing needs to be done.
But if they rolled back club heads to, say, 275cc, at least drivers would look less cartoonish!

Even there, younger players don't know of anything else but huge driver heads.

 

[ArmyGolf]

Maybe they should make golf illegal in the high elevation states because you can hit the ball way further there.

Nah. You need a 3rd set of double conforming gear to play there though, obviously.

 

[GoldenBuff]

Maybe they should make golf illegal in the high elevation states because you can hit the ball way further there.

And with all the massive terrain complexity, mountain areas have solved the distance problem. Pain and suffering for missed shots abounds.

 

[BigMac]

Just gonna throw this out there about water usage. Hear me out: Let the courses be a little baked out. Brown can actually be pretty damn beautiful if you let it. Raise your hand if you wouldn't play this golf course just because it's brown?

View attachment 8927412

Looks like Carnoustie for the Open Championship in 2018.

 

[MWard]

Looks like Carnoustie for the Open Championship in 2018.

Haha it's no Carnoustie. It's a beauty though

 

[radiman]

Call me crazy. But, I'm anti rollback and anti bifurcation. I'm just fine and dandy with the game in it's current state ?

I guess I'm not concerned if the longer hitters have an advantage over the shorter ones. Faster receivers have an advantage over slower defensive backs. The more athletic athletes will always have an advantage if they can refine their games to take advantage of it. And that's in any sport.

Par is relative anyways. It's an arbitrary number. The golfer isn't playing against par during a tournament. They're playing against one another. Who cares if the winner is even par, -10, or -20. They still have to beat 120+ other golfers.

It's been mentioned repeatedly here. There are ways they can change the distance without creating a new equipment standard or separating the rules. I find the shared rules as one of the games charms. We can always kind of measure our own games to the best players in the world in a way.

 

[93civiccpe]

Call me crazy. But, I'm anti rollback and anti bifurcation. I'm just fine and dandy with the game in it's current state ?

I guess I'm not concerned if the longer hitters have an advantage over the shorter ones. Faster receivers have an advantage over slower defensive backs. The more athletic athletes will always have an advantage if they can refine their games to take advantage of it. And that's in any sport.

Par is relative anyways. It's an arbitrary number. The golfer isn't playing against par during a tournament. They're playing against one another. Who cares if the winner is even par, -10, or -20. They still have to beat 120+ other golfers.

It's been mentioned repeatedly here. There are ways they can change the distance without creating a new equipment standard or separating the rules. I find the shared rules as one of the games charms. We can always kind of measure our own games to the best players in the world in a way.

I wish there was a way to thumbs up this twice.. It sums up very concisely how I feel. I don't think there's a change needed to equipment. They hype the fact these guys hit it far and accurate, set the courses up to give lots of roll, make the rough less penal, perfectly manicure the bunkers, then complain. If they want to make the course setup challenging there are plenty of ways mentioned in this thread that don't include lengthening the course or screwing with the equipment.

 

[Grins]

Call me crazy. But, I'm anti rollback and anti bifurcation. I'm just fine and dandy with the game in it's current state ?

I guess I'm not concerned if the longer hitters have an advantage over the shorter ones. Faster receivers have an advantage over slower defensive backs. The more athletic athletes will always have an advantage if they can refine their games to take advantage of it. And that's in any sport.

Par is relative anyways. It's an arbitrary number. The golfer isn't playing against par during a tournament. They're playing against one another. Who cares if the winner is even par, -10, or -20. They still have to beat 120+ other golfers.

It's been mentioned repeatedly here. There are ways they can change the distance without creating a new equipment standard or separating the rules. I find the shared rules as one of the games charms. We can always kind of measure our own games to the best players in the world in a way.

Totally agree. I recall reading John Feinstein's book about the first US Open at Bethpage Black. What was cool to me is when he was telling about cops & other average Joes talking to Tour players about how they would play certain holes, & how cool the players thought it was that this was a course that anyone could play.

Bifurcation of the rules would eliminate that feeling of shared experience.

 

[TheDoctor]

I haven't read the report and won't be wasting my time reading it, but I don't think that the equipment needs anything doing to it - at the end of the day, the longer hitters will still be longer relative to the rest of the field
Personally I think that it is the course setups that need to change to stop the ridiculous amounts of roll that players are getting - don't make the fairways so firm, grow the rough in at distances that then puts a huge premium on accuracy
Changing the equipment is not the solution as far as I am concerned, and I don't see a need for bifurcation of the rules either if the courses are set up in a different manner

Just gonna throw this out there about water usage. Hear me out: Let the courses be a little baked out. Brown can actually be pretty damn beautiful if you let it. Raise your hand if you wouldn't play this golf course just because it's brown?

View attachment 8927412

Looks like Carnoustie for the Open Championship in 2018.

