Jump to content

Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at GolfWRX such as viewing all the images, interacting with members, access to all forums and eligiblility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE GolfWRX account here.

* * * * - 3 votes

Distance Poll


165 replies to this topic

Poll: Distance Poll (248 member(s) have cast votes)

How do you feel about the distances that the pros now hit the ball?

  1. I love it. Let it rip! (123 votes [49.60%])

    Percentage of vote: 49.60%

  2. Dial it back. Things are getting silly out there. (103 votes [41.53%])

    Percentage of vote: 41.53%

  3. Other - see my reply below for details. (22 votes [8.87%])

    Percentage of vote: 8.87%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#61 Uhit

Uhit

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 336 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 450896
  • Joined: 01/06/2017
GolfWRX Likes : 60

Posted 07 November 2017 - 01:58 PM

 Barfolomew, on 07 November 2017 - 01:47 PM, said:

Im no physicist but if they dial it back won't the longer players STILL hit a 2 club difference into a green over average hitters??

But I would prefer to see skill of accuracy be rewarded over distance to make golf a more universal game for everyone to compete more evenly...but that aint gonna happen

...this game already exists, and it is called: miniature golf

...where the skill of distance AND accuracy is less rewarded, than in golf.


Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


1

#62 farmer

farmer

    Hall of Fame

  • ClubWRX Charter Members
  • 6,362 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 70095
  • Joined: 12/02/2008
GolfWRX Likes : 2272

Posted 07 November 2017 - 02:49 PM

When I first watched golf on tv, only the last three or four holes were shown, but courses kept everything watered and green so they would look nice on screen.  Fairways were cut with gang mowers set at 1/2 inch.  There was a huge kerfuffle at the '76 Open because one day they were accidentally set at 5/8 of an inch.  Players used to occasionally catch a flyer in the fairway (gasp).  Throw some water on the fairways, don't cut them down to an 8 on the stimp, and you'll take a quick 10-20 yards off the professional tee ball.  It would also be easier and cheaper to maintain the course.  The problem with rolling back the ball, reducing clubhead size or reducing COR is that someone is going to pay for all the R&D, and that will not be the guys who get the free equipment.  That's going to be the average hack who goes out and sometimes is able to squeeze in a round on the weekend or after work.  You still won't see many 3 irons into par 4's.  I drug out my old Maltby book from 1974, and a modern 5 iron is roughly equivalent to a 3 iron from that era.  In those days, iron sets were built off a 52* PW that was shorter than, say, a 47* PW, which is the standard for the Titleist MB, about as bladey a blade as is currently mass produced.

Edited by farmer, 07 November 2017 - 02:57 PM.


2

#63 300_Straight

300_Straight

    Tour Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 608 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 396806
  • Joined: 09/21/2015
  • Location:New York
  • Handicap:13
GolfWRX Likes : 218

Posted 07 November 2017 - 03:01 PM

 bladehunter, on 07 November 2017 - 01:27 PM, said:

 300_Straight, on 07 November 2017 - 01:24 PM, said:

 Uhit, on 07 November 2017 - 11:45 AM, said:

 bladehunter, on 07 November 2017 - 10:18 AM, said:

 new2g0lf, on 07 November 2017 - 09:15 AM, said:

The poll is virtually worthless, given it's wording.  How far back are we dialing it back?  Most of those fighting for rollback in these threads want golf rolled back 20 years, is that what you all are voting for?

To spin it the other direction.  Are all you anti rollback guys wanting to see 400 yd drives and 170 yd pw?  That's what you are voting for if you allow the tech to progress.  The candidate above is throwing his 20 year spin on this. And I haven't seen a single soul advocate for a wound ball.  Just that the ball could spin a touch more and thus be harder to hit as straight.  Which should cut down overall distances.  Some guys will still hit it plenty long.  If they can play the curves the ball would provide.  All that can be achieved easily with a durable solid core ball.

Can't believe we are actually trying to influence a poll started by the anti rollback OP because it doesn't show what you want.  It has actually shown close to 50/50 split.  It's all nonsense anyway. Why try to fake it to fit the narrative ?

This report shows:

http://www.golfwrx.c...le-has-changed/

...that on some tours, driving distance has slightly increased, and on other tours, it has decreased!

The driving distance in this report includes the roll - which is very depending on the fairway conditions, and not only by the ball.

We already have a limit of COR 0.83 for the ball and club face.
COR 1.0 would be the theoretical maximum (no loss), which is just 20% more, than what we already have.

20% more energy (COR 0.83 vs. COR 1.00) would result in around 10% additional carry distance...
...thus, a 300 yards long hitter would end up in no more than 330 yards with a perfect ball and clubhead, on a perfect strike.

The fear, that the distance could grow limitless is therefore complete nonsense.

And the higher accuracy that is needed for a longer drive, challenges the golfer even more.

Higher spin balls are already on the market, as tour balls...
...you just have to buy and play them, instead of distance balls.

The very few courses that think, that they desperately need a shorter ball for their tournaments, can apply a local rule, or make their fairways simply slower!

-

I think, that many are not aware, that some golfer are also businessman, that try to sell you something, that you (and the game golf) don´t really need...
^^ Yes. And with the Maximum COR established, there are only minimal gains by moving mass. They are Professional Athletes. Let them play how they play. The higher your SS, the more difficult it is to hit the ball straight because a deviation of 1* of face rotation has a much larger consequence.

Perhaps we should put a height limit on the NBA?
Or perhaps we should only allow MLB Pitchers to throw <95mph?

Give me a break.

COR hasnt been used in a while. THey use CT test now.  If I read correctly.  

And your analogy would work if I were talking about raising  the basketball goal.  I'm not talking about limiting players. I'm talking limiting equipment.  As in not lowering the basketball goal further.
I'm not familiar with CT but I will look into it. Your point is noted about equipment and not players.

I agree with curtailing roll in the fairways. Getting 50 yards of roll just doesn't happen. Maybe I'll get 20 yards of roll if I hit a low liner and my ball speed isn't too shabby.

