The Golf Ball "Problem": PGA Tour Players Hitting it Far is a Problem for All of Golf?

[rdubya59]

IMO and it's just my opinion, we need bifurcated rules.   There do need to be limits on how far the ball goes and how far clubs can hit the ball for Touring Pros to prevent courses becoming obsolete and running out of real estate.   The rest of us need all the help we can get.  If you're in a sanctioned tournament and hit it OB, you need to re-tee and hit three.   If you're out with your buddies on Saturday or Sunday and hit it OB, you need to drop one up there close to where it went OB and hit three from there-You ain't gettin a  check and we don't wanna wait all day for you to use the tee as your driving range.

 

[iacas]

16 minutes ago, rdubya59 said:

IMO and it's just my opinion, we need bifurcated rules.

I disagree, and think that the unified Rules of Golf are one of the best things about the sport.

16 minutes ago, rdubya59 said:

There do need to be limits on how far the ball goes and how far clubs can hit the ball for Touring Pros to prevent courses becoming obsolete and running out of real estate.

We have a lot of rules on the golf balls and golf clubs/drivers, including several on how they behave with respect to distance, ball speed, aerodynamics, etc. For example, balls must conform to the Overall Distance Standard. We have rules governing the springiness of the faces of drivers, the length of drivers, etc.

What you cannot regulate, however, is how fast a player is capable of swinging a driver.

16 minutes ago, rdubya59 said:

If you're out with your buddies on Saturday or Sunday and hit it OB, you need to drop one up there close to where it went OB and hit three from there-You ain't gettin a  check and we don't wanna wait all day for you to use the tee as your driving range.

Some players do that (though I'd argue that you should be hitting four, lying three, from your drop).

[uitar9]

I'll never afford to play at a tour course and if I could, I wouldn't be playing off the tips. I like watching bunt singles.

[Vinsk]

On 2/11/2018 at 11:49 AM, rdubya59 said:

 

IMO and it's just my opinion, we need bifurcated rules.   There do need to be limits on how far the ball goes and how far clubs can hit the ball for Touring Pros to prevent courses becoming obsolete and running out of real estate. 

 

Completely disagree. Obsolete? Won’t happen. Golf will always win. Tim Potter...(who?) just beat the biggest hitter and number 1 golfer on the planet at Pebble Beach. People are getting these unproven ideas about golfers going out and destroying these courses. No they’re not. There are still plenty of bogeys and worse happening at every tournament. It’s nonsense talk generating from a few guys who hit some amazing shots here and there. So what? Enjoy it and watch golf evolve but remember, golf will always win. Done. No need to dial back the ball or the equipment. Finished. Dumb idea, period.

[iacas]

http://golfweek.com/2018/02/12/r-and-a-ceo-martin-slumbers-on-distance-issue-discussion-needed/

[chspeed]

On 2/11/2018 at 12:09 PM, iacas said:

What you cannot regulate, however, is how fast a player is capable of swinging a driver.

True, but nature can. A little OT, but most scientist accept that there's a physiological limit to athletic motions, and many think we're pretty close to the limit. This is of course, taking into account natural methods only. The limit is blown away if we assume other external factors such as doping, genetic engineering, etc.

Good, short article for those interested: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/have-we-reached-the-athletic-limits-of-the-human-body/

 

Edited February 13, 2018 by chspeed

[phillyk]

13 minutes ago, iacas said:

http://golfweek.com/2018/02/12/r-and-a-ceo-martin-slumbers-on-distance-issue-discussion-needed/

So, are they addressing the issue of golfer vs course or golfer vs golfer?  I don't get it.  There will always be a gap between short hitter and long hitter no matter what they try to do, which I assume they must understand.  So maybe they are thinking of changing for golfer vs course, which I can understand a little, but it'll still hurt the short hitters more than the longer. 

[Nutsmacker]

What I don't understand is why these "officials" keep trying to alter the game?  I don't think there was anything wrong with the rules/balls to begin with.  Who wants to play with a deadened ball?  As long as it is within the legal specs, why change it around?   As everyone has reported, the average length on the tour hasn't changed much over the last 10 years or so.  It is almost like they are after DJ and a few others exclusively.  

 

 

[saevel25]

If they were to change the distance, I like to see them drop the COR again. I would not increase the spin rate on the ball. Changing the COR would more uniformly cause all tour players distance to decrease the same amount. Changing the spin rate would hurt the top end more than the bottom end because golfers who swing faster can put more spin on the ball.

