Reduced flight balls closer than we think?

Post Reply
User avatar
jasonfish11
Posts: 2847
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2014 9:27 pm
Location: Virginia Beach
dogs: 2
Contact:

Reduced flight balls closer than we think?

Post by jasonfish11 » Wed Feb 21, 2018 7:05 am

http://golfweek.com/2018/02/20/usga-mik ... golf-ball/

I'm not sure where I stand on this other than it will bring some great shorter courses back into major rotation. Also maybe they will quit building 8,000 yard courses and charging $150/round to play them?
Keep it short stupid.

User avatar
jasonfish11
Posts: 2847
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2014 9:27 pm
Location: Virginia Beach
dogs: 2
Contact:

Re: Reduced flight balls closer than we think?

Post by jasonfish11 » Tue May 15, 2018 4:28 pm

The USGA wants your opinions on distance now...

http://survey.usga.org/s3/DistanceInsights
Keep it short stupid.

User avatar
jasonfish11
Posts: 2847
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2014 9:27 pm
Location: Virginia Beach
dogs: 2
Contact:

Re: Reduced flight balls closer than we think?

Post by jasonfish11 » Tue May 15, 2018 4:29 pm

I was bored and wrote this response...

I have mixed thoughts. When I play golf with other recreational players the thought of "man these guys hit it too far" never crosses my mind. Most of them need to hit it further not shorter. I have worked hard on my game and I'm to a point where I feel distance is fine (average driver is 260 yards on game golf).

On the PGA tour (don't read this as professional golf as the LPGA is fine), distance is causing issues. People see the PGA tour playing courses that are 7800+ yards and they feel a course under 7000 yards isn't a "championship" golf course. This causes course builders to build bigger courses that cost more and wind up charging more to play. Even though the Landford Municiple course has no intent of ever hosting a big tournament. But "we" recreational golfers want to play on a similar course as the pros. So Landford Muni got built at 7500 yards so we will come to it and play like the pros. Then the price to play is $70/round. Which is too steep for Landford Muni, Dan Connor can't pay a $70 round. So he's forced to sit at home and drink beer with Rosanne.
Keep it short stupid.

User avatar
DougE
Posts: 1651
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2014 9:40 pm
Location: Maryland
dogs: 1
Contact:

Re: Reduced flight balls closer than we think?

Post by DougE » Tue May 15, 2018 9:13 pm

I filled out their (USGA) survey and sent them my honest opinion. They aren't going to like it.

User avatar
GBOGEY
Posts: 595
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Reduced flight balls closer than we think?

Post by GBOGEY » Tue May 15, 2018 11:34 pm

I find it interesting that they are so focused on the ball. I think it is because the Pro VI changed the game and there is almost a pre and post Pro VI in tour history. But in the 9 years that I've been playing I think it's more the equipment that has changed than the ball. At the pro level, you have to take into account the physical condition of the pros - they are bigger and more athletic and in some case more freak of nature (think how Justin Thomas and Rory can rotate despite being small). It's not like that is going away.

To me it's all relative. My favorite length for par 72 course is around 6200-6300 yards. I feel like at that length I generally have to hit all the shots but if I'm having a great driving day, I'm hitting lots of wedges. If you reduce my distance by 10%, just hope that will move further in.

User avatar
legitimatebeef
Posts: 5039
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2015 7:34 pm
Location: island off the coast of america
dogs: 1
Contact:

Re: Reduced flight balls closer than we think?

Post by legitimatebeef » Wed May 16, 2018 9:38 am

GBOGEY wrote:
Tue May 15, 2018 11:34 pm
I find it interesting that they are so focused on the ball. I think it is because the Pro VI changed the game and there is almost a pre and post Pro VI in tour history. But in the 9 years that I've been playing I think it's more the equipment that has changed than the ball. At the pro level, you have to take into account the physical condition of the pros - they are bigger and more athletic and in some case more freak of nature (think how Justin Thomas and Rory can rotate despite being small). It's not like that is going away.
People exercise more now but I don't think there's been a real size increase in golf. I think golfers now just swing way harder than they did in the muscleback/persimmon/pre-graphite eras.
Build a bridge and get over it.

User avatar
jasonfish11
Posts: 2847
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2014 9:27 pm
Location: Virginia Beach
dogs: 2
Contact:

Re: Reduced flight balls closer than we think?

Post by jasonfish11 » Wed May 16, 2018 9:44 am

I agree. I'd like to see something that compares club head speed over time.

Even though that isn't something you'd be able to get good historical data on.
Keep it short stupid.

User avatar
GBOGEY
Posts: 595
Joined: Wed Dec 10, 2014 8:22 pm
Contact:

Re: Reduced flight balls closer than we think?

Post by GBOGEY » Wed May 16, 2018 3:00 pm

Agree and disagree - the average tour pro was 6'2" several years ago - I'm sure that's up considerably since 1995. That's one reason that the standard putter length is now 34-35".

But even the smaller guys are swinging harder / generating more club speed. Some of it is training, but some of it has to be natural born physical abilities. That said we could have a whole other forum on what that is doing to the little guys backs. I personally don't think most human bodies, even for supreme athletes, are built to handle that much torque over a long period. I think DJ is about the only one with the physique to handle it, but obviously guys like Jason Day may not be able to do it for 20 years.

User avatar
legitimatebeef
Posts: 5039
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2015 7:34 pm
Location: island off the coast of america
dogs: 1
Contact:

Re: Reduced flight balls closer than we think?

Post by legitimatebeef » Wed May 16, 2018 5:19 pm

I didn't do the survey, but if they want to limit the distance it's ok with me. Anyways the balls we play now are already "reduced-flight", so rhetorically speaking let's be honest here we are talking about simply an increase of an existing regulation/limitation. And if such a limit would result in Joe Blow being pushed off the back tees, then tough titties is what I say.
Build a bridge and get over it.