3

#64 fillwelix

fillwelix

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 219 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 249866
  • Joined: 05/10/2013
  • Location:New Jersey
  • Handicap:7.5
GolfWRX Likes : 124

Posted 07 November 2017 - 04:23 PM

I'm fine with how long they hit it but can the commentators PLEASE stop talking about it on every swing they make?
WITB
Taylormade M1 2016 9.5*
Taylormade M2 2016 3HL
Mizuno JPX 900 Tour 3-PW
Titleist Vokey SM6 50* 54* 58*
Byron Morgan DH89

4

#65 Sean2

Sean2

    #TheWRX (Callaway Trip)

  • ClubWRX Charter Members
  • 26,223 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 29539
  • Joined: 05/23/2007
  • Location:South of Boston
  • Ebay ID:None
GolfWRX Likes : 12900

Posted 07 November 2017 - 04:28 PM

 fillwelix, on 07 November 2017 - 04:23 PM, said:

I'm fine with how long they hit it but can the commentators PLEASE stop talking about it on every swing they make?

Yes. Sometimes I think they are more enamored with how far a golfer hits a particular club than his score. I remember the year Z Johnson won the Masters. The announcers were none to pleased he laid up on every par 5. I am under the impression that the purpose of the game is to get the ball in the hole with as fewest strokes as possible...doesn't matter what club you hit, what kind of club you hit, how far you hit it...but how many strokes. Perhaps I am wrong? lol

Callaway GBB Epic 11º / Mitsubishi Rayon Diamana M+ 40 R
Callaway GBB Epic 16º / 20º / 24º Mitsubishi Rayon Diamana M+ 50
Callaway CF16 / 6--AW / UST Recoil ES 460 F4
Callaway Forged and MD-PM 54º / 58º / 62º UST Recoil ES 460 F4

Callaway Odyssey O Works Tank #7

5

#66 fillwelix

fillwelix

    Member

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 219 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 249866
  • Joined: 05/10/2013
  • Location:New Jersey
  • Handicap:7.5
GolfWRX Likes : 124

Posted 07 November 2017 - 04:41 PM

 Sean2, on 07 November 2017 - 04:28 PM, said:

 fillwelix, on 07 November 2017 - 04:23 PM, said:

I'm fine with how long they hit it but can the commentators PLEASE stop talking about it on every swing they make?

Yes. Sometimes I think they are more enamored with how far a golfer hits a particular club than his score. I remember the year Z Johnson won the Masters. The announcers were none to pleased he laid up on every par 5. I am under the impression that the purpose of the game is to get the ball in the hole with as fewest strokes as possible...doesn't matter what club you hit, what kind of club you hit, how far you hit it...but how many strokes. Perhaps I am wrong? lol

I feel like every time I watch a broadcast it's "well with how far these guys hit it these days..." and it just kills me. Slow down the fairways, grow out the rough. Make overpowering a golf course a true feat, not just something a bomber can do. They talk about how the game is all "Bomb and gauge" now but they are the ones allowing that to happen!
WITB
Taylormade M1 2016 9.5*
Taylormade M2 2016 3HL
Mizuno JPX 900 Tour 3-PW
Titleist Vokey SM6 50* 54* 58*
Byron Morgan DH89

6

#67 Medic

Medic

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,640 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 132567
  • Joined: 07/08/2011
  • Location:Florida
  • Handicap:5.8
GolfWRX Likes : 6933

Posted 07 November 2017 - 06:29 PM

 disk, on 06 November 2017 - 08:30 PM, said:

 Medic, on 06 November 2017 - 08:28 PM, said:

Anyone else ever watch the Nascar event where they all drive literally the exact same setup. Supposed to be a true test of their driving skills.

Why not have a PGA event or two in similar fashion? Old school equipment with everyone playing the exact same setup - just to their specs. (The Nascar drivers are allowed to adjust the mirrors and the seat, right?)

Might be an interesting and entertaining watch.

In what way are guys NOT playing with the same setup? It's not like F1 or something where being with a certain company means your gear is better, they all play the same stuff...

So you honestly believe that every shaft is the exact same, every ball is the exact same, etc?

And you honestly believe that every single player has the same setup in their bags? None carry additional wedges, 2 irons, etc?

And you honestly believe that every single player has their driver set to the exact same settings? Not to mention the specs on their other clubs.

A better question might be what would make you believe that every single player is using the exact same equipment?

Sigh......
Titleist 915D2 with Kuro Kage 60s in 45.25 set at 12*
Taylormade Rbz FW (17*)
Callaway X-Hot Pro 20* Hybrid
Callaway Apex CF16 4-PW w/KBS 90s
Titleist Vokey 50*
Callaway Mack Daddy 2 Slate 56*
Titleist Vokey SM-6 60-08 M
Odyssey Versa 9 34"
Callaway Chrome Soft

7

#68 Dave230

Dave230

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,012 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 252022
  • Joined: 05/22/2013
  • Location:Ireland
GolfWRX Likes : 1759

Posted 07 November 2017 - 06:33 PM

 fillwelix, on 07 November 2017 - 04:41 PM, said:

 Sean2, on 07 November 2017 - 04:28 PM, said:

 fillwelix, on 07 November 2017 - 04:23 PM, said:

I'm fine with how long they hit it but can the commentators PLEASE stop talking about it on every swing they make?

Yes. Sometimes I think they are more enamored with how far a golfer hits a particular club than his score. I remember the year Z Johnson won the Masters. The announcers were none to pleased he laid up on every par 5. I am under the impression that the purpose of the game is to get the ball in the hole with as fewest strokes as possible...doesn't matter what club you hit, what kind of club you hit, how far you hit it...but how many strokes. Perhaps I am wrong? lol

I feel like every time I watch a broadcast it's "well with how far these guys hit it these days..." and it just kills me. Slow down the fairways, grow out the rough. Make overpowering a golf course a true feat, not just something a bomber can do. They talk about how the game is all "Bomb and gauge" now but they are the ones allowing that to happen!