If they took the COR limit from .830 max to .800 max. Then there would be about a 6 mph drop off in ball speed on every golfer on Tour. In doing so, you'd see about an 8 yards of carry distance drop off. That would drop the top end to just under 300 yards. The average on tour would be 271 yards.

5 minutes ago, phillyk said:

So, are they addressing the issue of golfer vs course or golfer vs golfer?  I don't get it. 

That is the big question. If it is golfer v golfer, then they believe the skill of hitting the ball a long way with accuracy is not an important skill. Yet, that is the very skill that gave Jack and Tiger their competitive advantage. Golf has always been about the more gifted versus the less gifted.

[iacas]

@saevel25, I don't think 6 MPH = 8 yards. It's between 1.5 and 2.0 yards per MPH, IIRC.

[saevel25]

9 minutes ago, iacas said:

@saevel25, I don't think 6 MPH = 8 yards. It's between 1.5 and 2.0 yards per MPH, IIRC.

I just used excel on 2017 data. There is obviously some other factors besides ball speed. It did have a R^2 around .820.

 

[iacas]

13 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

I just used excel on 2017 data. There is obviously some other factors besides ball speed. It did have a R^2 around .820.

I got 10-ish on the FlightScope Trajectory Optimizer. Clubhead speed is usually about 1:2.5. 180 MPH ball speed is used to hit the ball about 325, which is about 1:1.8. 1:1.333 still seems a tad low.

But anyway… I'm not going to enjoy or likely appreciate a distance roll-back that concerns itself with 0.001% of golfers. And I am very much against bifurcation.

[Patch]

35 minutes ago, Nutsmacker said:

What I don't understand is why these "officials" keep trying to alter the game?  I don't think there was anything wrong with the rules/balls to begin with.  Who wants to play with a deadened ball?  As long as it is within the legal specs, why change it around?   As everyone has reported, the average length on the tour hasn't changed much over the last 10 years or so.  It is almost like they are after DJ and a few others exclusively.  

 

 

Perhaps the tour gurus are wanting to make more players competitive. They put over hundred players out there every week, with, I'm guessing, only 20% having a realistic chance of winning. Unless of course, a 120 ranked player ges hot for 4 days.

[Nutsmacker]

1 minute ago, Patch said:

Perhaps the tour gurus are wanting to make more players competitive. They put over hundred players out there every week, with, I'm guessing, only 20% having a realistic chance of winning. Unless of course, a 120 ranked player ges hot for 4 days.

I guess that is what is going on.  But it sure seems like we have different winners throughout the year.  Shouldn't the top 20% be winning most of the tournaments anyway?  They are in fact the best golfers.  The 20% also changes every year as players improve or decline.  

[saevel25]

13 minutes ago, iacas said:

I'm not going to enjoy or likely appreciate a distance roll-back that concerns itself with 0.001% of golfers. And I am very much against bifurcation.

I agree.

If it happens, then I guess I'll move up a few tee's

[iacas]

19 minutes ago, Patch said:

Perhaps the tour gurus are wanting to make more players competitive. They put over hundred players out there every week, with, I'm guessing, only 20% having a realistic chance of winning. Unless of course, a 120 ranked player ges hot for 4 days.

What?

No.

[klineka]

7 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

I agree.

If it happens, then I guess I'll move up a few tee's

Or just keep using the current clubs and balls and stay at the current tees 

Lets say they lower the COR limit on all clubs. I'm not going to suddenly go out and buy an entirely new set of clubs just because mine are no longer conforming. I dont play in tournaments and I would rather not keep a handicap than go out and drop $2,000 on an entire new set of clubs simply to make my set conforming.

Same thing with golf balls. I just got 5 dozen for Christmas. I wouldnt just throw those (worth $200 roughly) away if they suddenly became non-conforming. I'd use them just like normal and then I'm sure sooner or later the ones I bought from the store would be conforming. 

[Nutsmacker]

33 minutes ago, iacas said:

I am very much against bifurcation.

Yes, that has to be the worst thing that could happen to the game.  I appreciate playing the same rules, balls, equipment as the tour pro's play.  It will be a detriment to the game if we are playing by different criteria.  Why in the world are they even considering this?