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.

* * - - - 5 votes

Is Increasing Driving Distance Ruining the Pro Tours?

PGA Tour European Tour PGA Tour Champions Driving distance Drivers

810 replies to this topic

#481 Ashley Schaeffer

Ashley Schaeffer

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,352 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 258664
  • Joined: 06/24/2013
GolfWRX Likes : 1121

Posted 16 May 2018 - 03:55 PM

View Post15th Club, on 16 May 2018 - 03:43 PM, said:

View PostShilgy, on 16 May 2018 - 02:47 PM, said:

View PostPepperturbo, on 16 May 2018 - 02:32 PM, said:

When Tiger hit the PGA, he was stronger than most other tour players and kept getting stronger until his physical problems and maybe meltdown.  Not sure exactly when tour players and announcers started talking about the need to get into shape to be competitive but it was when Tiger was king.

That's when most everybody that wanted to win decided he or she had better hit the gym regularly.  It's easy for me to say there's a peak or maximum conditioning, having worked out all my life.  
For that reason I don't believe most tour players like "DJ" can get any strong or more fit then many are today.  In other words, the tour players physical capability over club distance is at or near its peak.

I don't foresee the ball gaining much more in yardage either.  IMO we should leave it alone for now and see what happens next in golf.  :beach:
But Pepper-15 doesn't like todays players hitting it longer than their hero Jack  playing the game differently than they remember their heroes playing.  So they want the ball rolled back and try to convince us "boyz at the local hacks muni" , his words not mine, that we won't care. Or even notice.  Al so that a handful of courses feel relevant. Never mind that for the most part the "elite event" courses rota has changed over the years-and should!  Why shouldn't the new stand alongside the old? And even surpass them?

"[M]y local hack muni," was quoting language from Ashley Schaeffer.

Yeah, and the rest of the negative things you concluded about those who play there were pure class.  Still can't admit that a rollback won't address speed of play for amateurs, right?

Edit to ask:

Which courses not currently played in elite competition at the pro level will be played at that level with a shorter ball?  When?



Thanks in advance.


Edited by Ashley Schaeffer, 16 May 2018 - 03:59 PM.

Driver: 9.5*
3W: 15*
5W: 19*-ish?
Irons: 4-PW
Wedges: 50*, 54*, 58*
Putter:  Putter

Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


1

#482 15th Club

15th Club

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,030 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 248249
  • Joined: 04/30/2013
  • Location:Michigan
  • Ebay ID:cdbplc
GolfWRX Likes : 504

Posted 16 May 2018 - 03:59 PM

View Postbigred90gt, on 16 May 2018 - 03:40 PM, said:

View Post15th Club, on 16 May 2018 - 03:04 PM, said:

View Postbigred90gt, on 16 May 2018 - 02:51 PM, said:

View Post15th Club, on 16 May 2018 - 02:29 PM, said:

Quote

So, no, it isn't "yuuuuuge" for balls compared to "less so" for clubs. Technological advances across the board are made for a reason, to provide a better performing product. You can't blame the ball

.


It may appear to be so, but I have little need to "blame" the ball, when the bottom line is whether or not it is the ball or the players or the clubs or the agronomy, the easiest thing to fix is the ball.

What you can't seem to wrap your mind around is that there is nothing that needs to be "fixed". Nothing is broken, but if a rollback is introduced, there will be a problem for all BUT the very best players in the world, which ironically, is where you say the problem is.

And to say that the ball is an easier fix than agronomy is incredibly ignorant and completely nullifies anything constructive you could possibly add.

No; on agronomy we just disagree.  The way that I want to see golf courses set up is extremely firm and fast and as dry as weather will possibly permit.  In other words, I want golf courses to promote as much roll as possible, because that accentuates the ground game which is a central feature of classic-era golf course design.  And I want them as "wide" as possible, to promote strategic thinking as to angles and approaches.  Again, firm fast and wide is what gets taken away if you need to trick the course into defending against equipment-technology-produced distance.

The only problem with that is that all of that only exacerbates the problems with longer and longer equipment technology.  And so part of the rollback notion is to satisfy the desires for much firmer and faster courses.

I expect that many people here don't see it my way.  That is okay; it's a free country.  But we do disagree.

The nice thing for me is that most of the guys (and gals) leading the USGA and the R and A see it my way, and will try to move things in my direction.
Dry, firm and fast with wide fairways is what has created the perceived "problem"! A guy might carry the ball 280, then he gets 40-60 yards of roll, and suddenly he has a 320-340 yard drive. With wide fairways, aim in the middle and then if it rolls peft or right, chances are you stay in the fairway. Soften the fairways, grow the grass out some and bring them in, and then you have to control your shots. If you get it offline, you are in jail. If you can hit the fairway, you are rewarded with a good lie, hence the name, "FAIRway". If you think rolling back the distance a golf ball can be hit will change anything, except giving the guys a 5-7 iron instead of a 7-9 iron in to the green, you're mistaken. It will change nothing amongst the professional ranks, but it will destroy the game for the rest of the world. You have got to look past the professional and elite amateur ranks, because the rest of the world is what aupports the game.

The game has gone from one played on the ground to one played in the air, and no amount of rollback will change that. Gone are the days hitting low bullets on every shot. No matter what you do, that's not going to change. Ball rollback or not, the game will never be played that way again.

You can disagree all you want, but far more players (past and present) and analysts have said the problem isn't the ball, it's the course set up than the other way around. If the rough isn't penal, there's no real penalty for just getting up and swingin as hard as you can. If the fairways are wider, that encourages it even more. You are in the overwhelming minority.

See, the more we go on about our tastes if golf course design and setup, the further apart we get.  I recognize that I cannot change your mind.  I assure you, you won't change my mind.

And yes, I do appreciate your understanding that the things I want to do to most courses really does make them that much faster and so it makes a ball rollback all the more imperative.  That's just the way it is.  I'd say that I'm sorry about that, but I'm not the least bit sorry.

I do want to pick on the notion that, "far more players (past and present) and analysts have said the problem isn't the ball, it's the course set up than the other way around."  And here is my challenge.  For every name of every analyst, player, etc. that you give me in support of that proposition, I will give you TWO names of people who favor some sort of ball rollback.

