The Time has surely come??

soundsham

Oilbeefhooked! wrote: »

So you don't believe the distance players are now driving the ball, is becoming a problem in modern Golf?

No I don't
How many Golfers drove that green yesterday ?

Conditions dictated that if was on for a super fit long hitter
Not every golfer

If the wind is opposite today the hole will play differently, it may be an iron off the tee

To me it makes golf great
every hole is a different prospect on any given day

I'd hate to see the football in Gaa changed coz some guy can bang over frees from 55m off the ground
Or because a hurler is knocking frees over from 100m+
Change a soccer ball coz Ronaldo and Messi are to good at frees

These are great skills perfected by hours and hours of training

I for one marvel at the guys who can

Neither affect the average players in any code

TheDoc

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Long hitting alone though will not win a club monthly medal, never mind a major championship.

This is so true, and why I'm going for paid lessons for the first time ever, to work on my shortgame. I've got a distinct advantage over the field with my driving, and don't capitalise on it with weak iron play and shortgame.

G1032

shane 007 wrote: »

How far would you take it? Limit the equipment also?
IMO the extra distance is more from the clubs & shafts. Balls will have some effect but more so the equipment.

No. It's the other way around. It's the ball that is the major reason for distance increase in the modern game

I listened to Tony Jacklin talk about this a while ago. Apparently the numbers playing the game in the UK are falling all the time?? In part due to the length of time it takes and in part due to the cost. Both of these can be reduced with a limit on how far the ball can go.....

I've not played golf myself for the last 2 years because of both of the reasons outlined above. If the ball didn't travel as far then courses wouldn't need to be as long, greens wouldn't need to be as big, cost of maintaining the course would be far less and cost of membership/green fee would fall as a result.
It would also take less much time to play a round of golf.

20 years ago I could play a round of golf on most courses around me in Galway/Mayo in a little over 3 hours. Over the last few years it was taking 4 - 4.5 hours per round. All these courses have been lengthened significantly because of the distance the ball is travelling.

Just to finish....... A friend of mine has worked in club design for two major golf companies and left the industry last year. He said he was glad to leave it because 'I got sick of making the same club year after year and putting a different name on it'!! He also said, like Jacklin, that the ball itself if the reason people are hitting it so far nowadays

GreeBo

TheDoc wrote: »

I don't know why people compare the proffesionals and make any comparison to the amateur game.

• Personalised fitting on a weekly basis.
• Custom built shafts. I'm not taking about the run of the mill selection, these guys can get unique custom built shafts, one of a kind.
• Conditioning coaches for physical training and fitness
• Advancements in fitness and conditioning providing more upper body strength.
• one to one coach, working with players every week.
• The time and dedicated to perfect a swing.

A proffesional will always hit a ball bigger then an amateur. It's not "STRICTLY" down to equipment.

If there was restrictions made to decrease distance in the amateur game, it will lead to simply slower golf and higher scoring golf, as players will become more reliant on hitting acurate woods and long irons into greens. Considering a lot of courses here in Ireland use that HORRIBLE upside down cup design for their greens, good luck trying to hit a green in two.

If they want to make changes to the pro tour go ahead, but no need for it on the amateur scene. I'm one of the biggest hitters in my club, and to be fair on a weekly basis most players hit out between 230-250 yards. Why in gods name would you remove more distance from them? The game is more fun and enjoyable when you are able to attack pins and flag, not when your having to hit woods into par 4's praying the ball doesn't run of the back of the green.

It's also worth noting that most amateurs arn't getting the maximum from their own swing and shot. Fades, poor ball flight, bad ball striking etc. It's not there is an epidemic where average players are hitting 350 yard drives.

It sounds like trying to fix a problem that isn't there.

Let the pro tour make changes if they want, there is no need to make changes to the amateur game.

Sure they will always hit it further than we do, but we are also hitting it much further than we ever did before.
The ball goes further, the club hits it further, clubs are individually fitted and yet we are playing courses that havent changed much in 100 years.
Why not just shoot the ball towards the green?
Why did RANDA limit the COR?

You say why remove distance?
I say why allow it in the first place?

If a new ball was 10% shorter than now, then it would actually help the shorter hitters, bringing everyone else back towards them.

Russman

TheDoc wrote: »

I don't think it's overpowering, but I take enjoyment out of using my "scoring irons" and being able to attack pins. Ironically one of the weakest parts of my game, wedge play, is the one I enjoy the most in terms of hitting a golf shot.

I wouldn't say I overpower a course, but in certain conditions sure I'm left with flicks of wedges into greens. But I'm the edge case.