Annoys me when they show a video of McIlroy or DJ hit a 350 yard drive on Facebook, making you think they're playing well, when they're 3 or 4 over on the round.

8

#69 disk

disk

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 307 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 352547
  • Joined: 12/18/2014
  • Location:Chicago
GolfWRX Likes : 138

Posted 07 November 2017 - 07:23 PM

 Medic, on 07 November 2017 - 06:29 PM, said:

 disk, on 06 November 2017 - 08:30 PM, said:

 Medic, on 06 November 2017 - 08:28 PM, said:

Anyone else ever watch the Nascar event where they all drive literally the exact same setup. Supposed to be a true test of their driving skills.

Why not have a PGA event or two in similar fashion? Old school equipment with everyone playing the exact same setup - just to their specs. (The Nascar drivers are allowed to adjust the mirrors and the seat, right?)

Might be an interesting and entertaining watch.

In what way are guys NOT playing with the same setup? It's not like F1 or something where being with a certain company means your gear is better, they all play the same stuff...

So you honestly believe that every shaft is the exact same, every ball is the exact same, etc?

And you honestly believe that every single player has the same setup in their bags? None carry additional wedges, 2 irons, etc?

And you honestly believe that every single player has their driver set to the exact same settings? Not to mention the specs on their other clubs.

A better question might be what would make you believe that every single player is using the exact same equipment?

Sigh......

Obviously you have some trouble with hyperbole, when I said they all use the same stuff it's wasn't meant to be taken literally. Sigh...

My point was they are all choosing from the same pool of clubs, shafts and balls etc. No one setup or combination is giving them any kind of competitive advantage over any other player.

9

#70 Pepperturbo

Pepperturbo

    Ardbeg Uigeadail

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,700 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 14656
  • Joined: 05/09/2006
  • Location:Midwest and Southwest
  • Handicap:lowS
GolfWRX Likes : 2444

Posted 07 November 2017 - 07:48 PM

I have no issue with how far anyone hits the ball on any tour  If it weren't for ball technology, I wouldn't be hitting it as far as I am still, which allows me to play longer tees.

Edited by Pepperturbo, 07 November 2017 - 07:49 PM.

Titleist 917D2 10.5, Fujikura Fuel 60 S, Tour Spec
Titleist 917F2, 15*, Original Blueboard 83 x5ct, S
Titleist 716T-MB 17* 2 iron, PX Flighted 6.0
Titleist 716CB 3-PW, KBS Tour S+
SM6 F-52*, KBS C-Taper S
SM6 M-58*, DGS200
ProV1 & ProV1X
SC California Monterey

Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


10

#71 3whacker

3whacker

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 255 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 26070
  • Joined: 02/27/2007
  • Location:Las Vegas Nevada
GolfWRX Likes : 32

Posted 07 November 2017 - 08:48 PM

it doesn't matter how much you throttle down the ball...the long hitters are still going to outdrive the shorter ones by the same amount..the only way to slow down the TOUR player is to grow the rough and slow down the fairway, but then the advantage goes right back to the long hitter..Hard to take technology out of the game once you expose it to the masses

11

#72 Benflicky

Benflicky

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 48 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 386192
  • Joined: 07/16/2015
  • Ebay ID:beflicke_0
GolfWRX Likes : 10

Posted 07 November 2017 - 09:41 PM

I miss when I was a kid and tiger was the longest hitter

12

#73 Uhit

Uhit

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 336 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 450896
  • Joined: 01/06/2017
GolfWRX Likes : 60

Posted 08 November 2017 - 08:13 AM

 300_Straight, on 07 November 2017 - 03:01 PM, said:

 bladehunter, on 07 November 2017 - 01:27 PM, said:

 300_Straight, on 07 November 2017 - 01:24 PM, said:

 Uhit, on 07 November 2017 - 11:45 AM, said:

This report shows:

http://www.golfwrx.c...le-has-changed/

...that on some tours, driving distance has slightly increased, and on other tours, it has decreased!

The driving distance in this report includes the roll - which is very depending on the fairway conditions, and not only by the ball.

We already have a limit of COR 0.83 for the ball and club face.
COR 1.0 would be the theoretical maximum (no loss), which is just 20% more, than what we already have.

20% more energy (COR 0.83 vs. COR 1.00) would result in around 10% additional carry distance...
...thus, a 300 yards long hitter would end up in no more than 330 yards with a perfect ball and clubhead, on a perfect strike.

The fear, that the distance could grow limitless is therefore complete nonsense.

And the higher accuracy that is needed for a longer drive, challenges the golfer even more.

Higher spin balls are already on the market, as tour balls...
...you just have to buy and play them, instead of distance balls.

The very few courses that think, that they desperately need a shorter ball for their tournaments, can apply a local rule, or make their fairways simply slower!

-

I think, that many are not aware, that some golfer are also businessman, that try to sell you something, that you (and the game golf) don´t really need...
^^ Yes. And with the Maximum COR established, there are only minimal gains by moving mass. They are Professional Athletes. Let them play how they play. The higher your SS, the more difficult it is to hit the ball straight because a deviation of 1* of face rotation has a much larger consequence.

Perhaps we should put a height limit on the NBA?
Or perhaps we should only allow MLB Pitchers to throw <95mph?

Give me a break.

COR hasnt been used in a while. THey use CT test now.  If I read correctly.  

And your analogy would work if I were talking about raising  the basketball goal.  I'm not talking about limiting players. I'm talking limiting equipment.  As in not lowering the basketball goal further.
I'm not familiar with CT but I will look into it. Your point is noted about equipment and not players.

I agree with curtailing roll in the fairways. Getting 50 yards of roll just doesn't happen. Maybe I'll get 20 yards of roll if I hit a low liner and my ball speed isn't too shabby.

COR is not that easy to measure with mobile means, that´s why they now use CT:

http://www.golfalot....me-ct-2803.aspx

...but COR describes the energy transfer, input to output, in the exact way, that´s why I use COR to clarify the physical limitations, that applies to the golf equipment.

-

To address the influence of the roll for the distances, which the mentioned statistic shows,
I collected the average carry distance data of the drives of both of the most consistent long hitters on tour since 2007:

J.B. Holmes and Bubba Watson in yards in the year

300.2   300.3    2007
307.9   294.0    2008
304.4   300.3    2009
302.2   291.7    2010
314.8   300.7    2011
305.2   307.7    2012
000.0   295.3    2013
297.7   305.0    2014
301.6   301.8    2015
304.8   300.6    2016
300.6   287.9    2017

As we can see, there were no distance gains in carry distance within the last 11 years!

Thus, if there are any distance gains in total distance including roll, then it is more related to the course conditions, than the ball, or the driver...
...which is no surprise, because both are already limited!

Edited by Uhit, 08 November 2017 - 08:18 AM.


13

#74 bladehunter

bladehunter

    Cubs win ! Cubs win!

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,495 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 291449
  • Joined: 01/12/2014
  • Location:south carolina
  • Handicap:NONE
GolfWRX Likes : 11744

Posted 08 November 2017 - 09:01 AM

 Uhit, on 08 November 2017 - 08:13 AM, said:

 300_Straight, on 07 November 2017 - 03:01 PM, said:

 bladehunter, on 07 November 2017 - 01:27 PM, said:

 300_Straight, on 07 November 2017 - 01:24 PM, said:

 Uhit, on 07 November 2017 - 11:45 AM, said:

This report shows:

http://www.golfwrx.c...le-has-changed/

...that on some tours, driving distance has slightly increased, and on other tours, it has decreased!

The driving distance in this report includes the roll - which is very depending on the fairway conditions, and not only by the ball.

We already have a limit of COR 0.83 for the ball and club face.
COR 1.0 would be the theoretical maximum (no loss), which is just 20% more, than what we already have.

20% more energy (COR 0.83 vs. COR 1.00) would result in around 10% additional carry distance...
...thus, a 300 yards long hitter would end up in no more than 330 yards with a perfect ball and clubhead, on a perfect strike.

The fear, that the distance could grow limitless is therefore complete nonsense.

And the higher accuracy that is needed for a longer drive, challenges the golfer even more.

Higher spin balls are already on the market, as tour balls...
...you just have to buy and play them, instead of distance balls.

The very few courses that think, that they desperately need a shorter ball for their tournaments, can apply a local rule, or make their fairways simply slower!

-

I think, that many are not aware, that some golfer are also businessman, that try to sell you something, that you (and the game golf) don´t really need...
^^ Yes. And with the Maximum COR established, there are only minimal gains by moving mass. They are Professional Athletes. Let them play how they play. The higher your SS, the more difficult it is to hit the ball straight because a deviation of 1* of face rotation has a much larger consequence.

Perhaps we should put a height limit on the NBA?
Or perhaps we should only allow MLB Pitchers to throw <95mph?

Give me a break.

COR hasnt been used in a while. THey use CT test now.  If I read correctly.  

And your analogy would work if I were talking about raising  the basketball goal.  I'm not talking about limiting players. I'm talking limiting equipment.  As in not lowering the basketball goal further.
I'm not familiar with CT but I will look into it. Your point is noted about equipment and not players.

I agree with curtailing roll in the fairways. Getting 50 yards of roll just doesn't happen. Maybe I'll get 20 yards of roll if I hit a low liner and my ball speed isn't too shabby.

COR is not that easy to measure with mobile means, that´s why they now use CT:

http://www.golfalot....me-ct-2803.aspx

...but COR describes the energy transfer, input to output, in the exact way, that´s why I use COR to clarify the physical limitations, that applies to the golf equipment.

-

To address the influence of the roll for the distances, which the mentioned statistic shows,
I collected the average carry distance data of the drives of both of the most consistent long hitters on tour since 2007:

J.B. Holmes and Bubba Watson in yards in the year

300.2   300.3    2007
307.9   294.0    2008
304.4   300.3    2009
302.2   291.7    2010
314.8   300.7    2011
305.2   307.7    2012
000.0   295.3    2013
297.7   305.0    2014
301.6   301.8    2015
304.8   300.6    2016
300.6   287.9    2017

As we can see, there were no distance gains in carry distance within the last 11 years!

Thus, if there are any distance gains in total distance including roll, then it is more related to the course conditions, than the ball, or the driver...
...which is no surprise, because both are already limited!


lol...and around we go.......  so it begs the question..why not add spin to the ball which is same as rolling it back to say 2004......  this would acheive the desired effect, add shot making back to the lineup and decrease the number of medium length guys who are hitting it long today... The numbers dont lie.... so why the huge pushback on a rollback ?


part of my gripe is that i feel like medium length guys are longer by a higher amount today than before... there is a line of diminishing return in driving with speed and forgiveness etc .... it isnt a constantly rising arc... any numbers on say Zach Johnson as a short guy or say Luke Donald as a medium short guy whos been around?

also have we considered that each of those guys are aging , yet averaging the exact same thing for 10 plus years?

Edited by bladehunter, 08 November 2017 - 09:08 AM.

17 M2  V2 Tour 10.5  Fuji Atmos Black 6X   Green Graphic special edition
17 M1 15  Graphite Design   ADDI 8X
Titleist TMB 2 Graphite Design 105X prototype
Vega VDC-01 Raw Handground 4-pw Modus 130X
Vega VW-02 Raw 52 56 60 S400
009 GSS 1.5  , Beached, tungsten sole weights

14

#75 Uhit

Uhit

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 336 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 450896
  • Joined: 01/06/2017
GolfWRX Likes : 60

Posted 08 November 2017 - 09:33 AM

 bladehunter, on 08 November 2017 - 09:01 AM, said:

 Uhit, on 08 November 2017 - 08:13 AM, said:

 300_Straight, on 07 November 2017 - 03:01 PM, said:

I'm not familiar with CT but I will look into it. Your point is noted about equipment and not players.

I agree with curtailing roll in the fairways. Getting 50 yards of roll just doesn't happen. Maybe I'll get 20 yards of roll if I hit a low liner and my ball speed isn't too shabby.

COR is not that easy to measure with mobile means, that´s why they now use CT:

http://www.golfalot....me-ct-2803.aspx

...but COR describes the energy transfer, input to output, in the exact way, that´s why I use COR to clarify the physical limitations, that applies to the golf equipment.

-

To address the influence of the roll for the distances, which the mentioned statistic shows,
I collected the average carry distance data of the drives of both of the most consistent long hitters on tour since 2007:

J.B. Holmes and Bubba Watson in yards in the year

300.2   300.3    2007
307.9   294.0    2008
304.4   300.3    2009
302.2   291.7    2010
314.8   300.7    2011
305.2   307.7    2012
000.0   295.3    2013
297.7   305.0    2014
301.6   301.8    2015
304.8   300.6    2016
300.6   287.9    2017

As we can see, there were no distance gains in carry distance within the last 11 years!

Thus, if there are any distance gains in total distance including roll, then it is more related to the course conditions, than the ball, or the driver...
...which is no surprise, because both are already limited!


lol...and around we go.......  so it begs the question..why not add spin to the ball which is same as rolling it back to say 2004......  this would acheive the desired effect, add shot making back to the lineup and decrease the number of medium length guys who are hitting it long today... The numbers dont lie.... so why the huge pushback on a rollback ?

lol...and round you go...

A high spin ball favors low spin player, and low spin driver, and a high spin ball with better aerodynamics will travel farther, than a high spin ball with average aerodynamics...

There are reasons, why different type of balls are already on the market - and some tour player play rather a TP5 instead of a TP5x, despite the TP5x is a lower spinning ball, and longer for most.
It is always the combination of the whole package, that works the best for every individual player, and this package may change, like the swing and the age.

...and round and round...

We have the data to see, that we have a reliable, stable base in terms of equipment, since more than a decade.

How you setup a course, and the weather conditions, influences the outcome more, than the equipment - so, why let the average golfer pay for a change in equipment, that does not help their game?


15

#76 RedWings1

RedWings1

    Member

  • ClubWRX Charter Members
  • 247 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 125504
  • Joined: 03/29/2011
  • Location:Dunham Hills,Fox Hills,Moose Ridge,Huntmoore & Kensington GC's, Mi.
  • Handicap:3
GolfWRX Likes : 65

Posted 08 November 2017 - 09:38 AM

 Uhit, on 08 November 2017 - 08:13 AM, said:

 300_Straight, on 07 November 2017 - 03:01 PM, said:

 bladehunter, on 07 November 2017 - 01:27 PM, said:

 300_Straight, on 07 November 2017 - 01:24 PM, said:

 Uhit, on 07 November 2017 - 11:45 AM, said:

This report shows:

http://www.golfwrx.c...le-has-changed/

...that on some tours, driving distance has slightly increased, and on other tours, it has decreased!

The driving distance in this report includes the roll - which is very depending on the fairway conditions, and not only by the ball.

We already have a limit of COR 0.83 for the ball and club face.
COR 1.0 would be the theoretical maximum (no loss), which is just 20% more, than what we already have.

20% more energy (COR 0.83 vs. COR 1.00) would result in around 10% additional carry distance...
...thus, a 300 yards long hitter would end up in no more than 330 yards with a perfect ball and clubhead, on a perfect strike.

The fear, that the distance could grow limitless is therefore complete nonsense.

And the higher accuracy that is needed for a longer drive, challenges the golfer even more.

Higher spin balls are already on the market, as tour balls...
...you just have to buy and play them, instead of distance balls.

The very few courses that think, that they desperately need a shorter ball for their tournaments, can apply a local rule, or make their fairways simply slower!

-

I think, that many are not aware, that some golfer are also businessman, that try to sell you something, that you (and the game golf) don´t really need...
^^ Yes. And with the Maximum COR established, there are only minimal gains by moving mass. They are Professional Athletes. Let them play how they play. The higher your SS, the more difficult it is to hit the ball straight because a deviation of 1* of face rotation has a much larger consequence.

Perhaps we should put a height limit on the NBA?
Or perhaps we should only allow MLB Pitchers to throw <95mph?

Give me a break.

COR hasnt been used in a while. THey use CT test now.  If I read correctly.  

And your analogy would work if I were talking about raising  the basketball goal.  I'm not talking about limiting players. I'm talking limiting equipment.  As in not lowering the basketball goal further.
I'm not familiar with CT but I will look into it. Your point is noted about equipment and not players.

I agree with curtailing roll in the fairways. Getting 50 yards of roll just doesn't happen. Maybe I'll get 20 yards of roll if I hit a low liner and my ball speed isn't too shabby.

COR is not that easy to measure with mobile means, that´s why they now use CT:

http://www.golfalot....me-ct-2803.aspx

...but COR describes the energy transfer, input to output, in the exact way, that´s why I use COR to clarify the physical limitations, that applies to the golf equipment.

-

To address the influence of the roll for the distances, which the mentioned statistic shows,
I collected the average carry distance data of the drives of both of the most consistent long hitters on tour since 2007:

J.B. Holmes and Bubba Watson in yards in the year

300.2   300.3    2007
307.9   294.0    2008
304.4   300.3    2009
302.2   291.7    2010
314.8      300.7    2011
305.2   307.7    2012
000.0   295.3    2013
297.7   305.0    2014
301.6   301.8    2015
304.8   300.6    2016
300.6   287.9    2017

As we can see, there were no distance gains in carry distance within the last 11 years!

Thus, if there are any distance gains in total distance including roll, then it is more related to the course conditions, than the ball, or the driver...
...which is no surprise, because both are already limited!