Augusta look so different when it isn't so green and no stands anywhere

 

[MWard]

I haven't read the report and won't be wasting my time reading it, but I don't think that the equipment needs anything doing to it - at the end of the day, the longer hitters will still be longer relative to the rest of the field
Personally I think that it is the course setups that need to change to stop the ridiculous amounts of roll that players are getting - don't make the fairways so firm, grow the rough in at distances that then puts a huge premium on accuracy
Changing the equipment is not the solution as far as I am concerned, and I don't see a need for bifurcation of the rules either if the courses are set up in a different manner




Augusta look so different when it isn't so green and no stands anywhere

Sure does. Bet that course plays unreal tricky when it’s firm and fast.

 

[golfinnut]

Let them hit it as far as they want. But ..... make them play on aerated, top dressed, bouncy greens instead of the manicured greens that they do now. Before the days of mowers that can cut the hairs off a gnats a**! Back in the days of Bobby Jones & Harry Vardon, when they had to use a "pop" stroke on the greens because they were fuzzy. Really test their skills. It won't matter how far you hit it when you're 3-putting every green.

 

[Phil75070]

The study got mentioned towards the end of the Pebble Beach Coverage-sure most of you heard it. Sounded like they were on the side of "some older courses could become irrelevant" if something doesn't happen.

I agree about the water concept. I play my local course early in the am and get exactly "0" roll out with my Driver/FW/Hybrid as everything is so wet. The only place I get roll out is under the trees--where the roots live. I don't want my golf to become any harder, but there has to be a way for people who manage Tour Stops to punish not hitting the fairway like I do on my tracks, etc.

I, too, play early weekday mornings and get little to no roll because of morning watering. Also, some of these older courses becoming irrelevant is irrelevant only for the pros in my opinion.

 

[mjkladis]

Bifurcation would spell the end of a true US Open, British Open or any professional Open tournament where AMs and Pros play at the same time. A +4 golfer can play a longer ball because he has an amateur status? Pretty ridiculous.

 

[Dr. Double]

I love the debate, man. Keep it up!

When it comes to shortening the golf ball, are there any guys you know that would benefit from it? Local hacks to club champions, I don’t know anyone here who would need it to enjoy any course in my region.

I don’t care where golf courses are located - My point was that if we start to worry about water usage, my course definitely isn’t one that is contributing to the problem. It’s not a national solution. That’s all.

This really depends on your definition of benefit. If by the benefit you mean shoot lower scores on the exact same course, then no I can't think of anyone. However if your definition of benefit is shorter rounds, faster play, less ball lost, less walking, then I think those are great benefits. Also, I think the scores for an average golfer would be the same if they played the appropriate tees for the new ball. I still don't understand why people are so against playing forward tee's.

 

[Dr. Double]

Call me crazy. But, I'm anti rollback and anti bifurcation. I'm just fine and dandy with the game in it's current state ?

I guess I'm not concerned if the longer hitters have an advantage over the shorter ones. Faster receivers have an advantage over slower defensive backs. The more athletic athletes will always have an advantage if they can refine their games to take advantage of it. And that's in any sport.

Par is relative anyways. It's an arbitrary number. The golfer isn't playing against par during a tournament. They're playing against one another. Who cares if the winner is even par, -10, or -20. They still have to beat 120+ other golfers.

It's been mentioned repeatedly here. There are ways they can change the distance without creating a new equipment standard or separating the rules. I find the shared rules as one of the games charms. We can always kind of measure our own games to the best players in the world in a way.

These are very valid points and I do agree that part of the game's charm is measuring yourself against the best, even though they already play a significantly different game than the average golfer, I see your point. The main reason that I am in favor of bifurcation is I think that pro golf tournaments have become boring because the only way you can win is bombing drivers then hitting a short iron or wedge close. With the exception of Bubba, no one shapes the ball anymore, everyone hits it over the trouble because it's a safer shot, everyone smashes driver because there is little to no penalty for a miss-hit because the ball doesn't spin, the art of the towering long iron is gone. I personally want there to be more than one type of golfer at the top.

I also think that some historic courses will be lost because of distance or they will be lengthened and lose their charm. Par is absolutely a relative number, but I don't think that should be part of the conversation. It's about the type of shots you can play and the increased creativity the pro's will have to use. I just think that would make the product of golf more enjoyable.

 

[Dr. Double]

Also, some of these older courses becoming irrelevant is irrelevant only for the pros in my opinion.

This is a great point. The reason that I am in favor of bifurcation is because there is a very small chance I will get to play some of worlds great courses. I may be in the minority on this, but the closest I'll ever come to playing Wingfoot, Augusta, Pebble Beach, Pasatiempo (which is currently to short for competition), or any other great, historic course is by watching it on tv. While I think that Erin Hills is great, I want to watch a greater variety.