All "big hitters" at club golf, are edge cases. The majority of golfers at club level I'd imagine hit what would be maybe constitued as the average distance.

Just from experience, I'd notice most players in my course on par 4's would take a good drive, and be left anywhere between 150-170 yards to the green. Assuming the drive is good and accurate. The next shot is then most likely a 6iron, 7iron, or possibly a 5 iron or wood/resuce for the shoter hitters.

I think thats a good sweetspot on average for a par 4. A good drive and then you have a 7iron or higher. IT still leaves you some distance, but atleast gives you the opportunity to hit a shot that can hold a green.

So many courses in Ireland have that ****e upturned green structure, where if you don't spin your ball on the surface, it just rolls of on the sides. No idea how we could expect guys hitting 4irons+ and woods to generate any sort of spin to that type of green, or any spin in general tbh. I'd definitly struggle if it came to that, as I don't generate tons of spin on my shots past an 8iron.

Co incidently that you mention overpowering, makes me realise how piss poor my short game is, that I'm frequently left with wedges and maybe 9irons 8irons into par 4's yet amn't taking total advantage.

I don't know specially how golf courses were designed, but I'd imagine a par 4 was built requiring a good drive, then providing you a shot to the green to get a birdie. While I'd agree being left with wedges might not be to the course design and intention, I somehow dont believe players being left with woods, rescues or high irons firing into par4's is intention either .

I wonder would a reduction in the distance the ball travels really impact your average Joe though ? (genuinely).
I'm not convinced most club golfers actually compress the modern ball enough to get the real benefit out of it that the pros get. I half suspect (with no real evidence admittedly) that if a pro loses say 30yds if the ball was changed, a club player might lose 5/10 at most. I could be completely wrong.

FixdePitchmark

Said the same to a lad the other day.

Out of say 36 shots we take to green - how many do amateurs genuinely hit perfect - I said for me it is about 10 to 20 %.

The pros are almost all perfect.

GreeBo

Henry Ford III wrote: »

It's never happened. They need sound iron play, a very decent short and recovery game, and still have to get the ball into the hole.

Rory's massive hit yesterday was truly exceptional, and a firm links and the wind all helped, but he still hit it straight.

Clubs and balls have been limited by rule changes over the years. Better technique, and superior conditioning both allow top pros to bomb it out there.

Long hitting alone though will not win a club monthly medal, never mind a major championship.

A long guy on a good day has to hit good wedges to the green.
A short guy on a good day has to hit good 3 irons to the green.

Who do you want to be?

If the limit the distance the ball can travel, then the long guys will still be long guys and the short guys will still be short guys. It just means the course wont be outdated and not played as it was designed.

Lots of older courses have subtleties that are just ignored today.
5th Hole in Grange, uphill "dogleg" with a tight drive protected on both sides by trees.

Oh, apart from the fact that I can now just drive my ball straight over the trees 50yrds from the green.

TheDoc

Russman wrote: »

I wonder would a reduction in the distance the ball travels really impact your average Joe though ? (genuinely).
I'm not convinced most club golfers actually compress the modern ball enough to get the real benefit out of it that the pros get. I half suspect (with no real evidence admittedly) that if a pro loses say 30yds if the ball was changed, a club player might lose 5/10 at most. I could be completely wrong.

No, as you say, in reality the club golfer doesn't strike the ball in a way that brings the benefit of gaining that extra distance from the ball composition.

But if we are talking about reducing distance, as a flat figure, it will make a distance.

If you take say 20 yards of a club golfer, in a lot of cases in my opinion, you are changing the second shot into a par 4 from being an iron, into maybe a rescue or wood. Now your talking about a totally different type of shot, making the shot expedentionally more difficult. In certain circumstances it's not just a 20 yard difference, being maybe a 6iron instead of a 7, for a lot of players you are taking away an iron and making them hit a wood, which with a lower ball flight and less spin, will make it a whole different situation.

GreeBo

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

Said the same to a lad the other day.

Out of say 36 shots we take to green - how many do amateurs genuinely hit perfect - I said for me it is about 10 to 20 %.

The pros are almost all perfect.

Nicklaus said he hit maybe 3 perfect shots a round.

He also said

TheDoc

GreeBo wrote: »

If a new ball was 10% shorter than now, then it would actually help the shorter hitters, bringing everyone else back towards them.

But that is just a sweeping statements that doesn't reflect the different strengths and weakness players have.

I play a club match in Lucan last year( I think Lucan) and was playing an older man who afterwards I learned used to be a scratch golfer.

