USGA/R&A Changes to the Equipment Standards?

[saevel25]

2 hours ago, saevel25 said:

Yea that makes sense. They might make a later react different suck it could slow it down at high swing speed but maintain most on slower swing speeds.

This is what happens when you type up a response using a cellphone at the gym, and do not proof read. 😭

I was thinking they would make a layer that would react differently at higher swing speeds. Like a dual core type of thing. 

Edited March 17 by saevel25

[billchao]

19 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

This is what happens when you type up a response using my cellphone at the gym, and do not proof read. 😭

I was thinking they would make a layer that would react differently at higher swing speeds. Like a dual core type of thing. 

I knew what you meant to type, but I was starting to wonder if you had the same educational background as @ChetlovesMer 😜

[mvmac]

5 hours ago, iacas said:

Ok, now I'm in full support of the new ball 😂

[70sSanO]

I haven't read all of the posts, so I apologize if this has already been posted.  If I understand correctly, the premise of the USGA and R&A rule change is based on swing speeds.  If that is correct, then don't change the ball, reduce swing speeds.

With the technology today, it is so easy to monitor a swing speed.  If there is a maximum swing speed for elite (whatever the definition of elite turns out to be), then add weight, adjustable fins, scoops, or ???, to slow down the speed of a driver.  Those more familiar with impact of aerodynamics/weight can chime in if this is a doable.

Maybe set a max swing speed with a + tolerance, based on technology reading error range.  An example would be 125mph max swing speed with +2mph tolerance.  "Maybe" allow a single swing exceeding the total allowable speed per round for a time when the golfer wants to really let it go.

John

Edited March 17 by 70sSanO

[saevel25]

16 minutes ago, 70sSanO said:

I haven't read all of the posts, so I apologize if this has already been posted.  If I understand correctly, the premise of the USGA and R&A rule change is based on swing speeds.  If that is correct, then don't change the ball, reduce swing speeds.

With the technology today, it is so easy to monitor a swing speed.  If there is a maximum swing speed for elite (whatever the definition of elite turns out to be), then add weight, adjustable fins, scoops, or ???, to slow down the speed of a driver.  Those more familiar with impact of aerodynamics/weight can chime in if this is a doable.

Maybe set a max swing speed with a + tolerance, based on technology reading error range.  An example would be 125mph max swing speed with +2mph tolerance.  "Maybe" allow a single swing exceeding the total allowable speed per round for a time when the golfer wants to really let it go.

John

Now sure I see how this is possible unless you make the club heavier, shorten the club, or just penalize golfers for swinging too fast?

It’s a different take, but I don’t not think this is feasible. 

[iacas]

2 hours ago, 70sSanO said:

If that is correct, then don't change the ball, reduce swing speeds.

With the technology today, it is so easy to monitor a swing speed.  If there is a maximum swing speed for elite (whatever the definition of elite turns out to be), then add weight, adjustable fins, scoops, or ???, to slow down the speed of a driver.  Those more familiar with impact of aerodynamics/weight can chime in if this is a doable.

It's "doable" but it makes absolutely no sense at all to do.

---

Also…

I was wrong about there being two points on the testing curve. There's just the one, and eventually it'll move up to 127 MPH.

I could swear (and the four of us that were chatting) that there used to be two points on the curve, which would make it tougher to make a conforming ball… but even if the point is moved a little farther from the Tour average, it's still possible to do the grey line… and may be possible to do something like the red line, too.

[saevel25]

 

[70sSanO]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

It's "doable" but it makes absolutely no sense at all to do.

---

 

Because if swing speed is the problem then work the problem, not an if/then.

John

[iacas]

24 minutes ago, 70sSanO said:

Because if swing speed is the problem then work the problem, not an if/then.

The problem is that the ball goes too far.

Adjustable "fins" aren't even legal. Your "solution" is worse than Peter Kostis's.

[Archie Bunker]

Maybe just limit the length of the driver to 42 inches? Shorter but more accurate drives? Get out the hacksaws!😉

[Vinsk]

20 minutes ago, Archie Bunker said:

Maybe just limit the length of the driver to 42 inches? Shorter but more accurate drives? Get out the hacksaws!😉

A little unfair if you’re 6’7.🙂

[70sSanO]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

The problem is that the ball goes too far.

Adjustable "fins" aren't even legal. Your "solution" is worse than Peter Kostis's.

I’m not going argue, but pre-Tiger golf here we come.

It won’t be that bad, since todays players actually know what a gym is.

John

[iacas]

59 minutes ago, 70sSanO said:

I’m not going argue, but pre-Tiger golf here we come.

It won’t be that bad, since todays players actually know what a gym is.

Nah. It’s like 4%.

[70sSanO]

1 hour ago, iacas said:

Nah. It’s like 4%.

Well Jack will be disappointed.  So close to checking off the last thing on his bucket list.

John

[boogielicious]

10 hours ago, Vinsk said:

A little unfair if you’re 6’7.🙂

Play basketball instead!😜

Could be the governing bodies are proposing to make restrictions just to see what alternatives the PGA Tour and OEM manufacturers will come up with. They’ve discussed it before, but now there’s a real deadline.

[Vinsk]

42 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

Play basketball instead!😜

Could be the governing bodies are proposing to make restrictions just to see what alternatives the PGA Tour and OEM manufacturers will come up with. They’ve discussed it before, but now there’s a real deadline.

Lol, true. I honestly feel it’s all a big waste of time. Golf is still hard. Always will be. The distance issue hasn’t made golf unchallenging as they proposed in their silly statement. Not one golfer has come along in over 20 years that’s even close to Tiger. The long drivers still hit it OB too. Golf wins. Always will.

[Archie Bunker]

Some of the classic courses that professionals played in years past were designed when 250 yards was considered to be a good drive. And many don't have enough room to push the tees back. With the industry using technology in an attempt to turn par 4's into par 3's someday, it makes sense that something needs to be done other than just making new longer courses. 

[Vinsk]

28 minutes ago, Archie Bunker said:

Some of the classic courses that professionals played in years past were designed when 250 yards was considered to be a good drive. And many don't have enough room to push the tees back. With the industry using technology in an attempt to turn par 4's into par 3's someday, it makes sense that something needs to be done other than just making new longer courses. 

Pick one , several and look at the course record. And look at the average scores of the fields that have played it over the last 20 years. I bet there’s little fluctuation.