Jump to content
IGNORED

USGA/R&A Distance Insights Project (Updated Feb. 2021)


iacas

Recommended Posts

  • Administrator
2 hours ago, lastings said:

I believe that the comparison from baseball bats to golfers switching to a different golf ball is not as easily dismissed as some of the comments in this thread are suggesting.  

You don't seem to have read my longer post re: bats, either.

I never said they were "the same" or that they didn't require a change. I acknowledged that they do.

But unlike in golf, we don't have people being "called up" from the amateur ranks several times a year to play in the World Series.

And again, a big part of why college programs have composite and metal bats is simply cost: wood bats break and thus cost quite a bit more, long term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

30 minutes ago, iacas said:

You don't seem to have read my longer post re: bats, either.

I never said they were "the same" or that they didn't require a change. I acknowledged that they do.

But unlike in golf, we don't have people being "called up" from the amateur ranks several times a year to play in the World Series.

And again, a big part of why college programs have composite and metal bats is simply cost: wood bats break and thus cost quite a bit more, long term.

No, I understand both your points regarding bats.   but, in more than one post you have dismissed the wood/metal bat argument, by solely entering the BBCor argument.   which is the least significant difference between wood and metal bats.  The fact that metal bats produce greater exit velocity (or, did) is not the reason players are forced to change their approach with wood bats.   

This is also a pretty false statement regarding cost.   First off, wood bats are about $100.  Composite bats are about $400.    Breaking 4 wood bats over the course of a college season would be pretty unlikely.  Also, it's not entirely out of the question that players are using 2 or even 3 composite bats over the course of the year. (in highschool, I didn't use my game bat for practice, because they break down in time).    lets just go ahead and omit D1 schools, since most of their equipment is provided by sponsors to begin with (certainly the top teams).   But, at DIII schools, most players are buying their own bat(s).   usually at a discounted price or even at cost through the team's sponsored catalog.   I would imagine this works in a similar way for golf, but I don't really know.  

The only real argument I can really get behind is the fact that players transition from amateur to Pro to Amateur in Golf.   but, I don't give it as much weight as you do.   

 

 

Edited by lastings
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
17 minutes ago, lastings said:

No, I understand both your points regarding bats.   but, in more than one post you have dismissed the wood/metal bat argument, by solely entering the BBCor argument.

This is not accurate.

Most of your post is a fabrication, and no further posts from you on this are warranted, as you're clearly misreading what I've said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I dont like the bat argument.

If there going to be any comparison maybe the full body suits for swimming from the Olympics years ago is the closest. Every swimmer had access to it....everyone's lap times increased but FINA banned them simply because people were too fast with the new tech.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator

Titleist (Acushnet) has issued a statement:

Quote

…we believe the conclusions drawn in this Report undervalue the skill and athleticism of the game’s very best players and focus far too much on the top of the men’s professional game and project this on golf and golfers as a whole.

Furthermore, we believe that existing equipment regulations effectively govern the prospects of any significant increases in hitting distance by the game’s longest hitters.

There's more. It's a 686-word statement. Link below.


https://www.titleist.com/distance-insights-perspective

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • 10 months later...

This article summarizes what I've been saying for a while now. GROW THE DAMNED GRASS LONGER! 
I can remember when they'd only roll the greens before a tournament. I was watching a program on preparing the course for a tournament in Dubai and the heads groundkeeper was saying they want to get the greens rolled at least a dozen times before the tournament and the at least 7 to 10 times getting the FAIRWAYS rolled. 

 


The distance debate will reignite quickly in 2021. But we don't need a rollback of equipment; it's a 'rising up' that we need.

The fact that the committee is meeting again in March to "decide what needs to be done" makes me think that sooner or later they will get enough "rollbackers" on the committee to decide to roll the ball back. I really hope I'm wrong, but it seems like this issue just won't go away. Again, I personally do NOT want them to roll back the equipment, I just think they will. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

10 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

This article summarizes what I've been saying for a while now. GROW THE DAMNED GRASS LONGER! 
I can remember when they'd only roll the greens before a tournament. I was watching a program on preparing the course for a tournament in Dubai and the heads groundkeeper was saying they want to get the greens rolled at least a dozen times before the tournament and the at least 7 to 10 times getting the FAIRWAYS rolled. 