2

#483 JackStraw2

JackStraw2

    Tour Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 550 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 44776
  • Joined: 12/30/2007
  • Handicap:+2.9
  • Ebay ID:thkbh
GolfWRX Likes : 245

Posted 16 May 2018 - 04:02 PM

View Post15th Club, on 16 May 2018 - 02:26 PM, said:

View PostJackStraw2, on 16 May 2018 - 01:58 PM, said:

View Post15th Club, on 16 May 2018 - 10:27 AM, said:

View PostShilgy, on 16 May 2018 - 10:20 AM, said:

View Post15th Club, on 16 May 2018 - 10:14 AM, said:

That was a year ago.  Davis was "floating" that "concept."  We shall see, where Davis ends up.
It's from your supplied link.  If you don't like it don't use it to support your argument. That could be considered "dumb" or "stupid".

Personally I do not see them doing a rollback. Bifurcation would be more likely but so difficult to implement it would be a nightmare.  I could see them try to do something with driver head size. But it would have a negligible affect just like the grooves fiasco.

What was the grooves "fiasco"?  Be specific.

btw; one powerful interest that is opposed to bifurcation is none other than Titleist.  Titleist wants to take the product that its tour players use, and sell it to aspirational/recreational golfers.

Like Titleist, but for very different reasons, I also oppose bifurcation.

I would imagine he's talking about rolling back groves to make shots from the rough more penal, when in fact after the U to V grove change the tour began averaging CLOSER to the hole.

So the USGA did all these crazy studies, spent a ton of money, said how bad the groves were for the game yada yada yada and all of a sudden with the V groves they hit it closer.

So the manufacturers had to change their grove milling  processes, if you wanted to play "by the rules" and play in any elite events you had to go drop $450 on a set of new wedges and $900 on some new irons, all because the best players in the world hit it too damn close out of the rough.

And after allllllllllll that, they now they hit it closer......that counts as a fiasco I think.

I am sort of pouncing on the bolded part, because I was waiting for that answer, which is thoroughly rebuttable.  Here is the chronology:
  • Groove rule is announced in 2008 or 2009;
  • Manufacturers are given time to re-tool, and all "old" inventory is allowed to be sold.  No large volumes of old-stock equipment are discarded or scrapped;
  • Goes into effect, for manufacturing only, in January of 2010;
  • All older clubs remain "legal," and nothing is declared non-conforming;
  • As a Condition of Competition, tour players (all getting equipment for free) are required to use newly-conforming grooves as of January 1, 2010, and together the USGA and PGA Tour coordinate rulings for the US Open (all players must use C of C compliant grooves);
  • Elite amateur competitions are urged by the USGA to NOT impose and conditions of competition until 2014; that was the rule for the US Am;
  • Recreational golfers are given until 2024 -- or maybe longer -- to use old equipment.  And in fact, absolutely no one in any club event is worried about non-conforming grooves.  The USGA might eventually suggest that no condition of competition be imposed at all.  It would be up to individual clubs and golf associations in any event, because the entire groove rule was prospective.
It was all handled mostly flawlessly by USGA.  There was never any "fiasco."

Well how do you feel about their anchoring ban if you dont mind me asking? Because that was also a knee jerk, much like what were dealing with now.

I wonder if DJs teeball that cut the pond in last years fedex cup playoff is the teeball that started all of this in the first place.
Titleist 915 D3 Speeder vc 7.2 tour spec
Titleist 910 F Rombax W
Titleist 913hd Matrix Altus
Titleist 714 CB/MB 4-Pw PjX 6.5
Tour issue 52, 56 60 Vokey 200 SM4
Odyssey Versa no. 7

3

#484 rangersgoalie

rangersgoalie

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,213 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 290733
  • Joined: 01/07/2014
  • Location:CA
GolfWRX Likes : 2386

Posted 16 May 2018 - 04:07 PM

View PostNorth Butte, on 16 May 2018 - 11:21 AM, said:

Bob was no doubt speaking out of his rear end but hey, if you agree with his sentiment it's best not to get too picky about his details.

And that's the essence of this whole attempt to gin up a "problem" out of whole cloth. The details never actually parse but man the sentiment feels SOOOOO good to rant about.

What was that quote, the handicap system could, er, uh, it could take care of it.

P.S. It's funny how the same technically illiterate, innumerate doofuses who've been claiming for 20 years that modern equipment gives an unfair "exponential" advantage to the longest hitters have now switched sides completely. They're all for an unfair "exponental" penalty that only affects the longest hitters. Unfairness in the service of feel-good sentimental whining is fair game, apparently. Fortunately, both irrational beliefs are equally unconnected to the real world. There is no magic golf ball that sense clubhead speed and rewards or penalizes as the designer sees fit.

I certainly agree with this.  There have been a number of roll back proponents who believed there was a, exponential benefit to the longer/ better players.  The biggest benefit has been their abilities to make changes and adjustments to their games to take advantage of the knowledge the manufacturers, players, and coaches are gaining every year due to better r&d.

But it is uncomfortable how many are willing to make OTHER players change their games and equipment when reaching the highest level.  One of the reasons I'd be ok with an overall roll back is to try and keep all levels of players in the same rules.  
The reason it won't happen that way?? Too much potential business of golf damage.  But it's ok to impact someone else's business for many and push for bifurcation to bring the better players back toward those that cannot do what they do....may just be the visual, but it's why this debate rankles many

4

#485 heavy_hitter

heavy_hitter

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,955 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 366715
  • Joined: 03/16/2015
GolfWRX Likes : 1378

Posted 16 May 2018 - 04:08 PM

View PostAshley Schaeffer, on 16 May 2018 - 03:55 PM, said:

View Post15th Club, on 16 May 2018 - 03:43 PM, said:

View PostShilgy, on 16 May 2018 - 02:47 PM, said:

View PostPepperturbo, on 16 May 2018 - 02:32 PM, said:

When Tiger hit the PGA, he was stronger than most other tour players and kept getting stronger until his physical problems and maybe meltdown.  Not sure exactly when tour players and announcers started talking about the need to get into shape to be competitive but it was when Tiger was king.

