Jump to content
IGNORED

Rolling Back Equipment to 1980s Specs for Tour Players


Mike Boatright
Note: This thread is 3098 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

0  

8 members have voted

  1. 1. Roll Back Equipment for PGA Tour Players?

    • No
      18
    • Yes
      4


Recommended Posts

As far as golf has come and the television ratings it get's from the Bubba's and Dustin Johnson of the world why not reset everything for the integrity of the game?

What does "the integrity of the game" mean?  Where does it say in the Rules of Golf one must use every club in their bag during every round?  Integrity means the quality of being honest and having strong moral principles; moral uprightness.  The fact 5-10 guys can bomb the ball further than the rest has nothing to do with integrity, that's what their natural ability and athleticism allow them to do.  Those guys bomb the ball, some have a great short game, others can putt lights out.  There are enough events on the Tour that the guys who can't bomb the ball can opt to not play in the events that solely reward distance.

It's like baseball leave the game as it should be and let the manufacturers sell the high tech illegal drivers if they choose to amateurs who need it and actually have fun with it. I think there are more pro's than cons to doing this the game is getting stupid with 500 yard par 4's standard and a bomb it and gauge style of play that's pretty lame. Baseball ended it's steroid era why can't golf make a stand and go back to it's golden age right?

Steroids have nothing to do with equipment, I don't know if you just used a bad analogy or you're also accusing golfers of using steroids,

Do some research, baseball bats and gloves have gone through tremendous upgrades since the days Babe Ruth played.  Beyond the fact that most of us will never drive it as far as Watson or DJ who cares?  I won't ever throw a 100+ mph fastball, should we outlaw pitchers who do from baseball?  Golf is doing well, non-pro's benefit heavily from the technology developed for the pro's and we get to see every Sunday what the best in the world can do with the same technology (overall) that we can buy and customize ourselves.

Watching the pro's play as they do motivates me to improve, I hit a drive yesterday 270 yards (longest ever for me), the hole was a Par 4 370, it was awesome feeling to be hitting a sand wedge with my 2nd shot while my playing partners were hitting hybrids and longer irons.  I'd love to have a sand wedge into the green on every Par 4 if I could.

If you yearn for the golden age, go buy yourself some persimmon woods, balata balls and hickory shafted irons, we won't judge you.

Joe Paradiso

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

If you yearn for the golden age, go buy yourself some persimmon woods, balata balls and hickory shafted irons, we won't judge you.

I won't quote the whole thing. I agree with you, except for the last statement. I'm sure someone here would judge... More seriously, it's been an arms race between manufacturers and the rules organizations over this for as long as I can remember. They want to do everything legally to make clubs more forgiving and go further, and there are valid concerns about length of courses and what the real benefits are. I believe in sensible limits, but once you give someone something you can't take it back. Enact strict limits and hold your line. Club companies have plenty of smart people to help with fittings, new ways to increase clubhead speed, etc. At some point there has to be a limit and maybe we have maxed out. I can't see what else they will do to enable clubs to go longer. Also, we play under a single set of rules, professionals and amateurs. No reason to change, and no reason to have one play a different set of clubs because very, very few people can take advantage of the benefits in such a way.

—Adam

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

The big problem is not the equipment but how classic courses have had to be altered due to this equipment. St. Andrews and Augusta National are prime examples. The original hazards off of the tee are no longer in play at St. Andrews. Along with milder weather, the scores you see in the British Open are almost laughable. I guess score shouldn't matter but the integrity of the courses are being compromised. Look what the USGA had to do to Merion a few years ago. They basically rebuilt parts of the course to make it hard enough for PGA Tour pros.

Golf is about playing the courses as they lay in front of the golfer. It's well and good for newer courses like Whistling Straits and Chambers Bay that were built to play 7500 or more yards but the golden age courses like Merion, Pebble Beach and others have to be tricked up to remain viable. My recommendation is the same as Jack Nicklaus', roll back the ball.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

The big problem is not the equipment but how classic courses have had to be altered due to this equipment. St. Andrews and Augusta National are prime examples. The original hazards off of the tee are no longer in play at St. Andrews. Along with milder weather, the scores you see in the British Open are almost laughable. I guess score shouldn't matter but the integrity of the courses are being compromised. Look what the USGA had to do to Merion a few years ago. They basically rebuilt parts of the course to make it hard enough for PGA Tour pros.