Anybody remember what Driver / Shaft combo J.B. was using in 2011? 314.8 of carry, J.B. was killing it that year!
Bridgestone J715, 10.5 Fuji Pro TS73
TM M1, 4w 18* Fuji Pro
Srixon U65, 3i, 20* Miyazaki 7s (stand 3i length)
Bridgestone J15CB, 4-PW, DG ProS300
TM Milled Grind, 50*54*58* DG X100
Toulon Long Island @33.5 - Gamer
Srixon Z Star & BStone B330
Backups:
TEE TourEX9 20* Fuji Pro 73h
2012 Ping Redwood ZB @33.5"
Bettinardi Kuchar Model 1 standard @ 33.5"

16

#77 Your-away!

Your-away!

    Tour Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 709 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 323581
  • Joined: 06/27/2014
  • Location:UK
GolfWRX Likes : 501

Posted 08 November 2017 - 09:41 AM

Don't need to change the clubs or ball, change the course conditions, its that simple.

I played St Andrews old course earlier this year on a nice dry day, i have never driven the ball so far in my life, my usual CARRY with a driver is about 230, so on a average day in the UK 240 is my max length with roll out, not on St Andrews it wasn't, i was easily getting 260 - 270 after roll out, it wasn't windy so god knows how far it would have been with a following wind.

If you watch the PGA tour on a regular basis you will see how hard and fast them fairways are, so hardly surprising how far it goes, not forgetting how warm it normally is.
DRIVER:TI Taylormade Aeroburner 9* - Stiff Fujikura Motore Speeder VC 6.1
3 WOOD:Taylormade Aeroburner TP 15* - Stiff Fujikura Motore Speeder VC 7.0
HYBRID: Adams super LS 19* - Radix Stiff
IRONS 4-PW: Bridgestone J36 RAW Black LTD Edition CB's - Project X 6.0 - 1*- 2* flat
WEDGES:Cleveland RTX 3 RAW 52 & 58 - Pro Modus 120s -  2.5* flat
PUTTER:Radius Classic 6 - matt black shaft - Superstroke Flatso 1.0
BALL:Whichever gets bought for me, or found.

17

#78 bladehunter

bladehunter

    Cubs win ! Cubs win!

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,495 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 291449
  • Joined: 01/12/2014
  • Location:south carolina
  • Handicap:NONE
GolfWRX Likes : 11744

Posted 08 November 2017 - 10:02 AM

Any thoughts on the aging yet sustained averages ?
17 M2  V2 Tour 10.5  Fuji Atmos Black 6X   Green Graphic special edition
17 M1 15  Graphite Design   ADDI 8X
Titleist TMB 2 Graphite Design 105X prototype
Vega VDC-01 Raw Handground 4-pw Modus 130X
Vega VW-02 Raw 52 56 60 S400
009 GSS 1.5  , Beached, tungsten sole weights

18

#79 Uhit

Uhit

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 336 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 450896
  • Joined: 01/06/2017
GolfWRX Likes : 60

Posted 08 November 2017 - 10:54 AM

 bladehunter, on 08 November 2017 - 10:02 AM, said:

Any thoughts on the aging yet sustained averages ?

Holmes had a diagnosis and a corresponding surgery in 2011, which was the year he hit it by far the farthest...
...which could indicate, that this was more related to his mind set, than to his equipment.

Both were around 30 and are still younger than 40, which I would see, as the most stable age in golf.

I am now longer, than I was with 40...
...even if I use the same equipment.

Holmes was number 1 in 2016 in regard of carry distance...
...and also in 2008, 2009, 2010 and 2011.

Bubba was number 1 in regard of carry distance in the year 2014, 2012 and 2007.

Both cases show, that their position in the field stayed the same, despite their advancing age.

...thus there is no correlation in this case between age and distance.

Edited by Uhit, 08 November 2017 - 11:00 AM.


19

#80 Cicero

Cicero

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,304 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 41303
  • Joined: 10/24/2007
GolfWRX Likes : 331

Posted 08 November 2017 - 01:09 PM

 raynorfan1, on 07 November 2017 - 11:27 AM, said:

 bladehunter, on 07 November 2017 - 10:18 AM, said:

To spin it the other direction.  Are all you anti rollback guys wanting to see 400 yd drives and 170 yd pw?

How far a professional athlete can hit a ball doesn't really matter, IMHO. What matters is how it impacts the game. I think you need to dial up the difficulty of the course, such that a 400 yard drive or 170 yard pitching wedge doesn't have such a dramatic impact on score.

My $0.02:

I doubt anyone is going to be hitting it that far on tour under normal conditions on any kind of regular basis, especially with the equipment regulations in place, particularly with the driver.  Even if a long drive guy comes out on tour, they’re going to dial it down.

Every super-fast guy who comes out on tour dials it back and sacrifices distance, both with their swings and their equipment, so that they can maximize their consistentency and shoot the best scores they can.  

What’s funny is that the record for driving distance happened years ago; it wasn’t a bunch of guys, and the tour hasn’t caught up to that number.  As it’s been stated, distance has pretty much leveled off (might not be dead level, but I don’t see any huge distance-related jumps lately, or forthcoming).  Also, it just has not proven practical to play top-level golf at 140mph on-course.  And if, by some crazy freak convergence of talent, genetics, and skill, some guy makes a living on tour while cruising at 140, he will be a unicorn, one in a million, a freak.  It wouldn’t make sense to me to roll the ball back because of, or in anticipation of, that one guy (because if that guy shows up hitting 400 regularly, it will just be that guy, I’m sure).  

I think that equipment is fine where it is.  Any new distance gains will come from affecting spin on the equipment side (which will be self limiting, otherwise guys would be playing long drive balls), or from faster players.  There are other ways to challenge top players besides having 520 yard par 4’s.  I think the focus on distance at this point is too narrow, and a few years too late.


Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


Wanna get rid of this ugly yellow box? And remove other annoying "stuff" in between posts? Create a FREE GolfWRX account here.