That's when most everybody that wanted to win decided he or she had better hit the gym regularly.  It's easy for me to say there's a peak or maximum conditioning, having worked out all my life.  
For that reason I don't believe most tour players like "DJ" can get any strong or more fit then many are today.  In other words, the tour players physical capability over club distance is at or near its peak.

I don't foresee the ball gaining much more in yardage either.  IMO we should leave it alone for now and see what happens next in golf.  :beach:
But Pepper-15 doesn't like todays players hitting it longer than their hero Jack  playing the game differently than they remember their heroes playing.  So they want the ball rolled back and try to convince us "boyz at the local hacks muni" , his words not mine, that we won't care. Or even notice.  Al so that a handful of courses feel relevant. Never mind that for the most part the "elite event" courses rota has changed over the years-and should!  Why shouldn't the new stand alongside the old? And even surpass them?

"[M]y local hack muni," was quoting language from Ashley Schaeffer.

Yeah, and the rest of the negative things you concluded about those who play there were pure class.  Still can't admit that a rollback won't address speed of play for amateurs, right?

Edit to ask:
Which courses not currently played in elite competition at the pro level will be played at that level with a shorter ball?  When?


Thanks in advance.


Rollback of the ball won't do anything to shorten rounds.  Rollback the ball and instead of say having a 7i into the green you have a 5i.  You have now just decreased the loft of the ball.  With decreasing the loft of the ball you are now missing more greens because of rollout.  Architecture and greens of the course have changed over the years to make them faster, smaller, and with more roll offs to keep up with the technology of the game.  The only thing the roll back of the ball will do is make the longer hitter more dominant and the shorter hitters not able to keep up.  Will not change the speed the game is played.


5

#486 15th Club

15th Club

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,030 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 248249
  • Joined: 04/30/2013
  • Location:Michigan
  • Ebay ID:cdbplc
GolfWRX Likes : 504

Posted 16 May 2018 - 04:16 PM

View PostJackStraw2, on 16 May 2018 - 04:02 PM, said:

...
...
...
...
Well how do you feel about their anchoring ban if you don't mind me asking? Because that was also a knee jerk, much like what we're dealing with now.

...

I am not a good judge of the anchoring ban.  I think I am like many if not most people, insofar as I could never understand how it was ever legal in the first place.  (The simple answer, I know, is "How exactly do you write the rule?  Do you limit club length?  Or do you focus on the physical mechanism of making the stroke?  Or grip?"  When you try to write a rule, it gets difficult.)

But moreover, I just felt sorry for any poor ba$terd whose putting was so tragic that they had to go to something like a belly/anchored putter.  I could never understand how anybody ever got the correct length or feel putting like that.

I am not at all happy about that whole saga.  I would not call it a "knee jerk," insofar as the USGA did not react instantly.  It was perhaps "a day late and a dollar short," but again I did not have a dog in that fight.  I was not happy with the USGA, and I was not sympathetic to the anchor-putters.

Edited by 15th Club, 16 May 2018 - 04:16 PM.


6

#487 15th Club

15th Club

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,030 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 248249
  • Joined: 04/30/2013
  • Location:Michigan
  • Ebay ID:cdbplc
GolfWRX Likes : 504

Posted 16 May 2018 - 04:24 PM

View Postheavy_hitter, on 16 May 2018 - 04:08 PM, said:

...
...
...

Rollback of the ball won't do anything to shorten rounds.  Rollback the ball and instead of say having a 7i into the green you have a 5i.  You have now just decreased the loft of the ball.  With decreasing the loft of the ball you are now missing more greens because of rollout.  Architecture and greens of the course have changed over the years to make them faster, smaller, and with more roll offs to keep up with the technology of the game.  The only thing the roll back of the ball will do is make the longer hitter more dominant and the shorter hitters not able to keep up.  Will not change the speed the game is played.

I realize that this is not a direct response to you, but here is a story I have told before.  I was on the 13th tee at Warwick Hills in Grand Blanc MI during a Buick Open about ten years ago.  It is a 544-yard Par 5, with water in front.  It is a virtual par 4 for tour players.  When I was there, there was a bad backup on the tee.  I think there were three pairings all waiting to tee off.  Because of that situation, one of the Tour's rules guys (I believe it was Slugger White, but it may have been Mark Russell) was there to see if he could speed things up.  And he couldn't.  As he sat, disgusted, in his cart he said to no one in particular (unless it was someone on his headset), "the damn ball goes too far."

Edited by 15th Club, 16 May 2018 - 04:25 PM.


7

#488 rangersgoalie

rangersgoalie

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,213 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 290733
  • Joined: 01/07/2014
  • Location:CA
GolfWRX Likes : 2386

Posted 16 May 2018 - 05:47 PM

I played Warwick in two Buick Opens in 92-94  
That hole was easily reachable for me if I hit the fairway, and I was at best middle of the pack with a
Maxfli HT ball.....I would assume a rollback would be, hypothetically at least, in that range or era??

Whether it was Slugger or Mark saying it, Its tough to pick two better officials.
But I know I was able to hit my current driver at the end of 2016, 20 yards longer than my 1990's
Macgregor super eye o Matic when I played them before injured.  Very scientific test for certain ��

8

#489 15th Club

15th Club

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,030 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 248249
  • Joined: 04/30/2013
  • Location:Michigan
  • Ebay ID:cdbplc
GolfWRX Likes : 504

Posted 16 May 2018 - 05:59 PM

View Postrangersgoalie, on 16 May 2018 - 05:47 PM, said:

I played Warwick in two Buick Opens in 92-94  
That hole was easily reachable for me if I hit the fairway, and I was at best middle of the pack with a
Maxfli HT ball.....I would assume a rollback would be, hypothetically at least, in that range or era??

Whether it was Slugger or Mark saying it, Its tough to pick two better officials.
But I know I was able to hit my current driver at the end of 2016, 20 yards longer than my 1990's
Macgregor super eye o Matic when I played them before injured.  Very scientific test for certain ��

Right.  I don't wish to make too much out of Warwick, or certainly just a single hole at Warwick.