 


The distance debate will reignite quickly in 2021. But we don't need a rollback of equipment; it's a 'rising up' that we need.

The fact that the committee is meeting again in March to "decide what needs to be done" makes me think that sooner or later they will get enough "rollbackers" on the committee to decide to roll the ball back. I really hope I'm wrong, but it seems like this issue just won't go away. Again, I personally do NOT want them to roll back the equipment, I just think they will. 

 

I really like the article's points.  Funny thing was this summer my niece's husband, they live in the Radford Va area, spoke of the fairways in Eastern NC and how the "rough" here was their fairways there.  As I have thought more on this, it makes great sense, Mr Chamblee's thoughts are a good way to make the game more challenging.  I was watching the Golf Channel's replay of events 2020 and I was intrigued by their comments on the length of the rough on one course.  Also I watched the the balls rolled and rolled and rolled down the well groomed fairways I thought to myself they don't roll that way here no matter how well groomed.  All that to say all the rules changes will do is force the manufacturers of balls and clubs dig harder to find that extra distance.  The outcry will be what do we do now with all these "illegal" balls and clubs?  I am thinking about the groove rule and how many "illegal" clubs are still in play and how much Covid brought those old clubs back out.  The USGA and the R&A have to be careful - are they willing to kill the renaissance the sport is enjoying for the sake of a few grumpy old golfers by rolling things back?  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator

The March meeting isn't something new, its just been delayed by almost a year due to the COVID issues.  And the results of the March meeting will be an enumeration of specific possible actions which will be studied further.  A list of the likely topics for further study was included in the Conclusions of the Distance Insight Project released back in February.  But when we talk about things that the USGA/R&A have the ability to regulate, course set up isn't one of them.  Maybe the PGA Tour voluntarily will take action to decrease the motivation for the USGA/R&A to change equipment rules, but I doubt it.   I still take the Ruling Bodies at their word, there are no current plans to change equipment rules in a way that would decrease distance for all players.

And when we talk about the "groove rule", let's remember that those old clubs are legal for three more years in pretty much every situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I think it’s all nonsense. The old Scotsmen would laugh and bitch at the difficulties of this game hundreds of years ago with feather balls and wooden sticks. Here we are today with golf still considered one of the most difficult sports to become good at with titanium clubs, graphite shafts, 4 piece balls, and launch monitors.

Yet there’s concern the game is becoming too easy. Asinine. Shut up and play. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

22 minutes ago, WillieT said:

The USGA and the R&A have to be careful - are they willing to kill the renaissance the sport is enjoying for the sake of a few grumpy old golfers by rolling things back?  

Are you calling Jack grumpy?  Probably comes with the age and wanting to protect records.  I don't know... but if Jack wants to talk about it over beers I'm up for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

13 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

And when we talk about the "groove rule", let's remember that those old clubs are legal for three more years in pretty much every situation.

Yep and I am pretty sure they will be used around courses for a number of years after as well.  Back to the roll back - the courses can make things harder for sure - change some shorter 4's to 3's maybe?  Change the short 5's to 4's?  Is there a hard fast rule that a course has to be par 70-71-72?  It would be interesting to see what those who originally envisioned the game would say today about it today.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Just now, WillieT said:

Yep and I am pretty sure they will be used around courses for a number of years after as well.  Back to the roll back - the courses can make things harder for sure - change some shorter 4's to 3's maybe?  Change the short 5's to 4's?  Is there a hard fast rule that a course has to be par 70-71-72?  It would be interesting to see what those who originally envisioned the game would say today about it today.  

