Does the Ball go Too Far?

[iacas]

Hardly scientific, but I wanted to take this poll.

Consider the fact that the ball, which has been under the "Overall Distance Standard" for something like 30 years, is being hit pretty far by pros.

Some people blame the ball, while others blame longer, lighter, larger drivers, increased swing speed, etc.

But anyway, I don't want to push the debate, just ask the question and get a (non-scientific) poll of the results: does the ball go too far? For your game, for the pros... just in general: yes or no?

[williethekid]

I voted no. I'm not saying that the ball doesnt go far, because it definitely does. My grandfather had long drive trophy's for hitting it 250 yards, and he said he crushed it past most people. The part where it makes the game interesting are long par 3's, and short par 4's. Driving the green or just getting to it. Also it makes the 4 wedge option viable for longer players. The ball goes farther, but that means a bad shot goes farther from where you would like it to. I think the ball is fine for now, especially for the non-pro golfer. One of the argument's I have heard is that longer balls mean longer holes. I dont think so, how about narrower holes. A narrow fairway means a more accurate club, a longer hole just rewards driving distance.

[iacas]

One of the argument's I have heard is that longer balls mean longer holes. I dont think so, how about narrower holes.

True to some extent, but I prefer the shorter holes. Look at what Oakmont's 17th did to people this year, or what some of the "drivable" par fours do to Tiger, Vijay, etc. They make more bogeys on those holes when they try to drive them than when they lay up and play smart... but the temptation is always there.

[Burg]

My opinion has always been that in order to make golf courses more difficult, they should be made shorter and tighter with the rough being very penal. If you make them 8,000 yards with average rough you are playing right into the hands of the Tiger Woods set that can bomb the ball. Shorten the courses, grow the rough, and narrow the fairways if you want to bring shot-making back into golf.

[P3R3]

I wont stop till I hit consistant 300 yard drives like all internet golfers do. :popcorn:

[Striper]

I agree that distance isn't as big a deal as tougher, more penalizing holes.

I think all holes with parallel fairways/holes should be marked with OB markers. If you hit your ball in to the playing area of another hole you should have to take "stroke and distance". THAT would put a premium on accuracy for the average golfer AND possibly speed up play.

[Dyna]

I wont stop till I hit consistant 300 yard drives like all internet golfers do. :popcorn:

I'm jumping on that bandwagon, love popcorn also.

[lamebums]

For the pros: Yes. And courses are going out of their way to "Tiger-proof" them - a la Augusta National, at 7400-something yards, or at Oakmont (I forget which hole) with a 500 yard par 4.

For the average guy: No. He's being left behind. Driving distance has changed little for the average joe since then, and although it's gone up for some of us (anyone who takes the game seriously at all), we're by and large being left behind too. Do any of us hit 390 yard bombs like Cabrera did at the Open?

The solution? Make the pro tour's courses more penalizing on wild tee shots. Simple trigonometry indicates it's harder to hit a fairway with a 300 yard drive than a 200 yard drive. So make the rough thicker, furrow the bunkers, and plant more trees.

Making parallel fairways out of bounds would just kill the game for the majority of duffers, though - since most of them slice the ball, they're more likely to end up in a parallel fairway anyway. Not fun if you're out with the buddies and you're hitting 7 off the tee, even though you know you could have gotten that second shot on the green.

And, don't lengthen the hole. I don't care what the pros can do, but 95 percent of golfers can't reach a 500 yard par 4 in two.

[iacas]

For the average guy: No. He's being left behind. Driving distance has changed little for the average joe since then, and although it's gone up for some of us (anyone who takes the game seriously at all), we're by and large being left behind too. Do any of us hit 390 yard bombs like Cabrera did at the Open?

The hole was downwind and downhill. You weren't at that tournament to see that drive - I was. Fred Funk carried the ball over 300 yards and it rolled out to 350 to 360. I hit the ball about as far as Fred Funk.

The solution? Make the pro tour's courses more penalizing on wild tee shots. Simple trigonometry indicates it's harder to hit a fairway with a 300 yard drive than a 200 yard drive. So make the rough thicker, furrow the bunkers, and plant more trees.