But the idea that Slugger and/or Mark -- two of the most knowledgeable golf tournament guys in world history -- would be saying, "the damn ball goes too far" is revealing of a lot more than just Warwick.

9

#490 marmooskapaul

marmooskapaul

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,116 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 13039
  • Joined: 03/05/2006
  • Location:Indiana
GolfWRX Likes : 482

Posted 16 May 2018 - 06:19 PM

Hard and fast...really wide fairways...That describes most every 20$ public course without fairway irrigation that I played....from July till October. An observation...there is a lot of luck involved in all that bounce and roll...and almost all score better when it's like that...as compared to wet and slow in the spring.
We used to say..just pretend we are playing the British Open...and bang drives 70 yards farther than normal. Can be fun...but definitely not for every round or tournament. To be honest..playing like that...the ball really doesn't matter much??


Remove This Advertisement Viewing As Guest

    GolfWRX Forums

    Advertisement


10

#491 Shilgy

Shilgy

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,940 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 235237
  • Joined: 03/07/2013
  • Location:Phoenix
  • Handicap:5.2
GolfWRX Likes : 5710

Posted 16 May 2018 - 08:13 PM

View Post15th Club, on 16 May 2018 - 04:24 PM, said:

View Postheavy_hitter, on 16 May 2018 - 04:08 PM, said:

...
...
...

Rollback of the ball won't do anything to shorten rounds.  Rollback the ball and instead of say having a 7i into the green you have a 5i.  You have now just decreased the loft of the ball.  With decreasing the loft of the ball you are now missing more greens because of rollout.  Architecture and greens of the course have changed over the years to make them faster, smaller, and with more roll offs to keep up with the technology of the game.  The only thing the roll back of the ball will do is make the longer hitter more dominant and the shorter hitters not able to keep up.  Will not change the speed the game is played.

I realize that this is not a direct response to you, but here is a story I have told before.  I was on the 13th tee at Warwick Hills in Grand Blanc MI during a Buick Open about ten years ago.  It is a 544-yard Par 5, with water in front.  It is a virtual par 4 for tour players.  When I was there, there was a bad backup on the tee.  I think there were three pairings all waiting to tee off.  Because of that situation, one of the Tour's rules guys (I believe it was Slugger White, but it may have been Mark Russell) was there to see if he could speed things up.  And he couldn't.  As he sat, disgusted, in his cart he said to no one in particular (unless it was someone on his headset), "the damn ball goes too far."
And yet the low winning score was in 1987. -26!
TM M3 10* Graphite Design BB6s
TM M1 3w 14*  Graphite Design BB7s
Srixon U65 18° Atmos Red 7s
Adams A12 UST Silver S 21°
Srixon Z765 5-AW Nippon Pro Modus3 125S
Titleist Vokey 54*F  58*S
Toulon Garage Rochester/ Toulon Rochester

To paraphrase Dr Seuss: Don't cry because the round of golf is over-smile because it happened .  :)

11

#492 gvogel

gvogel

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,836 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 37680
  • Joined: 08/19/2007
  • Location:Tonawanda, NY
  • Ebay ID:dbvogey
GolfWRX Likes : 1671

Posted 16 May 2018 - 08:56 PM

I will say one thing: it seems pretty fruitless to argue for a ball roll back, or equipment roll back on a web site that was created to talk about the latest, and greatest of golf equipment.

You guys can go on and on about which ball you play and why, or which driver you prefer and why - when in a lot of other sports the ball and the club are pretty much standard from player to player.  

I'm checking out.  But it seems to me that at some point the folks that make the rules are going to have to do something about modern equipment in order to keep so many good golf courses, that were built in a certain age, relevant for modern players.  for me, part of the skill of getting from the tee to the green, or near the green, has been reduced by the modern driver and ball.  And that is not a good thing for the game.
On Sundays, I used to play hickory

12

#493 Ashley Schaeffer

Ashley Schaeffer

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,352 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 258664
  • Joined: 06/24/2013
GolfWRX Likes : 1121

Posted 16 May 2018 - 09:37 PM

View Postgvogel, on 16 May 2018 - 08:56 PM, said:

I will say one thing: it seems pretty fruitless to argue for a ball roll back, or equipment roll back on a web site that was created to talk about the latest, and greatest of golf equipment.

You guys can go on and on about which ball you play and why, or which driver you prefer and why - when in a lot of other sports the ball and the club are pretty much standard from player to player.  

I'm checking out.  But it seems to me that at some point the folks that make the rules are going to have to do something about modern equipment in order to keep so many good golf courses, that were built in a certain age, relevant for modern players.  for me, part of the skill of getting from the tee to the green, or near the green, has been reduced by the modern driver and ball.  And that is not a good thing for the game.

Much like modern professional golf.
Driver: 9.5*
3W: 15*
5W: 19*-ish?
Irons: 4-PW
Wedges: 50*, 54*, 58*
Putter:  Putter

13

#494 Valtiel

Valtiel

    Trap Draw

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 892 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 150887
  • Joined: 12/12/2011
  • Location:Scotts Valley, CA
  • Handicap:2
GolfWRX Likes : 795

Posted 17 May 2018 - 01:26 AM

In the interest of contributing an idea instead of making fun of this whole argument, what about this;

We can agree that its primarily driver distance we are concerned with, yes? I don't think people are concerned with PW or even mid iron distance, so why not clamp down on the driver specifically and leave everything else alone? And I don't mean messing with COR or anything like that, but what about a significant clamp down on driver MOI? That would place a higher premium on hitting the center of the face as even slightly off center hits are much more penal. The path to a hypothetical bifurcation is a lot simpler then as well since you would just need Tour and Retail versions of a single club that are just internally weighted differently.

This way all the big drives can still happen, they are just that much more impressive and risky, kind of a wooden versus metal bat sort of thing. I think we can all agree that high MOI 460cc drivers have taken a lot of the risk out of swinging for the fences and while I personally do not think anything really needs to change, I think this would be the least disruptive way to accomplish a similar goal.
Taylormade M1 430 8.5* Tensei Pro Orange V2 70TX || Titleist 915D3 8.5* Diamana Kai'li 80x
Nike Tour Issue SQ2 13* Blueboard 83x
Nike Tour Issue SQ2 17* Blueboard 103x
|| Nike SQ2 15* Blueboard 93x
Taylormade V-Steel 21* Project X Rifle Satin 6.5 || Ping Anser 20* Aldila Rogue Black 110MSI 105h Tour-X

Mizuno MP-H4 3i 21* Brunswick Precision FCM 7.3
Mizuno MP-H4 4i 24* Brunswick Precision FCM 7.3
Mizuno MP-59 5i-PW 27*- 48* Brunswick Precision Rifle FCM 7.0
Vokey SM6 52* F-Grind KBS Tour X || Vokey 452.08 DG X200 Black Oxide
Vokey SM5 56* S-Grind DG S400 || Vokey 456.14 Tour Issue Raw DG X100
Vokey Special 60* V-Grind Black Oxide DG X300 SSx2 || Vokey Tour Issue SM60-04 DG X300 SSx2
SeeMore PTM1 Black || Scotty Cameron Santa Fe w/Bullseye shaft

14

#495 buckeyefl

buckeyefl

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,234 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 259982
  • Joined: 06/29/2013
GolfWRX Likes : 2321

Posted 17 May 2018 - 07:45 AM

View Post15th Club, on 16 May 2018 - 02:26 PM, said:

View PostJackStraw2, on 16 May 2018 - 01:58 PM, said:

View Post15th Club, on 16 May 2018 - 10:27 AM, said:

View PostShilgy, on 16 May 2018 - 10:20 AM, said:

View Post15th Club, on 16 May 2018 - 10:14 AM, said:

That was a year ago.  Davis was "floating" that "concept."  We shall see, where Davis ends up.
It's from your supplied link.  If you don't like it don't use it to support your argument. That could be considered "dumb" or "stupid".

Personally I do not see them doing a rollback. Bifurcation would be more likely but so difficult to implement it would be a nightmare.  I could see them try to do something with driver head size. But it would have a negligible affect just like the grooves fiasco.

What was the grooves "fiasco"?  Be specific.

btw; one powerful interest that is opposed to bifurcation is none other than Titleist.  Titleist wants to take the product that its tour players use, and sell it to aspirational/recreational golfers.

Like Titleist, but for very different reasons, I also oppose bifurcation.

I would imagine he's talking about rolling back groves to make shots from the rough more penal, when in fact after the U to V grove change the tour began averaging CLOSER to the hole.

So the USGA did all these crazy studies, spent a ton of money, said how bad the groves were for the game yada yada yada and all of a sudden with the V groves they hit it closer.

So the manufacturers had to change their grove milling  processes, if you wanted to play "by the rules" and play in any elite events you had to go drop $450 on a set of new wedges and $900 on some new irons, all because the best players in the world hit it too damn close out of the rough.

And after allllllllllll that, they now they hit it closer......that counts as a fiasco I think.

I am sort of pouncing on the bolded part, because I was waiting for that answer, which is thoroughly rebuttable.  Here is the chronology:
  • Groove rule is announced in 2008 or 2009;
  • Manufacturers are given time to re-tool, and all "old" inventory is allowed to be sold.  No large volumes of old-stock equipment are discarded or scrapped;
  • Goes into effect, for manufacturing only, in January of 2010;
  • All older clubs remain "legal," and nothing is declared non-conforming;
  • As a Condition of Competition, tour players (all getting equipment for free) are required to use newly-conforming grooves as of January 1, 2010, and together the USGA and PGA Tour coordinate rulings for the US Open (all players must use C of C compliant grooves);
  • Elite amateur competitions are urged by the USGA to NOT impose and conditions of competition until 2014; that was the rule for the US Am;
  • Recreational golfers are given until 2024 -- or maybe longer -- to use old equipment.  And in fact, absolutely no one in any club event is worried about non-conforming grooves.  The USGA might eventually suggest that no condition of competition be imposed at all.  It would be up to individual clubs and golf associations in any event, because the entire groove rule was prospective.
It was all handled mostly flawlessly by USGA.  There was never any "fiasco."

Lol. Nice fanboy answer. I'm still trying to figure out if you are blind, brainwashed or simply trolling.


15

#496 clevited

clevited

    Don't think you are, know you are.

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 246 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 484290
  • Joined: 10/13/2017
GolfWRX Likes : 87

Posted 17 May 2018 - 08:01 AM

In before locked!!!!!

Just figured I would make the point here that I have made elsewhere (though I don't have the energy to jump in and fight with 15 again lol, I applaud your dedication and obsession, I really do).  

We are all forgetting that if you nerf the ball or whatever it may be to lower distance, there are still guys out there that can UNHITCH THE PLOW so to speak.  Jamie Sadlowski for instance is trying to make it on the tour, and he is swinging his driver around 129-130 during competition.  I am almost positive he can dial that same club up to near 140 and still be pretty accurate (from what I have seen on YouTube anyways).  There are not many opportunities for him to hit it that hard on today's golf courses, but you change the ball, well, he will uncork it more often and the perceived problem will just come back in a decade or so when the even bigger hitters start outshining the current crop of players.

Point is, it still takes an aweful lot of skill and not to mention BALLS to go out and hammer a drive down a tight fairway for the chance of using a wedge into the green.  I am a believer in slowing down fairways (just allow them to grow a tad longer and water them on a normal schedule), and let the rough grow a bit more to make the rough actually tough to score out of.  At my local course, the rough is a death sentence, you need to swing a wedge 140 friggen mph just to get the ball out!  (OK exaggeration, but only a little :)  Really though, I enjoy seeing these guys bomb them and then either get out of trouble, or reap the reward of a well placed bomb.  I don't see a problem, but if something has to change, I choose the above.

Also, announcers being amazed when a player pulls out a 9 iron or something on a par 5 second shot.  That 9 iron back in the day could have been a 7 or 6 at times due to loft and length changes over the years.  Too much infatuation with what club they pull out.