For comparison, the 1860 Open was played over 36 holes, about 11,400 yards total (5700 for 18, basically)  The winning score was 174 (so averaging 77 for 18 holes).  The original "standard" score was "bogey", basically what it is now, one higher than what we call "par".  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

16 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

Are you calling Jack grumpy?  Probably comes with the age and wanting to protect records.  I don't know... but if Jack wants to talk about it over beers I'm up for it.

He probably is and it may be about protecting the glory days.  Yes I love good banter but also understand that records will come and go we all know that.  I recall my dad talking about growing up in the Great Depression and how tough it was and how his dad grew up in the turn of the century rural NC and how much tougher it was then.  The game is evolving, just as all sports have - it is funny how no matter how much the equipment improves it still comes down to a person taking a club and swinging it to hit a ball into the distance.  The more things change the more they stay the same - even the arguments over whether they should roll the equipment back or make the courses tougher or both.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
4 minutes ago, WillieT said:

He probably is and it may be about protecting the glory days.  Yes I love good banter but also understand that records will come and go we all know that.  I recall my dad talking about growing up in the Great Depression and how tough it was and how his dad grew up in the turn of the century rural NC and how much tougher it was then.  The game is evolving, just as all sports have - it is funny how no matter how much the equipment improves it still comes down to a person taking a club and swinging it to hit a ball into the distance.  The more things change the more they stay the same - even the arguments over whether they should roll the equipment back or make the courses tougher or both.    

I remember reading that Bobby Jones said Nicklaus played "a game with which I am not familiar".  (I hope I have that quote right).  Jack sees guys playing a game with which HE isn't familiar.  Only one of those two has said that the equipment can't be allowed to advance, that it should be rolled back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

29 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

I remember reading that Bobby Jones said Nicklaus played "a game with which I am not familiar".  (I hope I have that quote right).  Jack sees guys playing a game with which HE isn't familiar.  Only one of those two has said that the equipment can't be allowed to advance, that it should be rolled back.

Good correlation.  Jack can't have it both ways...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
GCLogo.png

The distance debate will reignite quickly in 2021. But we don't need a rollback of equipment; it's a 'rising up' that we need.

Brandel weighs in (again).

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
15 minutes ago, iacas said:
GCLogo.png

The distance debate will reignite quickly in 2021. But we don't need a rollback of equipment; it's a 'rising up' that we need.

Brandel weighs in (again).

He makes some sense. These are some of the points posters have made in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • iacas changed the title to Usga/Ra Distance Insights Project
  • iacas changed the title to USGA/R&A Distance Insights Project (Updated Feb. 2021)

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • Support TST Affiliates

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo after clicking this link. For Mevo+, click this link or the image above.
  • Posts

    • I’m a fan of the M2… always be one of TM’s best heads.  BUT. Doea the other Titleist driver’s hosel adapter fit the TS4 and vice versa??  If it does you can use the proforce in both heads etc…. 
    • Yup. Have to agree. Can't give up 40+ on the road and expect to win. Would have like to see OSU take more chances down the field. Hats off to Michigan though they were simply better today. It's Georgia's national championship to lose now IMO, I don't think there's any offense left in the playoff picture that will challenge Georgia's defense.
    • Too much so, yes. The body is responsible for the AROUND. The arms are responsible for the UP.
    • Figured since I have this, I may as well post it.   Even though it’s not a good video. Can’t get back far enough.    driver swing is quite a bit more flat.  Probably too much sway rather than turn.    But, I’m really working on speed, and this summer I averaged 278 off the tee with driver and hit 61% fairways.     So, I just don’t think it’s my biggest concern.  I do want to be longer, though.      
    • Day 119: Worked on backswing cupped wrist feel and also transition priority piece. Decided to get the feel of head position change (I call it Rory-ing) first, before working on clubface. I will be playing 18 tomorrow and will pay attention to ball flight to see how I need to adjust palmar flexion amount. Also did pitching/chipping drills from covid-19 practice plan days 6/7.
  • Today's Birthdays

    1. apc2210
      apc2210
      (31 years old)
    2. J M Brown
      J M Brown
      (39 years old)
    3. Neil B
      Neil B
      (80 years old)

×
×
  • 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...