Booooooooooring. Augusta did that and everyone complained about how boring the Masters was. The U.S. Open courses are set up that way and while it's good for a once-a-year "grind" event, it's not something people want to watch week in and week out.

That's no solution at all.

[Q.Q.Quillume]

I wont stop till I hit consistant 300 yard drives like all internet golfers do. :popcorn:

Well, there's at least one internet golfer who doesn't hit it 300, or even 275 or 250. As a matter of fact, it's a

rare occasion when this one internet golfer even hits it 235 or 240. That internet golfer just might be Q.Q.Quillume.

[Leek]

Not for me it doesn't

[MGP]

Well, there's at least one internet golfer who doesn't hit it 300, or even 275 or 250. As a matter of fact, it's a

Hey, that's how far I hit it too! Funny now that I have a GPS and measure actual distances on shots, all the "300 yard hitters" I play with are only 10-25 yards longer than me. Of course, they are just having an "off day".

Back to the original question... I don't think the ball goes too far for the average amateur. For very good amateurs and pros, maybe. Club and ball technology have certainly helped better players hit the ball longer and I think, has changed the style of game most pros play. I'm not sure what the best answer to the "problem" is or if it's really even a problem. The statistics I've seen show that there hasn't been a significant shift in the handicaps or scoring averages for most amateurs over the past 20 years. Based on what I see on the course, I would have to agree. The pros are certainly playing a different game than they did 20 years ago, however.

[lamebums]

The hole was downwind and downhill. You weren't at that tournament to see that drive - I was. Fred Funk carried the ball over 300 yards and it rolled out to 350 to 360. I hit the ball about as far as Fred Funk.

I doubt you at a ~2 handicap, are an average golfer. You said so yourself in other places that you were good at the game. I'm talking about the problems here that would cause the average guy (16 handicap - if I remember correctly? And it'd be much higher if every weekend duffer out there kept one.)

Booooooooooring. Augusta did that and everyone complained about how boring the Masters was. The U.S. Open courses are set up that way and while it's good for a once-a-year "grind" event, it's not something people want to watch week in and week out. That's no solution at all.

Then what's

your solution? I see it this way - if the average guy can't reach a par 4 in two good shots because it's 500 yards long, then he isn't going to have much fun. And I know you're going to say he's hitting from the wrong tees, but his choice, however wrong, is what golf has to be centered around, if it's to remain a viable and affordable sport. It's the 90+ percent of long suffering duffers out there who can't hit it 200 yards that keep greens fees affordable and golf courses open. Edit: How was Augusta boring, if it was 7,400-something yards? Isn't the same kind of Tiger-proofing that a lot of people were calling for?

[iacas]

I doubt you at a ~2 handicap, are an average golfer.

That's beside the point. The point was you're taking a stat (Cabrera's 397-yard drive) as some sort of "proof" that we're being left behind. It was an anomaly: a downwind, downhill hole with a firm fairway that kicked the ball 80 yards further. It's not proof of anything. If someone is 40 yards behind Cabrera on flat ground, they could be a similar percentage behind him on that hole too.

Then what's

Who said I have one? Furthermore, having a "solution" implies I think there's a "problem." I don't. I voted "no," and my answer applies to everyone, pro or amateur.

I see it this way - if the average guy can't reach a par 4 in two good shots because it's 500 yards long, then he isn't going to have much fun.

I see it this way: if the average guy is playing a course with a 500-yard par four, he's playing the wrong tees. You're right about my guess. It's his choice, too, but he's choosing not to have any fun. Or he has a perverse notion of "fun."

It's the 90+ percent of long-suffering duffers out there who can't hit it 200 yards that keep greens fees affordable and golf courses open.

No, it's not. Half or so of that 25 million number play something like a round or two or three only per year. We could drop to 12 million golfers in the U.S. without really even noticing so long as those 12 million were the ones that played more than five times per year.

How was Augusta boring, if it was 7,400-something yards? Isn't the same kind of Tiger-proofing that a lot of people were calling for?