Edit:  To answer the OP question, no increased driving distance is not ruining the tour.  It amazes people and attracts a lot of attention to it if anything, and also the "need" to lengthen course and cry about the cost and land needed to do so is silly.  YOU DON'T NEED TO LENGTHEN THE COURSES!!!!  Also, the pyhsical skill it takes to swing a club 120+ and still hit the ball straight adds to the legitimacy of golf as an "athletic" sport.  Before anyone says the drivers are too forgiving, some of these guys can swing a driving iron this fast or faster and get it out there a long ways.  Its their fairway finder, and yet an iron isn't nearly as forgiving as a driver can be.  Fairways woods as well, smaller head, shallower head, still swing 120+ and bomb it.

Edited by clevited, 17 May 2018 - 08:12 AM.

Posted Image

16

#497 North Butte

North Butte

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,150 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 424472
  • Joined: 05/09/2016
GolfWRX Likes : 5514

Posted 17 May 2018 - 08:36 AM

Quote

Grandpa: I used to be with ‘it’, but then they changed what ‘it’ was. Now what I’m with isn’t ‘it’ anymore and what’s ‘it’ seems weird and scary. It’ll happen to you!

--The Simpsons
Everything has its drawbacks, as the man said when his mother-in-law died, and they came down upon him for the funeral expenses.

17

#498 mosesgolf

mosesgolf

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,254 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 6303
  • Joined: 09/28/2005
GolfWRX Likes : 1586

Posted 17 May 2018 - 09:00 AM

It's fun watching Tour pros hit the distances nowadays.  What's glamorous about a 280 yard drive which was considered LONG in Greg Norman's day.  And even LONGER in Gary Player's day.  :D
Ping G 9 Kuro Kage Dual Core 60 TS
Ping Rapture 3 Wood
Ping G15 5 Wood UST
Ping i E1 4-GW Nippon Stiff
Ping Glide 54 58
Ping Ug Le Putter 34

18

#499 15th Club

15th Club

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,030 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 248249
  • Joined: 04/30/2013
  • Location:Michigan
  • Ebay ID:cdbplc
GolfWRX Likes : 504

Posted 17 May 2018 - 09:08 AM


Quote

YOU DON'T NEED TO LENGTHEN THE COURSES!!!!


But that is exactly what has been happening, with every single major tournament-hosting golf course in the world.  Nobody knows better than the USGA, and the R&A, and they are the people who will make the equipment rules.

19

#500 North Butte

North Butte

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,150 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 424472
  • Joined: 05/09/2016
GolfWRX Likes : 5514

Posted 17 May 2018 - 09:12 AM

I guess we're supposed to believe that the rich guys who own these 100-year-old courses left them EXACTLY as the architect built them, never "toughened", never lengthened until around 2002 when they suddenly started butchering them by adding another 1,000 yards.

That's a false narrative. These guys have been modifying, toughening, Tiger-proofing, strengthening, lengthening, remodeling, renovating their courses for decades prior to the introduction of Titanium and the ProV1. In some cases literally from the day they were built they've been modified on a regular basis.

And they won't quit doing it if Mike Davis gets his "rollback" or "bifurcation". It's what people with a lot of money do, they spend it one "improving" their golf course.

The only thing forcing them to butcher classic courses is hubris, ego, status-seeking and just plain old money burning a hole in their pockets. It's not due to any outside influence.

Edited by North Butte, 17 May 2018 - 09:13 AM.

Everything has its drawbacks, as the man said when his mother-in-law died, and they came down upon him for the funeral expenses.

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

#501 15th Club

15th Club

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,030 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 248249
  • Joined: 04/30/2013
  • Location:Michigan
  • Ebay ID:cdbplc
GolfWRX Likes : 504

Posted 17 May 2018 - 09:14 AM

View Postbuckeyefl, on 17 May 2018 - 07:45 AM, said:

View Post15th Club, on 16 May 2018 - 02:26 PM, said:

View PostJackStraw2, on 16 May 2018 - 01:58 PM, said:

View Post15th Club, on 16 May 2018 - 10:27 AM, said:

...
...

What was the grooves "fiasco"?  Be specific.

btw; one powerful interest that is opposed to bifurcation is none other than Titleist.  Titleist wants to take the product that its tour players use, and sell it to aspirational/recreational golfers.

Like Titleist, but for very different reasons, I also oppose bifurcation.

I would imagine he's talking about rolling back groves to make shots from the rough more penal, when in fact after the U to V grove change the tour began averaging CLOSER to the hole.

So the USGA did all these crazy studies, spent a ton of money, said how bad the groves were for the game yada yada yada and all of a sudden with the V groves they hit it closer.

So the manufacturers had to change their grove milling  processes, if you wanted to play "by the rules" and play in any elite events you had to go drop $450 on a set of new wedges and $900 on some new irons, all because the best players in the world hit it too damn close out of the rough.

And after allllllllllll that, they now they hit it closer......that counts as a fiasco I think.

I am sort of pouncing on the bolded part, because I was waiting for that answer, which is thoroughly rebuttable.  Here is the chronology:
  • Groove rule is announced in 2008 or 2009;
  • Manufacturers are given time to re-tool, and all "old" inventory is allowed to be sold.  No large volumes of old-stock equipment are discarded or scrapped;
  • Goes into effect, for manufacturing only, in January of 2010;
  • All older clubs remain "legal," and nothing is declared non-conforming;
  • As a Condition of Competition, tour players (all getting equipment for free) are required to use newly-conforming grooves as of January 1, 2010, and together the USGA and PGA Tour coordinate rulings for the US Open (all players must use C of C compliant grooves);
  • Elite amateur competitions are urged by the USGA to NOT impose and conditions of competition until 2014; that was the rule for the US Am;
  • Recreational golfers are given until 2024 -- or maybe longer -- to use old equipment.  And in fact, absolutely no one in any club event is worried about non-conforming grooves.  The USGA might eventually suggest that no condition of competition be imposed at all.  It would be up to individual clubs and golf associations in any event, because the entire groove rule was prospective.
It was all handled mostly flawlessly by USGA.  There was never any "fiasco."