User avatar
sjduffers
Posts: 750
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 7:11 pm
Location: SF Bay area
Contact:

Re: Reduced flight balls closer than we think?

Post by sjduffers » Wed May 16, 2018 8:25 pm

The problem is that the average man's drive is 205 for amateurs (all ages and handicaps combined), I remember reading somewhere, so if you take 20% off, it would become 164 yards. Forget even playing 6000 yards courses, then! Not to mention that all the hazards, bunkers, etc, that were designed for around 200 yards drives (for amateurs) would become out of place, the greens would look huge (since we'd have to be much closer to even think of hitting them), etc... Even 10% might be too much of a reduction for the amateur game and Joe Blow. The solution is to bifurcate the ball (not the rules, just the ball) for the very elite. These guys are playing a game with which we are not familiar...
I'm gonna go low this time...

User avatar
legitimatebeef
Posts: 5039
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2015 7:34 pm
Location: island off the coast of america
dogs: 1
Contact:

Re: Reduced flight balls closer than we think?

Post by legitimatebeef » Sat May 19, 2018 9:39 am

sjduffers wrote:
Wed May 16, 2018 8:25 pm
The problem is that the average man's drive is 205 for amateurs (all ages and handicaps combined), I remember reading somewhere, so if you take 20% off, it would become 164 yards. Forget even playing 6000 yar
Tough titties. :nope
Build a bridge and get over it.

User avatar
sjduffers
Posts: 750
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2014 7:11 pm
Location: SF Bay area
Contact:

Re: Reduced flight balls closer than we think?

Post by sjduffers » Sat May 19, 2018 2:08 pm

legitimatebeef wrote:
Sat May 19, 2018 9:39 am
sjduffers wrote:
Wed May 16, 2018 8:25 pm
The problem is that the average man's drive is 205 for amateurs (all ages and handicaps combined), I remember reading somewhere, so if you take 20% off, it would become 164 yards. Forget even playing 6000 yar
Tough titties. :nope
I actually read that the average distance in 1996 was 200 yards and 208 in 2016. So not the huge gains that the overlords of the game want us to believe are happening. Of course, all your drives are 270 yards or more, so even with 54 yards less (20%), you'd still be flying over the bunkers set at 200. Right? :rofl

Seriously though, look realistically around you at the average duffer and you'll see that 200 yards is a "decent" drive for most people. There are many, many guys that never come close to that. Not to mention women and kids.
I'm gonna go low this time...

User avatar
jasonfish11
Posts: 2847
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2014 9:27 pm
Location: Virginia Beach
dogs: 2
Contact:

Re: Reduced flight balls closer than we think?

Post by jasonfish11 » Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:14 am

Distance survey 2.0 from the governing bodies. This one is very detailed, and if you write multi-sentence answers like me it might take 15-30 min.

http://redirect.viglink.com/?format=go& ... A%20survey.
Keep it short stupid.

User avatar
jasonfish11
Posts: 2847
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2014 9:27 pm
Location: Virginia Beach
dogs: 2
Contact:

Re: Reduced flight balls closer than we think?

Post by jasonfish11 » Wed Sep 19, 2018 10:39 am

legitimatebeef wrote:
Wed May 16, 2018 9:38 am
GBOGEY wrote:
Tue May 15, 2018 11:34 pm
I find it interesting that they are so focused on the ball. I think it is because the Pro VI changed the game and there is almost a pre and post Pro VI in tour history. But in the 9 years that I've been playing I think it's more the equipment that has changed than the ball. At the pro level, you have to take into account the physical condition of the pros - they are bigger and more athletic and in some case more freak of nature (think how Justin Thomas and Rory can rotate despite being small). It's not like that is going away.
People exercise more now but I don't think there's been a real size increase in golf. I think golfers now just swing way harder than they did in the muscleback/persimmon/pre-graphite eras.

So talking about players being more fit and athletic. Back in the 70's Jack was one of the longest guys on tour, his drives averaged around 270-280.

Just recently DJ hit some drives with Jacks old driver, that carried over 290 yards.

https://golfweek.com/2018/08/29/dustin- ... er-1-iron/
Keep it short stupid.

User avatar
jasonfish11
Posts: 2847
Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2014 9:27 pm
Location: Virginia Beach
dogs: 2
Contact:

Re: Reduced flight balls closer than we think?

Post by jasonfish11 » Thu Sep 20, 2018 9:15 am

So I sent this email to the USGA, I'm sure it will fall on deaf ears.

I thought of a potential solution for the distance golf balls travel. You could set up 3 different classes of golf balls that are all conforming to USGA standards. Then each tournament committee would dictate which golf ball(s) can be used in their competitions. Example you could have a class A ball that is 120% class B at 100% and class C at 80%. The only issue would be how do handicaps work? Well luckily you already have standards for how to adjust slope/rating for distance changes in figure 5-2g of the current rules. So if we assume 50% of shots are from distance that 120% ball probably makes effective course distance 10% shorter (some testing might be warranted as it might be 7% or 15%). So if I were to play a 6500 yard course with a class A ball the handicap system would automatically reduce the rating and slope by 3.0 and 7 respectively based on figure 5-2g 650 yard reduction for men. This would require just 1 extra input when people go to put in their scores in a handicap system (what ball they used). Also if the worry is that the professional ball travels too far, I would guarantee that if the USGA & R&A made the class C ball their ball of use for the US Open and the Open championship all other professional tours would fallow in line (with maybe 1 or 2 exceptions). The ball is so impactful to performance pro's wouldn't want to constantly be changing balls for different tournaments.
Keep it short stupid.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests