Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
iacas

Consider What a 20% Ball Roll-Back Would Mean

93 posts / 5072 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

5 minutes ago, NM Golf said:

So here is a question I have, how do you even dial a ball back say 20%?

The same way you determine the standard now. You simply move it backward 20%.

It's not going to be 20% for everyone. Some may lose 22%. Some may lose only 19%.

But you've still rolled the ball back 20%.

https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/pdf/Equipment/TPX3006-overall-distance-and-symmetry-test-procedure.pd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Want to hide this ad? Register for free today!

On 2/28/2018 at 1:33 PM, iacas said:

I don't feel as though you really read the first post.

EVERY course would have to be dramatically altered. EVERY course.

Truthfully, I didn't read all of it. Shame on me.

I do get your point about the 20% aspect versus your reference to 10%. I get that. I also see how all courses would have to be dramatically changed. I just feel like that would be... manageable, still. Then again I'm the furthest thing from a course architect. Hell I'm sure my depth perception alone is below average!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

21 hours ago, GolfLug said:

20 percent??? Good lawd...senior tees.. here I come..:-O

Hell! I'm already there! If they knock me back any further I'll bee teeing off the ladies or the kids tees! The argument, or at least one of them, has been that too much real estate is needed to build courses that will hold a pro's game. But, look at Harbour Town. It's not that long from the tips, but it's a challenging layoutr due to the design. Maybe we should look at course design a little closer. Look at the Honda Classic just concluded. 15 and 17 are not really long par 3's, yet they played well above par. Why? Due to how the holes were designed in relation to the wind. There's nothing wrong with the game, leave the damn ball alone!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

25 minutes ago, Buckeyebowman said:

The argument, or at least one of them, has been that too much real estate is needed to build courses that will hold a pro's game.

But I've never seen a PGA pro even want to play the courses I play; so why punish me? ;-)(I have played Colonial a few times, but not the Colonial set up for the PGA.) Best, -Marv

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I still have not read nor heard any good argument for rolling back the golf ball. Poor Jack, he’s Jack, but he’s just making an ass of himself. Golf is hard. Always will be and the game will always win. ‘Making golf courses obsolete’ he says. Ridiculous. Jack is just sadly becoming a disgruntled old man. Hell he even admitted he doesn’t even watch golf anymore ....butt out Jack. Let ‘em bomb it. There will always be bogeys no matter how far they hit it.

   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

When was the last time anyone heard Jack say anything positive regarding the game? I believe his only concern regarding the it is keeping his name out there, so he can enhance his business ventures such as course design, club manufacturing, apparel, ice cream(???) etc. relevant. As far as courses becoming obsolete, when exactly has that been a problem? The one week a year a very select few hold a tournament? Usually on a course so private, or expensive, most golfers will never get on it anyway? (My heart bleeds for the Merion's and their memberships, LOL) Golfs governing bodies should worry more about the game the amateurs play, and growing it properly. Instead, they worry about nonsense like groove, anchoring putters, balls going to far etc. If Tour players are hitting the ball too far, let the Tour decide how to handle it. Jack and the USGA can round up every amateur who thinks they hit the ball too far, and they wouldn't be able to fill up a taxi. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

7 hours ago, Vinsk said:

I still have not read nor heard any good argument for rolling back the golf ball. Poor Jack, he’s Jack, but he’s just making an ass of himself. Golf is hard. Always will be and the game will always win. ‘Making golf courses obsolete’ he says. Ridiculous. Jack is just sadly becoming a disgruntled old man. Hell he even admitted he doesn’t even watch golf anymore ....butt out Jack. Let ‘em bomb it. There will always be bogeys no matter how far they hit it.

   

get off my lawn.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

17 hours ago, jkelley9 said:

I just feel like that would be... manageable, still. Then again I'm the furthest thing from a course architect. Hell I'm sure my depth perception alone is below average!

Let's take #18 at Augusta National as an example.