Lol. Nice fanboy answer. I'm still trying to figure out if you are blind, brainwashed or simply trolling.

What part exactly did I get wrong?

Only if "having a different opinion" equals trolling, am I trolling.  I put up with an awful lot of abuse and personal insults in this debate, and I shouldn't have to do that.

21

#502 BrockPSU

BrockPSU

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 61 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 486666
  • Joined: 11/13/2017
  • Location:PA
  • Handicap:1
GolfWRX Likes : 44

Posted 17 May 2018 - 09:15 AM

View Post15th Club, on 17 May 2018 - 09:08 AM, said:



Quote

YOU DON'T NEED TO LENGTHEN THE COURSES!!!!


But that is exactly what has been happening, with every single major tournament-hosting golf course in the world.  Nobody knows better than the USGA, and the R&A, and they are the people who will make the equipment rules.

Until someone actually destroys a course with distance and not having +10 strokes gained putting, I don't think you need to be lengthening the courses anymore then what they already are. Just because the USGA says so doesn't mean they need to keep lengthening courses doesn't mean that they are right. I would like to see the average of tour players thoughts on lengthening courses if it is actually needed.
915 D2 AD DI 6x
915 F AD DI 8x
716 T-MB 3 AD DI Hybrid 95x
716 T-MB 4 Project x 6.5
716 CB 5-6 Project x 6.5
716 MB 7-PW Project x 6.5
SM6 46 F Grind Project x 6.0(in rotation)
SM7 50 F Grind, 54 S Grind, 58 L Grind Project x 6.0
Scotty Cameron Tour Rat R&D Proto Concept 1

22

#503 15th Club

15th Club

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,030 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 248249
  • Joined: 04/30/2013
  • Location:Michigan
  • Ebay ID:cdbplc
GolfWRX Likes : 504

Posted 17 May 2018 - 09:18 AM

View PostNorth Butte, on 17 May 2018 - 09:12 AM, said:

I guess we're supposed to believe that the rich guys who own these 100-year-old courses left them EXACTLY as the architect built them, never "toughened", never lengthened until around 2002 when they suddenly started butchering them by adding another 1,000 yards.

That's a false narrative. These guys have been modifying, toughening, Tiger-proofing, strengthening, lengthening, remodeling, renovating their courses for decades prior to the introduction of Titanium and the ProV1. In some cases literally from the day they were built they've been modified on a regular basis.

And they won't quit doing it if Mike Davis gets his "rollback" or "bifurcation". It's what people with a lot of money do, they spend it one "improving" their golf course.

The only thing forcing them to butcher classic courses is hubris, ego, status-seeking and just plain old money burning a hole in their pockets. It's not due to any outside influence.


I didn't say that, I didn't claim that, and I didn't premise any argument on that.  The University of Michigan's Alister Mackenzie-designed golf course is not "owned by rich guys" with money burning holes in their pockets.  Nor is The Old Course; nor are dozens and hundreds of courses that host elite-level competitions.

You'd do a lot better, to stick to the real arguments, and actual things that I have written.

23

#504 North Butte

North Butte

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,150 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 424472
  • Joined: 05/09/2016
GolfWRX Likes : 5514

Posted 17 May 2018 - 09:19 AM

USGA accomplished not a single one of their stated "groove rollback" objectives after wasting many years "studying", then months of implementing with the side effect of tens of millions of dollars being spent to replace perfectly fine equipment. That is a total an abject failure by anybody's reckoning.

But yeah it was a success in that the entire world (inexplicably IMO) didn't tell USGA to go jump in a lake instead of wasting all that money and effort. Eventually they are going to make one two many expensive, transparently idiotic blunders and the golf world will realize it's better off without USGA calling the shots. A ball rollback could easily be the straw that breaks the camel's back.
Everything has its drawbacks, as the man said when his mother-in-law died, and they came down upon him for the funeral expenses.

24

#505 clevited

clevited

    Don't think you are, know you are.

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 246 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 484290
  • Joined: 10/13/2017
GolfWRX Likes : 87

Posted 17 May 2018 - 09:19 AM

View Post15th Club, on 17 May 2018 - 09:08 AM, said:

Quote

YOU DON'T NEED TO LENGTHEN THE COURSES!!!!

But that is exactly what has been happening, with every single major tournament-hosting golf course in the world.  Nobody knows better than the USGA, and the R&A, and they are the people who will make the equipment rules.

I am saying it doesn't need to happen.  It is completely unnessary.  It is a mentality that needs to stop and it doesn't require a golf ball rollback or any equipment change to make stop.  It is a mindset that OMG WE NEED TO LENGTHEN COURSES, CUZ PEOPLE HIT TOO FAR!!  It just needs to go away.

Anyways, I am not going to go back and fourth with you again 15th, I can't handle the broken record of extremely flawed logic regarding this subject.  I challenge you to think about the domino effect, the repercussions of changing things, and I challenge you to understand that no matter what you do, the game changes, it evolves and golf courses will always be able to be dominated by someone.  Golfers are like water, they take the path of least resistance, and for those that CAN, distance is that path.  The current crop of pro golfers are getting better, there is though a ceiling to that.  We are near that ceiling, and someday it could be that every player on tour is Dustin Johnson like in every aspect.  It is inevitable with or without a ball change.  And again, with a ball change, you just up the anti as far as what kind of player will be on tour in the future.

Edited by clevited, 17 May 2018 - 09:21 AM.

Posted Image

25

#506 15th Club

15th Club

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,030 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 248249
  • Joined: 04/30/2013
  • Location:Michigan
  • Ebay ID:cdbplc
GolfWRX Likes : 504

Posted 17 May 2018 - 09:22 AM

View PostBrockPSU, on 17 May 2018 - 09:15 AM, said:

View Post15th Club, on 17 May 2018 - 09:08 AM, said:

Quote

YOU DON'T NEED TO LENGTHEN THE COURSES!!!!


But that is exactly what has been happening, with every single major tournament-hosting golf course in the world.  Nobody knows better than the USGA, and the R&A, and they are the people who will make the equipment rules.