Higher scores have always been apart of The Open. Those courses are not overly hard except when the weather kicks up.

2000 (-19)

1997 (-12)

1996 (-13)

1994 (-12)

1992 (-12)

1990 (-18)

Golf is about playing the courses as they lay in front of the golfer. It's well and good for newer courses like Whistling Straits and Chambers Bay that were built to play 7500 or more yards but the golden age courses like Merion, Pebble Beach and others have to be tricked up to remain viable. My recommendation is the same as Jack Nicklaus', roll back the ball.

I don't get the ball issue. The amount of energy allowed between the clubface and the ball is limited by the USGA. The only issues is these guys are getting longer. They just outright swing faster. There are 12 guys on the PGA Tour right now that average over 120 MPH for their clubhead speed. That has nothing to do with the ball.

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

The big problem is not the equipment but how classic courses have had to be altered due to this equipment. St. Andrews and Augusta National are prime examples. The original hazards off of the tee are no longer in play at St. Andrews. Along with milder weather, the scores you see in the British Open are almost laughable. I guess score shouldn't matter but the integrity of the courses are being compromised. Look what the USGA had to do to Merion a few years ago. They basically rebuilt parts of the course to make it hard enough for PGA Tour pros.  Golf is about playing the courses as they lay in front of the golfer. It's well and good for newer courses like Whistling Straits and Chambers Bay that were built to play 7500 or more yards but the golden age courses like Merion, Pebble Beach and others have to be tricked up to remain viable. My recommendation is the same as Jack Nicklaus', roll back the ball.

Nicklaus is the greatest but with all due respect, all of thes courses are perfectly viable for everyone EXCEPT, perhaps, 0.5% of the world's golfers. So for that we are supposed to rewrite the rules and punish every other golfer on earth? Why should major championships or the pro game dictate the rules? And even if it should, why should the rules protect the interests of specific golf clubs? Jack complained in an interview that "only Augusta National" had the kind of money needed to be able to continue to stretch their courses to keep up with modern pro distances. We are supposed to be upset about this? Many of these classic clubs have ridiculously wealthy memberships, and forgive me if I don't shed a tear that these guys will need to cough up a big assessment fee in order to have the privilege of hosting the U.S. Open. For every famous classic course by a classic designer like Mackenzie or Tillinghast, there are three or four more by the same designer that most people never heard of, because they never hosted a major in our lifetime. So, why stop with the classic courses of the second half of the 1900s? Why not reduce distance to 1920 standards and bring ALL of the "classic" designs back as contenders for hosting majors? An equipment rollback "fixes" a problem which doesn't exist. It makes the game less enjoyable for virtually anyone who plays. I'm 51, a 6.4 hcp, and my drives travel anywhere from 260-290 in neutral conditions. When I took up golf at 24 with a steel shafted wooden driver, I had to kill it to get 245. Golf is more fun hitting it 280 (and hitting a 9 iron from 150 instead of a 7), but I am supposed to bow down to the USGA and retired major golf champions because they are unhappy that it might be costly to get Baltusrol in shape for a U.S. Open? Golf is hard enough as it is. It is silly to be outraged that people play the game well, and that they hit the ball longer than yesteryear. That's what this is ultimately about, it's just appearances and ego, pure and simple. A small, elite group unhappy that the game looks too easy compared to their memory, and sad that the places they grew up playing aren't what they used to be to modern pros. This is hardly a reason to turn an industry upside down and make the game harder for virtually everyone who plays it.