20

#81 Cool Hand Luke

Cool Hand Luke

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 336 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 439120
  • Joined: 08/31/2016
  • Location:AZ
  • Handicap:3.8
GolfWRX Likes : 217

Posted 08 November 2017 - 02:07 PM

my question is which courses have become obsolete as everyone is claiming?? and obsolete for who??

I'd like to see them contest a major on a course 6800 yds that isn't tricked up (beyond appropriate major conditions) and just see what happens... maybe we'd be surprised. maybe all those guys pounding it 330 wouldn't need to hit driver as much and that advantage would be mitigated somewhat. maybe the scores would be the same or even higher??
910 D3
i25 3W
913h
714 CB 3-P
sm6 52F, 58M
scotty del mar
proV1x

21

#82 The Mad Bomber

The Mad Bomber

    Fully rehabilitated former Titleist Fanboy

  • ClubWRX Charter Members
  • 507 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 80811
  • Joined: 04/21/2009
  • Location:Calgary, Alberta
GolfWRX Likes : 353

Posted 08 November 2017 - 02:40 PM

I just don't want to see the great courses become obsolete. Simple as that.
915 D3 7.5º w/ Grafalloy blue X
'17 M2 15* w/ Grafalloy blue X
T-MB 2 iron, C-Taper
Mizzy MP-5 4-9 C-Taper
Vokey 47º, 52º, 56º, 60º C-Taper
Scotty Newport 2.6
V1x's

WITB link

22

#83 The Mad Bomber

The Mad Bomber

    Fully rehabilitated former Titleist Fanboy

  • ClubWRX Charter Members
  • 507 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 80811
  • Joined: 04/21/2009
  • Location:Calgary, Alberta
GolfWRX Likes : 353

Posted 08 November 2017 - 02:42 PM

View PostCool Hand Luke, on 08 November 2017 - 02:07 PM, said:

my question is which courses have become obsolete as everyone is claiming?? and obsolete for who??

I'd like to see them contest a major on a course 6800 yds that isn't tricked up (beyond appropriate major conditions) and just see what happens... maybe we'd be surprised. maybe all those guys pounding it 330 wouldn't need to hit driver as much and that advantage would be mitigated somewhat. maybe the scores would be the same or even higher??

The modern equipment is turning the Old Course into a pitch and putt. That's the benchmark I use and if that course becomes unsuitable for a major championship I'd never forgive the R&A and the USGA.
915 D3 7.5º w/ Grafalloy blue X
'17 M2 15* w/ Grafalloy blue X
T-MB 2 iron, C-Taper
Mizzy MP-5 4-9 C-Taper
Vokey 47º, 52º, 56º, 60º C-Taper
Scotty Newport 2.6
V1x's

WITB link

23

#84 Cool Hand Luke

Cool Hand Luke

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 336 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 439120
  • Joined: 08/31/2016
  • Location:AZ
  • Handicap:3.8
GolfWRX Likes : 217

Posted 08 November 2017 - 02:50 PM

View PostThe Mad Bomber, on 08 November 2017 - 02:42 PM, said:

View PostCool Hand Luke, on 08 November 2017 - 02:07 PM, said:

my question is which courses have become obsolete as everyone is claiming?? and obsolete for who??

I'd like to see them contest a major on a course 6800 yds that isn't tricked up (beyond appropriate major conditions) and just see what happens... maybe we'd be surprised. maybe all those guys pounding it 330 wouldn't need to hit driver as much and that advantage would be mitigated somewhat. maybe the scores would be the same or even higher??

The modern equipment is turning the Old Course into a pitch and putt. That's the benchmark I use and if that course becomes unsuitable for a major championship I'd never forgive the R&A and the USGA.

See, I think that is a bad example. Most of those british open courses can be pitch and putts given the right (lack of) conditions. But you get some bad conditions and it's as stern a test as any. And it's not just the equipment, it's the level of athletes we have in the game now, the trackman-type technologies and the advances in agronomy.
910 D3
i25 3W
913h
714 CB 3-P
sm6 52F, 58M
scotty del mar
proV1x

24

#85 Uhit

Uhit

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 336 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 450896
  • Joined: 01/06/2017
GolfWRX Likes : 60

Posted 08 November 2017 - 02:58 PM

View PostThe Mad Bomber, on 08 November 2017 - 02:40 PM, said:

I just don't want to see the great courses become obsolete. Simple as that.

Then simply tell the head green keeper, that he should let the grass grow longer, to make the fairways slower, and the rough thicker.

If this should not be enough, let them apply a local rule, that allows them to use special balls (like distance reduced range balls) for their course.

Simple as that!

Otherwise everyone has to pay the bill, which is neither a good advertise, nor a good motivation, for the game golf.


25

#86 Cicero

Cicero

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,304 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 41303
  • Joined: 10/24/2007
GolfWRX Likes : 331

Posted 08 November 2017 - 03:02 PM

View PostCool Hand Luke, on 08 November 2017 - 02:50 PM, said:

View PostThe Mad Bomber, on 08 November 2017 - 02:42 PM, said:

View PostCool Hand Luke, on 08 November 2017 - 02:07 PM, said:

my question is which courses have become obsolete as everyone is claiming?? and obsolete for who??

I'd like to see them contest a major on a course 6800 yds that isn't tricked up (beyond appropriate major conditions) and just see what happens... maybe we'd be surprised. maybe all those guys pounding it 330 wouldn't need to hit driver as much and that advantage would be mitigated somewhat. maybe the scores would be the same or even higher??

The modern equipment is turning the Old Course into a pitch and putt. That's the benchmark I use and if that course becomes unsuitable for a major championship I'd never forgive the R&A and the USGA.

See, I think that is a bad example. Most of those british open courses can be pitch and putts given the right (lack of) conditions. But you get some bad conditions and it's as stern a test as any. And it's not just the equipment, it's the level of athletes we have in the game now, the trackman-type technologies and the advances in agronomy.