I see two design changes,

Option 1, you keep the distance from the tee relative to the fairway bunkers. So the design of the hole isn't drastically changed from off the tee. Then to maintain the similar distance to the green, you would need to move it. This would make the hole 383 yards instead of it's 460 yards.

Option1.jpg

Option 2, you keep the green were it is at, and move the tee box way forward to adjust for the 20% distance loss. The issue with this scenario is that it now takes the PGA Tour average drive that lands just in the first bunker and moves it into the 2nd bunker. This would allow longer hitters, even with the 20% decrease, to bomb it past the 2nd bunker.

Option2.jpg

Either option is costly. Not all courses can face these added costs, let alone the drastic changes to how the course will be played.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

39 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

Let's take #18 at Augusta National as an example.

I see two design changes,

Option 1, you keep the distance from the tee relative to the fairway bunkers. So the design of the hole isn't drastically changed from off the tee. Then to maintain the similar distance to the green, you would need to move it. This would make the hole 383 yards instead of it's 460 yards.

Option1.jpg

Option 2, you keep the green were it is at, and move the tee box way forward to adjust for the 20% distance loss. The issue with this scenario is that it now takes the PGA Tour average drive that lands just in the first bunker and moves it into the 2nd bunker. This would allow longer hitters, even with the 20% decrease, to bomb it past the 2nd bunker.

Option2.jpg

Either option is costly. Not all courses can face these added costs, let alone the drastic changes to how the course will be played.

 

 

 

The members tee for 18 is 385, they wouldn't really need to rebuild anything (for the pros), also long hitters are always going to have an advantage no matter how much they roll it back.

image.png.9cfdf0e78a7793baaec7454d62020ef5.png

Edited by JxQx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

11 minutes ago, JxQx said:

 

 

The members tee for 18 is 385, they wouldn't really need to rebuild anything (for the pros), also long hitters are always going to have an advantage no matter how much they roll it back.

image.png.9cfdf0e78a7793baaec7454d62020ef5.png

It’s still changes the hole drastically for the pros. Now where you might have a handful of guys bombing it over the bunker. Now you have dozens. 

It changes the course for the members. Now you need a tee box further up for them. Now the hole changes from a dogleg to a pretty straight hole. It also might take the bunker out of play for the members. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

The future of golf with a 20% reduction in ball distances, what the typical golfer would look like. . .

See the source image

 

And the ladies. . .:

See the source image

 

 

On the petite side. . .

BO-8.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

An article from Golf Digest just popped up on my phone this morning.    This debate over the golf ball going too long has been going on since around 1936.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

43 minutes ago, dennyjones said:

An article from Golf Digest just popped up on my phone this morning.    This debate over the golf ball going too long has been going on since around 1936.   

This answers one of @iacas‘s questions in the OP.  Roll back to when, you say?

1935 obviously!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

23 hours ago, iacas said:

The same way you determine the standard now. You simply move it backward 20%.

It's not going to be 20% for everyone. Some may lose 22%. Some may lose only 19%.

But you've still rolled the ball back 20%.

https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/pdf/Equipment/TPX3006-overall-distance-and-symmetry-test-procedure.pd

IACAS,      So about the opening post, the thing i've said many of times about the courses now is, why is it always about trying to make a course longer?     

nobody ever says Merion GC isnt long enough and that course always plays tough...  Or i believe you said the Honda classic course which is just over 7000...    jmo when courses are playing out to 7400+ , i think it's more of a penis showing competition lol   

dialing back the golf ball jmo is dumb..... there are already standards for the golf ball and clubs...   

courses can make the fairways narrower, greens slower lol or more challenging...  i dont want to see every course be "target" golf,  but there is always a way to make a course tougher...  but these guys are so good that they will still eventually figure out a way to go low...  

and for the average Joe Golfer.....probably 90% of us, are driving 270 or less.... and the courses we are playing if we are playing them from the right tee's we are playing 6500 yards or less  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 3/2/2018 at 3:00 PM, David L Yskes said:

probably 90% of us, are driving 270 or less...

99% and much less. Lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

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.

Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • 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...