Every hole I was about 100 yards ahead of him with my drives, he was taking woods into greens while I was taking irons. That was my advantage. But I didn't capitalise, his shortgame was impervous and he won on the 16th.

The point being that he was strong hitting his woods, and he was precise around the greens. My longer hitting brought me some comfort in terms of hitting my comfort clubs into greens, but as I failed to capitalise on my putts, he never really was in trouble the entire game.

I also don't think it will bring longer hitters back . If I take my Dad as an example, I'm always about 50-60 yrds longer then him. If we do a flat 10% reduction in distance, I'm still 50-60 yards ahead of him. It makes no odds.

The benefit of being a bigger hitter is having more comfort clubs to hit. Wedges, 9 irons, 8 irons. To attack pins and be able to try setup birdes.

The whole point of technology advancement, if we forget the main reason in terms of generating sales and enticing players to upgrade equipment frequently, was to bring the shorter/average distance hitters to the point where they are hitting more comfort clubs.

Again I'd state that I don't think it's as rampant a problem at club level as you might be making out. Being a big hitter doesn't mean I can simply neglect my ironplay and shortgame. I'm not walking out thinking I'm going to walk my way to victory. I know your not saying that and I'm not implying you are, but I'm just not convinced that it's a big deal at our level.

You could argue even on the flipside that shoter hitters have a simpler game, being able to hit full shots, where as longer hitters have to learn to hit 3/4 half shots effectively. Which at our level, the most comfortable shot is a full shot.

GreeBo

TheDoc wrote: »

No, as you say, in reality the club golfer doesn't strike the ball in a way that brings the benefit of gaining that extra distance from the ball composition.

But if we are talking about reducing distance, as a flat figure, it will make a distance.

If you take say 20 yards of a club golfer, in a lot of cases in my opinion, you are changing the second shot into a par 4 from being an iron, into maybe a rescue or wood. Now your talking about a totally different type of shot, making the shot expedentionally more difficult. In certain circumstances it's not just a 20 yard difference, being maybe a 6iron instead of a 7, for a lot of players you are taking away an iron and making them hit a wood, which with a lower ball flight and less spin, will make it a whole different situation.

It wont be a flat figure because distance isnt generated that way, it will be a percentage/ratio compression related I would bet, or possibly dimples.

Russman

TheDoc wrote: »

No, as you say, in reality the club golfer doesn't strike the ball in a way that brings the benefit of gaining that extra distance from the ball composition.

But if we are talking about reducing distance, as a flat figure, it will make a distance.

If you take say 20 yards of a club golfer, in a lot of cases in my opinion, you are changing the second shot into a par 4 from being an iron, into maybe a rescue or wood. Now your talking about a totally different type of shot, making the shot expedentionally more difficult. In certain circumstances it's not just a 20 yard difference, being maybe a 6iron instead of a 7, for a lot of players you are taking away an iron and making them hit a wood, which with a lower ball flight and less spin, will make it a whole different situation.

True enough.
I guess it begs the question, as a result of modern equipment/ball developments etc, are many club golfers playing off the wrong tees ? Could that issue be solved by simply playing more forward tees ? If you're going to dial everything back, it'd be, in theory, the exact same game as now, but just played on a smaller plot of land.....?
I dunno, its a good debate though.

GreeBo

TheDoc wrote: »

But that is just a sweeping statements that doesn't reflect the different strengths and weakness players have.

I play a club match in Lucan last year( I think Lucan) and was playing an older man who afterwards I learned used to be a scratch golfer.

Every hole I was about 100 yards ahead of him with my drives, he was taking woods into greens while I was taking irons. That was my advantage. But I didn't capitalise, his shortgame was impervous and he won on the 16th.

The point being that he was strong hitting his woods, and he was precise around the greens. My longer hitting brought me some comfort in terms of hitting my comfort clubs into greens, but as I failed to capitalise on my putts, he never really was in trouble the entire game.

I also don't think it will bring longer hitters back . If I take my Dad as an example, I'm always about 50-60 yrds longer then him. If we do a flat 10% reduction in distance, I'm still 50-60 yards ahead of him. It makes no odds.

The benefit of being a bigger hitter is having more comfort clubs to hit. Wedges, 9 irons, 8 irons. To attack pins and be able to try setup birdes.

The whole point of technology advancement, if we forget the main reason in terms of generating sales and enticing players to upgrade equipment frequently, was to bring the shorter/average distance hitters to the point where they are hitting more comfort clubs.