  • Upvote 2

JP Bouffard

"I cut a little driver in there." -- Jim Murray

Driver: Titleist 915 D3, ACCRA Shaft 9.5*.
3W: Callaway XR,
3,4 Hybrid: Taylor Made RBZ Rescue Tour, Oban shaft.
Irons: 5-GW: Mizuno JPX800, Aerotech Steelfiber 95 shafts, S flex.
Wedges: Titleist Vokey SM5 56 degree, M grind
Putter: Edel Custom Pixel Insert 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I won't quote the whole thing. I agree with you, except for the last statement. I'm sure someone here would judge...

More seriously, it's been an arms race between manufacturers and the rules organizations over this for as long as I can remember. They want to do everything legally to make clubs more forgiving and go further, and there are valid concerns about length of courses and what the real benefits are. I believe in sensible limits, but once you give someone something you can't take it back. Enact strict limits and hold your line. Club companies have plenty of smart people to help with fittings, new ways to increase clubhead speed, etc. At some point there has to be a limit and maybe we have maxed out. I can't see what else they will do to enable clubs to go longer.

Also, we play under a single set of rules, professionals and amateurs. No reason to change, and no reason to have one play a different set of clubs because very, very few people can take advantage of the benefits in such a way.

I think it would be cool to play a round with old technology, I just don't want to be forced to do it or roll back technology for the pro's.

As for an arms race, I think that's what the manufacturers would like you to believe but the reality is almost every club produced today is at or very near the maximum range permitted by the USGA in terms of club head size and MOI.

Short of the USGA changing the specifications, the manufacturers are left to play with very minor adjustments in weight placement, shafts (length, torque, kick point), color, head shape (to some degree)  and adjustability (fitting) to improve upon their current clubs performance.   The marketing hype over emphasizes the performance improvements to convince people to buy the latest and greatest.

Joe Paradiso

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

See my signature, yet I still voted no. I would enjoy seeing a special event or tournament if they could round up enough persimmon.

As others have said, we have one set of rules for all and I think this is what most people want. The advances in equipment help handicappers at least as much if not more than professionals. Right now, technology under the current rules of golf is probably close to the limit in distance anyway. I understand that it seems that some courses are obsolete, but really they aren't. If the USGA wants to hold an event there, they can change the par, they  usually do anyway. I could see now, or if average distance increases, a tour spec ball as Nicklaus has suggested, but I wouldn't roll it back much from right now.

If the PGA decided tomorrow they wanted to go back to persimmon, it would take probably two years to implement. There aren't that many craftsmen left who know how to do it. It is almost a lost art, and that part is sad to me. There is exactly one manufacturer of new traditional persimmon clubs in the US, Louisville Golf who manufacture, traditional and improved persimmon woods as well as hickory shafted woods for that growing segment. There is one other manufacturer, Tad Moore, who makes hickory shafted woods as well as custom putters. Dave Wood does some restoration, and there are a few other cottage businesses. Joe Powell closed last fall. Back in the day, some old persimmon clubs were prized by tour players and sold for as much as drivers do today. And $500 was a lot more relative speaking in 1975 than it is today!

Yes persimmon IS pure. You haven't lived until you have hit one on the sweet spot and heard that crack. I don't hit the sweet spot often, but I play 90% of my golf with persimmon and blades. I just enjoy doing it. I enjoy scrounging around for gear. I played yesterday with Hogan Apex PC irons, a Cleveland persimmon driver and a Middleground persimmon 4 wood. They work just fine with ProV1's or Wilson Duos if you prefer a softer feel.

With the swing speeds some of those guys generate, they would break heads. Nicklaus broke several back in his heyday, as did other big hitters. Of course if you go to a steel shaft at 43-44 inches, it would slow the swing speed a tad, but they would still go through heads.

  • Upvote 1

Don

In the bag:

Driver: PING 410 Plus 9 degrees, Alta CB55 S  Fairway: Callaway Rogue 3W PX Even Flow Blue 6.0; Hybrid: Titleist 818H1 21* PX Even Flow Blue 6.0;  Irons: Titleist 718 AP1 5-W2(53*) Shafts- TT AMT Red S300 ; Wedges Vokey SM8 56-10D Putter: Scotty Cameron 2016 Newport 2.5  Ball: Titleist AVX or 2021 ProV1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Nicklaus is the greatest but with all due respect, all of thes courses are perfectly viable for everyone EXCEPT, perhaps, 0.5% of the world's golfers. So for that we are supposed to rewrite the rules and punish every other golfer on earth?