This.  Crossfield addressed this in a video after that tourney.  If a course like that is receptive, on a nice warm day, it can be had, like most courses.  But I’m sure the same could have been said 20-30 years ago.  It’s a good bet that if the wind is blowing and the course is dry and fast, “obsolete” won’t be the first thing on players’ minds.  It’s the trade off you get when the elements are a part of a courses defenses.

26

#87 elwhippy

elwhippy

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,675 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 3536
  • Joined: 07/28/2005
GolfWRX Likes : 460

Posted 08 November 2017 - 03:14 PM

As mentioned I am concerned that being off line on a lot of modern venues is zero punishment. 30 yards off line in the courses in my area equals chip out, OOB or lost ball, not a clear path to the green. What is more and more prevalent is "and they have moved the tees up 60 yards today on this par 5"? Come again? We don't shorten the course for out medals, we shift the tees back and move the flags to tricky positions. Bomb and Gouge is not true Golf.

27

#88 Dave230

Dave230

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,012 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 252022
  • Joined: 05/22/2013
  • Location:Ireland
GolfWRX Likes : 1759

Posted 09 November 2017 - 07:29 AM

St Andrews has never been that tough, relatively speaking. Bobby Jones shot 285 to win there in 1927, which was the lowest 72-hole score by six shots at The Open at that point.

John Daly only shot 3 shots better to win at St Andrews in 1995, whereas Nick Faldo shot 270 in 1990, bettered only once in the 5 Opens since. All links are very weather dependent.

Having said that, they had to trick up the greens a little to keep the scores in check last time, then the wind came in and play had to be suspended because balls are moving. That shouldn't happen on a links course. If they have to do that, then we're in trouble.

Edited by Dave230, 09 November 2017 - 07:30 AM.


28

#89 Uhit

Uhit

    Advanced

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 336 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 450896
  • Joined: 01/06/2017
GolfWRX Likes : 60

Posted 09 November 2017 - 07:55 AM

View PostDave230, on 09 November 2017 - 07:29 AM, said:

St Andrews has never been that tough, relatively speaking. Bobby Jones shot 285 to win there in 1927, which was the lowest 72-hole score by six shots at The Open at that point.

John Daly only shot 3 shots better to win at St Andrews in 1995, whereas Nick Faldo shot 270 in 1990, bettered only once in the 5 Opens since. All links are very weather dependent.

Having said that, they had to trick up the greens a little to keep the scores in check last time, then the wind came in and play had to be suspended because balls are moving. That shouldn't happen on a links course. If they have to do that, then we're in trouble.

I had a moving ball on a flat, slow green, on a course in the Rhine valley...
...that can happen if the wind is strong enough, and says nothing, except, that the wind was strong enough to move a ball on a green.

If you have greens with lots of slope, then the wind has not to be that strong to move a ball - depending on the position of the ball - no surprise, and nothing exceptional.

29

#90 Medic

Medic

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,640 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 132567
  • Joined: 07/08/2011
  • Location:Florida
  • Handicap:5.8
GolfWRX Likes : 6933

Posted 09 November 2017 - 08:57 PM

View Postdisk, on 07 November 2017 - 07:23 PM, said:

View PostMedic, on 07 November 2017 - 06:29 PM, said:

View Postdisk, on 06 November 2017 - 08:30 PM, said:

View PostMedic, on 06 November 2017 - 08:28 PM, said:

Anyone else ever watch the Nascar event where they all drive literally the exact same setup. Supposed to be a true test of their driving skills.

Why not have a PGA event or two in similar fashion? Old school equipment with everyone playing the exact same setup - just to their specs. (The Nascar drivers are allowed to adjust the mirrors and the seat, right?)

Might be an interesting and entertaining watch.

In what way are guys NOT playing with the same setup? It's not like F1 or something where being with a certain company means your gear is better, they all play the same stuff...

So you honestly believe that every shaft is the exact same, every ball is the exact same, etc?

And you honestly believe that every single player has the same setup in their bags? None carry additional wedges, 2 irons, etc?

And you honestly believe that every single player has their driver set to the exact same settings? Not to mention the specs on their other clubs.

A better question might be what would make you believe that every single player is using the exact same equipment?

Sigh......

Obviously you have some trouble with hyperbole, when I said they all use the same stuff it's wasn't meant to be taken literally. Sigh...

My point was they are all choosing from the same pool of clubs, shafts and balls etc. No one setup or combination is giving them any kind of competitive advantage over any other player.

Oh, all clear now. They are all using golf clubs and golf balls so it's all the same.

So you honestly believe that the guys whose livelihoods are completely dependent on their equipment won't work hard to make sure it's the best for their game? And there is no advantage in playing clubs that are absolutely perfectly customized and fitted to their individual games? With hand selected sets that sometimes include 5 wedges or perhaps two drivers?

Which is my whole point exactly and you essentially helped me to make it. Remove the advantage of a custom fitted, custom selected set. Everyone plays off-the-shelf "stock" sets with the exact same setup, exact same specs, same ball and all.
Players would then have to rely on their own shot making skills, their own abilities to adapt and their own creativity.

This is really an extremely simple concept. A great deal of the advantage the pros have lay in their equipment. From the incredibly expensive customized shafts fine tuned to provide consistent performance round after round to their perfectly balanced putters - every aspect of their game is custom fitted. And my idea centered on removing that advantage and let them have at it. Even if Callaway was the sponsor and provided the equipment the players who use Callaway would have to adapt because their bag would include clubs not set to their specs.

Titleist 915D2 with Kuro Kage 60s in 45.25 set at 12*
Taylormade Rbz FW (17*)
Callaway X-Hot Pro 20* Hybrid
Callaway Apex CF16 4-PW w/KBS 90s
Titleist Vokey 50*
Callaway Mack Daddy 2 Slate 56*
Titleist Vokey SM-6 60-08 M
Odyssey Versa 9 34"
Callaway Chrome Soft

Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


Wanna get rid of this ugly yellow box? And remove other annoying "stuff" in between posts? Create a FREE GolfWRX account here.

30



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

GolfWRX Sponsors