Until someone actually destroys a course with distance and not having +10 strokes gained putting, I don't think you need to be lengthening the courses anymore then what they already are. Just because the USGA says so doesn't mean they need to keep lengthening courses doesn't mean that they are right. I would like to see the average of tour players thoughts on lengthening courses if it is actually needed.

Me too.  I'd like to see some honest interviews on that.  But you realize, that with something between 60% and 70% of players on the PGA Tour using Titleist balls, and virtually all of them being paid to do so under a contract, those answers are all going to be suspect.

26

#507 North Butte

North Butte

    Hall of Fame

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,150 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 424472
  • Joined: 05/09/2016
GolfWRX Likes : 5514

Posted 17 May 2018 - 09:22 AM

He says, "These clubs are being FORCED to lengthen their courses by the distance elite players hit the modern ball. Something has to be done so the ball doesn't FORCE them into more and more changes.

Then when it's pointed out that people have been lengthening courses as long as there have been golf courses he says, "Nobody's claiming anyone was FORCED to do anything".

And BTW the University of Michigan's endowment and income makes Donald Trump look like a pauper. Modern mega-universities are the very definition of deep pockets, far beyond any mere bunch of golf-course members.

He is now officially a troll.

Edited by North Butte, 17 May 2018 - 09:24 AM.

Everything has its drawbacks, as the man said when his mother-in-law died, and they came down upon him for the funeral expenses.

27

#508 QuigleyDU

QuigleyDU

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,949 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 62095
  • Joined: 08/01/2008
  • Location:reno nv
  • Ebay ID:reederc2
GolfWRX Likes : 1174

Posted 17 May 2018 - 09:22 AM

View Post15th Club, on 17 May 2018 - 09:08 AM, said:

Quote

YOU DON'T NEED TO LENGTHEN THE COURSES!!!!

But that is exactly what has been happening, with every single major tournament-hosting golf course in the world.  Nobody knows better than the USGA, and the R&A, and they are the people who will make the equipment rules.


that is because the USGA is run by morons that really do not know how to set up a course. They are unimaginative and are prisoners of group think and sheep mentality.

Edited by QuigleyDU, 17 May 2018 - 09:24 AM.

driver: SRIXON Z745
fairway: NIKE VAPOR 13*
3-4 IRON: MIZZY MP H5 GD AMT X100.
5-PW IRONS: MP5 DG AMT X100
WEDGES; CLEVELAND rtx 3.0 RAW
PUTTER; PING SIGMA G SHEA H
BALL; various, ask me that day.

28

#509 15th Club

15th Club

    Major Winner

  • Advanced Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,030 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 248249
  • Joined: 04/30/2013
  • Location:Michigan
  • Ebay ID:cdbplc
GolfWRX Likes : 504

Posted 17 May 2018 - 09:26 AM

View PostNorth Butte, on 17 May 2018 - 09:19 AM, said:

USGA accomplished not a single one of their stated "groove rollback" objectives after wasting many years "studying", then months of implementing with the side effect of tens of millions of dollars being spent to replace perfectly fine equipment. That is a total an abject failure by anybody's reckoning.

But yeah it was a success in that the entire world (inexplicably IMO) didn't tell USGA to go jump in a lake instead of wasting all that money and effort. Eventually they are going to make one two many expensive, transparently idiotic blunders and the golf world will realize it's better off without USGA calling the shots. A ball rollback could easily be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

THE ARGUMENT MADE, WAS THAT THE GROOVE RULE WAS A "FIASCO."  And that is untrue.  It was not a "fiasco."  In no way, was it a "fiasco."  I have already stated; if you disagree with the aims and goals of the groove rule, that is fine.  It is not what I was responding to.  I was responding to the allegation of a "fiasco," replete with completely inaccurate stories about amateur golfers somehow being forced into buying new irons and wedges on short notice.  Which is all untrue.  Not unless you are an amateur who qualified for the US Open in 2010-2013.

29

#510 BrockPSU

BrockPSU

    Rookie

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 61 posts
  •  
  • Member #: 486666
  • Joined: 11/13/2017
  • Location:PA
  • Handicap:1
GolfWRX Likes : 44

Posted 17 May 2018 - 09:27 AM

View Post15th Club, on 17 May 2018 - 09:22 AM, said:

View PostBrockPSU, on 17 May 2018 - 09:15 AM, said:

View Post15th Club, on 17 May 2018 - 09:08 AM, said:

Quote

YOU DON'T NEED TO LENGTHEN THE COURSES!!!!


But that is exactly what has been happening, with every single major tournament-hosting golf course in the world.  Nobody knows better than the USGA, and the R&A, and they are the people who will make the equipment rules.

Until someone actually destroys a course with distance and not having +10 strokes gained putting, I don't think you need to be lengthening the courses anymore then what they already are. Just because the USGA says so doesn't mean they need to keep lengthening courses doesn't mean that they are right. I would like to see the average of tour players thoughts on lengthening courses if it is actually needed.

Me too.  I'd like to see some honest interviews on that.  But you realize, that with something between 60% and 70% of players on the PGA Tour using Titleist balls, and virtually all of them being paid to do so under a contract, those answers are all going to be suspect.

Lol......that's like saying tiger wanting a rollback is suspect also because he signed a contract with Bridgestone. No matter what you will always have more people playing a certain brand. And tbh I don't think its even about money anymore because the people that went with the money well lets just say they have not been winning a lot lately. And everyone knows Titleist doesn't pay as well as the other bigger sharks.

915 D2 AD DI 6x
915 F AD DI 8x
716 T-MB 3 AD DI Hybrid 95x
716 T-MB 4 Project x 6.5
716 CB 5-6 Project x 6.5
716 MB 7-PW Project x 6.5
SM6 46 F Grind Project x 6.0(in rotation)
SM7 50 F Grind, 54 S Grind, 58 L Grind Project x 6.0
Scotty Cameron Tour Rat R&D Proto Concept 1

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



5 user(s) are reading this topic

3 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users


    ThinkingPlus, 15th Club, gvogel

GolfWRX Sponsors