Why should major championships or the pro game dictate the rules? And even if it should, why should the rules protect the interests of specific golf clubs? Jack complained in an interview that "only Augusta National" had the kind of money needed to be able to continue to stretch their courses to keep up with modern pro distances. We are supposed to be upset about this? Many of these classic clubs have ridiculously wealthy memberships, and forgive me if I don't shed a tear that these guys will need to cough up a big assessment fee in order to have the privilege of hosting the U.S. Open.

For every famous classic course by a classic designer like Mackenzie or Tillinghast, there are three or four more by the same designer that most people never heard of, because they never hosted a major in our lifetime. So, why stop with the classic courses of the second half of the 1900s? Why not reduce distance to 1920 standards and bring ALL of the "classic" designs back as contenders for hosting majors?

An equipment rollback "fixes" a problem which doesn't exist. It makes the game less enjoyable for virtually anyone who plays. I'm 51, a 6.4 hcp, and my drives travel anywhere from 260-290 in neutral conditions. When I took up golf at 24 with a steel shafted wooden driver, I had to kill it to get 245. Golf is more fun hitting it 280 (and hitting a 9 iron from 150 instead of a 7), but I am supposed to bow down to the USGA and retired major golf champions because they are unhappy that it might be costly to get Baltusrol in shape for a U.S. Open?

Golf is hard enough as it is. It is silly to be outraged that people play the game well, and that they hit the ball longer than yesteryear. That's what this is ultimately about, it's just appearances and ego, pure and simple. A small, elite group unhappy that the game looks too easy compared to their memory, and sad that the places they grew up playing aren't what they used to be to modern pros. This is hardly a reason to turn an industry upside down and make the game harder for virtually everyone who plays it.

Lets clarify. I don't advocate rolling back equipment for anyone except the ball and then only for PGA pros not the rest of us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Lets clarify. I don't advocate rolling back equipment for anyone except the ball and then only for PGA pros not the rest of us.

I don't. Golf has always been a game where amateurs play the same game under the same rules.

I don't see a reason to change that. If you want to change the equipment rules then it needs to be a change for everyone.

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

first, that is a small sample size. They asked one Tour player to use older clubs. Also they are making assumptions after one round. I don't take much from this article than Snedeker is a good sport for using the equipment.

Umm, just posting videos means nothing really with out context. Honestly it's confusing.

I've hit persimmons, I don't really like them. SO no, not so pure.

What you don't have a sense of humor?

Link to comment
Share on other sites


What you don't have a sense of humor?

I was suppose to take that as a joke? You might want to work on you delivery.

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I don't. Golf has always been a game where amateurs play the same game under the same rules.

I don't see a reason to change that. If you want to change the equipment rules then it needs to be a change for everyone.

That's fine. We may be able to get nearly the same equipment but we are not playing the same game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

That's fine. We may be able to get nearly the same equipment but we are not playing the same game.

Sure we are. It's called playing golf under the "rules of golf". We are playing the same game. We just suck way way way way way way way way more than they do.

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Sure we are. It's called playing golf under the "rules of golf". We are playing the same game. We just suck way way way way way way way way more than they do.

Makes me think......following on another reply to this thread, I explored the Louisville Golf website. If there are amateurs who play persimmon and hickory leagues, why couldn't the PGA Tour do something like this? There is nothing in the rules saying you can't use LESS than the limits of technology. Of course they would never do this, because the push back from equipment companies and issues with sponsorships would make the tour chicken out. But I would bet you more than one tour player would be willing to have - as some have suggested in this thread - one event per year played with old style equipment. It would be fun to watch. N

JP Bouffard

"I cut a little driver in there." -- Jim Murray

Driver: Titleist 915 D3, ACCRA Shaft 9.5*.
3W: Callaway XR,
3,4 Hybrid: Taylor Made RBZ Rescue Tour, Oban shaft.
Irons: 5-GW: Mizuno JPX800, Aerotech Steelfiber 95 shafts, S flex.
Wedges: Titleist Vokey SM5 56 degree, M grind
Putter: Edel Custom Pixel Insert 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Sure we are. It's called playing golf under the "rules of golf". We are playing the same game. We just suck way way way way way way way way more than they do.