I wasn't calling for it. And what do you mean "how was it boring?" Did you WATCH this year? The Masters this year was a snore. It's been charge-proofed, not Tiger-proofed.

Length has nothing to do with how boring a hole is, though oftentimes the short holes (drivable par fours, reachable par fives) are more exciting.

[lamebums]

That's beside the point. The point was you're taking a stat (Cabrera's 397-yard drive) as some sort of "proof" that we're being left behind. It was an anomaly: a downwind, downhill hole with a firm fairway that kicked the ball 80 yards further. It's not proof of anything. If someone is 40 yards behind Cabrera on flat ground, they could be a similar percentage behind him on that hole too.

That individual shot is an anomaly, yes. That doesn't blow off the fact that the average tour pro drives the ball 288 yards, while the average guy hits it anywhere from 195-205 (depending on which source you use). The problem here is the average tour pro drove it 260 back in 1993, while the average guy hit it 193. In short, the average guy is being left behind. (That article dated from 2003, so undoubtedly they hit it longer by now.)

Who said I have one? Furthermore, having a "solution" implies I think there's a "problem." I don't. I voted "no," and my answer applies to everyone, pro or amateur.

I'm not talking about the ball in this case - I'm talking about the boring Masters. What do

you think would make the Masters more exciting?

I see it this way: if the average guy is playing a course with a 500-yard par four, he's playing the wrong tees. You're right about my guess. It's his choice, too, but he's choosing not to have any fun. Or he has a perverse notion of "fun."

12 million, 25 million, whatever. There's still a lot more of them than there are of us. The number of golfers who keep a handicap is what, 4 million? And the number of those who aren't total duffers? Even fewer than that.

I wasn't calling for it. And what do you mean "how was it boring?" Did you WATCH this year? The Masters this year was a snore. It's been charge-proofed, not Tiger-proofed.

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I enjoyed watching Tiger not on top of the leaderboard for once.

[iacas]

That individual shot is an anomaly, yes. That doesn't blow off the fact that the average tour pro drives the ball 288 yards, while the average guy hits it anywhere from 195-205 (depending on which source you use).

Golfers 10+ years ago were playing "distance" balls. Pros always had more yardage available if they wanted it - they just wanted the spin and control a balata ball offered.

I'm not really interested in considering the "average" golfer if we're going to include the guys who play twice a year. They're not "golfers" for the sake of this discussion in my opinion. So, you can claim a win on this point if you want - but in my experience, the pros haven't picked up any extra distance that amateurs haven't had.

I'm not talking about the ball in this case - I'm talking about the boring Masters. What do

We've already debated this, and I already answered this question, you know, back in April. That's not what this thread is about.

Maybe I'm in the minority here, but I enjoyed watching Tiger not on top of the leaderboard for once.

What's that got to do with anything?

Please don't answer - let's just get back to topic. The topic ain't The Masters or Tiger Woods or coming up with "solutions" to a problem that we don't even believe exists (per the current results).

[Mr.Buckethead]

I do not think the ball goes too far.

Scoring records are not being shattered week in and week out. The courses typically make the necessary adjustments. When was the last time someone shot 59?


I caddied at an Open qualifier and all 4 guys in the group bombed the ball. They easily hit the ball 280-310. However, because they were playing from the tips, they weren't hitting wedges into the greens every time.


As an aside, I spoke with a guy that played at a local country club with Steve Flesch. He said that Flesch wanted a challenge and he went and teed off 20-30 yards past the back tees. He said that Flesch still knocked the ball past everyone.

[lamebums]

Golfers 10+ years ago were playing "distance" balls. Pros always had more yardage available if they wanted it - they just wanted the spin and control a balata ball offered.

Just so you know, I voted no anyway. The ball only goes too far for a tiny minority of people (a few hundred tour pros plus maybe a few percent of better amateurs who can hit it that far consistently), but for the majority of people, it isn't a problem. The problem I am concerned about is when the course changes for the 300+ bombers, and doesn't take the bunter into account, just so a few people aren't reducing it to bomb, gouge, pitch, and putt.

So, that's that. Let's leave it at that.