Again I'd state that I don't think it's as rampant a problem at club level as you might be making out. Being a big hitter doesn't mean I can simply neglect my ironplay and shortgame. I'm not walking out thinking I'm going to walk my way to victory. I know your not saying that and I'm not implying you are, but I'm just not convinced that it's a big deal at our level.

You could argue even on the flipside that shoter hitters have a simpler game, being able to hit full shots, where as longer hitters have to learn to hit 3/4 half shots effectively. Which at our level, the most comfortable shot is a full shot.

Its a sweeping statement because its the truth!
If everyone was 10% shorter then there is less of a real distance between players shots.
Bringing in other facets of the game blurs the lines. This is purely a thread about distance.

TheDoc

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

Said the same to a lad the other day.

Out of say 36 shots we take to green - how many do amateurs genuinely hit perfect - I said for me it is about 10 to 20 %.

The pros are almost all perfect.

I think golf digest or somthing like that did a brilliant piece last year.

Wedge play has become one of the most critically important parts of a pro's arsenal, and they did analysis against 10 proffesionals and 10 amateurs. As you could imagine, the amateurs were all over the shop and the pros were so precise it was scary.

It's definitly something I've been trying to work on, and alas getting lessons for it as I can't figure it out for myself.

Serious issue with distance control and spin control for me

FixdePitchmark

Interesting stuff.

http://www.nicklaus.com/news/jack-nicklaus-golf-balls-now-available/

I would tend to agree that long courses are a disaster for slow play.

I hit the ball far enough - but prefer a course I am forced to hit irons off the tee and mid irons in.

These championship courses that lads go and join , are a bit daft for the amount of golf I play.

I want 3 hours , no looking for balls.

Yes the odd test with driver, but maybe 4 drives a round max. God - I have changed. But it is more a time issue.

TheDoc

Russman wrote: »

True enough.
I guess it begs the question, as a result of modern equipment/ball developments etc, are many club golfers playing off the wrong tees ? Could that issue be solved by simply playing more forward tees ? If you're going to dial everything back, it'd be, in theory, the exact same game as now, but just played on a smaller plot of land.....?
I dunno, its a good debate though.

I know in my club they removed what used to be forward tees, and our member stakes are now nearly on par with the white stakes. There is only a handful of holes that have a big difference, and even I can only think of our 14th which has maybe 30 yards difference. The rest is between 5-10 yards in difference.

I remember when playing of the whites "used" to be perceived as difficult, have to say doesnt seem that way aymore considering our yellows(members) tees are pretty much the same.

If equipment regulations came in that slashed distance accross the board, I'm sure in our club the tees would move back to where they were circa early 00's.

FixdePitchmark

TheDoc wrote: »

I think golf digest or somthing like that did a brilliant piece last year.

Wedge play has become one of the most critically important parts of a pro's arsenal, and they did analysis against 10 proffesionals and 10 amateurs. As you could imagine, the amateurs were all over the shop and the pros were so precise it was scary.

It's definitly something I've been trying to work on, and alas getting lessons for it as I can't figure it out for myself.

Serious issue with distance control and spin control for me

Join the queue Doc.

Honestly thinking of just leaving myself about 140 out. That is how bad it has gone.

TheDoc

GreeBo wrote: »

Its a sweeping statement because its the truth!
If everyone was 10% shorter then there is less of a real distance between players shots.
Bringing in other facets of the game blurs the lines. This is purely a thread about distance.

I don't understand what you mean.

If we took it as a flat percentage which you are making it out to be ( I see your other post about ratios, but not sure that makes sense to me either)

Player A hits the ball 300 yards
PLayer B hits the ball 280 yards

When you remove the 10% distance it's still roughly the same distance between the two, with player a having circa 20 yards advantage.

I know there is A LOT of mitigating factors, ball strike, flight, all the stuff that determines if a player is actually getting the advantage from the technology, but if we are to keep it simple probably makes sense to talk flat percentages or figures.

Because it's argueable that the distance gain between player a and b, could be solely down to ability, swing and ball striking, and nothing to do with technology.

The problem we run into here is every golfer is different in terms of swing, physical build and all that stuff. Like I know my extra distance comes from the fact I've big shoulders, and hit a draw, and not because I have a great ball strike.

FixdePitchmark

As energy is a squared relationship. A change in velocity of the ball would not bring distance back in a linear way. So using a % is not the right way to look at it.

A change could be made that would bring the higher velocity back more. When all velocity was reduced.

Milkers

Increased driver head size with trampoline faces and lightweight shafts have also contributed heavily I would say.