It's a matter of perspective. I can't hit a wedge from 140 yards and draw it back to the hole. Or hit a pitch from off the green that checks up next to the hole. Their talent means they can take advantage of the available technology. The average golfer cannot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

It's a matter of perspective. I can't hit a wedge from 140 yards and draw it back to the hole.

Neither can most PGA Tour players. Bubba is a special case if that is what you are getting at. Wedges are very hard to curve unless you have an outward path of something like 16 degrees and deloft it to a 7 iron. Then you are basically changing a PW to a 7 iron but with a shorter shaft. Then it's easier to curve.

It's a matter of perspective. I can't hit a wedge from 140 yards and draw it back to the hole. Or hit a pitch from off the green that checks up next to the hole. Their talent means they can take advantage of the available technology. The average golfer cannot.

Yet they are still playing the same game. The same rules. They go out, tee the ball up and play. They are just better.

Heck a lot of PGA Tour players are going towards more Game Improvement stuff in their long irons. Most of them hit very forgiving drivers we use. In the end they are seeing the benefit of technology meant for amateurs.

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Well for the guys that think tech needs to keep going and distance is just part of the game now...

What happens when we see 450/ 500+ yard drives. 250+ yard 5 irons and more

The vast majority of old courses now are obsolete because of the distance.

Most haven't the room to expand.

Building new courses that require 2 to 3 times the acreage to build will make green fees

unaffordable, it will become a rich mans game again.

What are you going to say 15 years from now if tech goes farther and farther.

I'm with what Jack has said for many years limit the ball period.

Who cares about the Mfg's If they want to be in the club business then they can work

on forgiveness and forget about distance. That's something all of US can use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Well for the guys that think tech needs to keep going and distance is just part of the game now...

What happens when we see 450/ 500+ yard drives. 250+ yard 5 irons and more

We will not unless a long driver person makes it to the PGA Tour.

USGA has limited the driver a ton. You'd need a golfer with 140+ MPH clubhead speed. Golf technology isn't heading in that direction due to the USGA's rules.

Look at the PGA driving distance. It's pretty much has flattened off the past 10 years.

The vast majority of old courses now are obsolete because of the distance.

Most haven't the room to expand.

I'm with what Jack has said for many years limit the ball period.

Who cares about the Mfg's If they want to be in the club business then they can work

on forgiveness and forget about distance. That's something all of US can use.

Jack doesn't get the ball is limited. The USGA has limited the interaction between the ball and the clubface. By setting the COR to 0.830 they limited the ball.

straight from the USGA website on the golf ball.

From the USGA guidelines on testing initial velocity,

4. Significance 4.1

This method is used to determine the initial velocity properties of golf balls. The data obtained from this method is used to ascertain the conformance of the golf balls to the initial velocity standard as stated in the Rules of Golf (Appendix III). The velocity of the ball shall not be greater than 250 feet (76.2 m) per second. A maximum tolerance of 2% will be allowed.

250 FT/Second = 170 mph

  • Upvote 1

Matt Dougherty, P.E.
 fasdfa dfdsaf 

What's in My Bag
Driver; :pxg: 0311 Gen 5,  3-Wood: 
:titleist: 917h3 ,  Hybrid:  :titleist: 915 2-Hybrid,  Irons: Sub 70 TAIII Fordged
Wedges: :edel: (52, 56, 60),  Putter: :edel:,  Ball: :snell: MTB,  Shoe: :true_linkswear:,  Rangfinder: :leupold:
Bag: :ping:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 3098 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...