GreeBo

Milkers wrote: »

Increased driver head size with trampoline faces and lightweight shafts have also contributed heavily I would say.

Its been shown again and again that its the ball.
Current pro can use persimmon clubs and hit it pretty much the same as they do with modern clubs. (The new clubs help greatly with off centre/mis hits though)

Give them an old ball and its a different story.

TheDoc wrote: »

I don't understand what you mean.

If we took it as a flat percentage which you are making it out to be ( I see your other post about ratios, but not sure that makes sense to me either)

Player A hits the ball 300 yards
PLayer B hits the ball 280 yards

When you remove the 10% distance it's still roughly the same distance between the two, with player a having circa 20 yards advantage.

I know there is A LOT of mitigating factors, ball strike, flight, all the stuff that determines if a player is actually getting the advantage from the technology, but if we are to keep it simple probably makes sense to talk flat percentages or figures.

Because it's argueable that the distance gain between player a and b, could be solely down to ability, swing and ball striking, and nothing to do with technology.

The problem we run into here is every golfer is different in terms of swing, physical build and all that stuff. Like I know my extra distance comes from the fact I've big shoulders, and hit a draw, and not because I have a great ball strike.

Taking your argument that its down to individual ability, whats the problem with both players having to use a ball that is, say, 10% shorter than the current ball? All your points still stand, A still hits it further than B, the difference is the actual distance the ball travels.

300 -> 270
250 -> 225
So the difference in ball traveled distance is now 45yards instead of being 50.
Player A still has the same length advantage over player B, it just means the course now has some defence.

TheDoc

Yah I get your point above, I made it in regards to your comment that it brings long hitters back to short ones, but it doesn't really.

Although I get what you mean if your talking about the course itself.

In reality it would probably have **** all impact to me, but I could see it having adverse impacts to shorter hitters having to use clubs like 4irons and woods, when normally they wouldn't.

FixdePitchmark

TheDoc wrote: »

Yah I get your point above, I made it in regards to your comment that it brings long hitters back to short ones, but it doesn't really.

Although I get what you mean if your talking about the course itself.

In reality it would probably have **** all impact to me, but I could see it having adverse impacts to shorter hitters having to use clubs like 4irons and woods, when normally they wouldn't.

It would have a bigger impact on you if velocity was reduced. = 1/2 mv^2

GreeBo

TheDoc wrote: »

Yah I get your point above, I made it in regards to your comment that it brings long hitters back to short ones, but it doesn't really.

Although I get what you mean if your talking about the course itself.

In reality it would probably have **** all impact to me, but I could see it having adverse impacts to shorter hitters having to use clubs like 4irons and woods, when normally they wouldn't.

It does bring them back though, he was 50 yards behind, now he is 45.
If it was a 20% reduction then it would be less again.

Senna

Average drive on the PGA is 288 yards, 10 years ago it was 277, 10 years before that 266 yards (give or take). Anything over 300 is more about conditions than equipment.
There is no problem with the game and Rorys drive is not an example of equipment advances ruining the game.

If we look to retard development based on pro's game, then we should look at some of them hitting a 5 wood to 3ft, that's much more impressive. Maybe we should put wee windmills on the greens and have them putt through them to the hole.

soundsham

Playing driver 4i into the wind today for most guys !!
Enough said for me anyway

Meaning if the ball was altered only the few could get there

Luiten has 211 left playing about 230
Rory on tee in 5 mins

GreeBo

soundsham wrote: »

Playing driver 4i into the wind today for most guys !!
Enough said for me anyway

Meaning if the ball was altered only the few could get there

Luiten has 211 left playing about 230
Rory on tee in 5 mins

I dont see why its "enough said" just becuase its playing longer today?
do you think anyone would have driven it 15 years ago under the same conditions as rory yesterday?


Whats wrong with not being able to reach a par 4 in two if its into the wind....nothing abnormal about that. The abnormal bit is guys driving it over 350 yards...regularly.

soundsham

I don't know if conditions were right 15 years ago maybe John Daly would have drove it
Vijay Freddie Davis Love

There were big hitters in every era

GreeBo

soundsham wrote: »

I don't know if conditions were right 15 years ago maybe John Daly would have drove it
Vijay Freddie Davis Love

There were big hitters in every era

Longest Drives

2014 397 Simpson
2010 424 Stricker
2005 442 DA Points
2001 409 Martin
2000 305 Duval
1995 315 Daly


ProV1 was launched end of season 2000...

Montgolfier

http://www.randa.org/en/RandA/News/News/2013/May/Drive-Distance.aspx

Driving distance has increased 3 yds since 1996