Who are you rooting for?

[Nitro7]

No doubt Nitro, I just think eventually, maybe, the manufacturers will realize that to keep growing the game there is going to have to be some kind of give and take in regards to the golf ball.

I don't think many players will welcome a golf ball that goes 20% less distance Jared. OEM's marketing
is all about more distance. It will be tough to educate and convince everyone it's the right thing to do
and in their best interest and that it is actually feasible. I think most ams are concerned with realizing
more distance and the OEMs realizing bigger profits. Don't know if I would be happy hitting my driver
40/50 yards shorter.

 

[Dariusz J.]

I don't think many players will welcome a golf ball that goes 20% less distance [...] Don't know if I would be happy hitting my driver 40/50 yards shorter.

Who cares ? Light athletics decidents made all javelin throwers shorter of a similar distance because of much more important reasons than ego of athletes or javelin manufacturers. They surely would have not been happy with it but they had no choice. There are old records and new records and everyone accepts it -- from the very athletes to fans.

You're slowly softening your stance on extremely penal rough being THE litmus test for great ball striking.

Really ? I do not notice it. I always said it must be gradually penal -- the farther from fairway the more penal. It should be very light very close to the fairway since one does not want to penalize anyone for an unlucky bounce. OTOH, whackers who hits 20 (or 15 or 30 -- whatever) meters or more off fairways should be penalized to the bone even to a degree that it is better not to look for the ball and to use provisional one -- as often happens to us, amateurs in case of wild shots.

What I'm more curious about is your designation of a "pampered course" and that you seem to feel most all
courses played on the PGA Tour are of this kind of pampered setup.

A pampered course is a description of a course where bad shots are not penalized enough. Simple as that.

A flier out of rough (that you call as deep) is not enough penalty. If someone is very off the fairway there is no possibility for fliers because noone could be able to hit another shot than a SW heavy chop down to cover 20 meters and be on a fairway with a shortest way if one is lucky enough.

And do not tell me what is rough. I play almost every week with a rough that you have no idea about and prolly is comparable to the massacre, at least.

Cheers

 

[ParHunter]

You're just ignoring the point. He's NBC's lead analyst and he fails to keep current with
swing physics and biomechanics. He bends the truth about the past and makes a fool of
himself by making ridiculously bogus comments about players. Nothing trustworthy about
that behavior.

That Miller really makes stuff up as he goes along! In a video for the Front 9 from the 15th of Jan 'Johnny Miller on Greg Norman's swing' he describes a move Norman did with his lead foot as a 'cricket' move to protect the wickets with his foot/leg. Complete BS!!! Shows that he doesn't understand anything about cricket either as you would get LBW (leg before wicket) if you would shield the wickets from the ball with your feet/legs.

 

[Nitro7]

Who cares ?

At this point in time...everybody.

Really ? I do not notice it. I always said it must be gradually penal -- the farther from fairway the more penal. It should be very light very close to the fairway since one does not want to penalize anyone for an unlucky bounce.

Well, I've noticed by what you said right here!! And I agree with this AND this is exactly what almost every
course setup on tour adheres to. You're other comment about being way off line is unrealistic mainly because
of course layouts. These courses don't have the kind of routing that would allow that kind of rough. The rough
at PGA National this week is plenty penal and most of the players aren't hitting tee shots 30 yards from the
edge of the fairway. The ones that might is probably a small number and those that are most likely aren't in
contention. All these guys hit the ball well, especially the ones playing well and contending. Almost stupid to
have extremely deep rough anywhere on the course, it doesn't serve any real purpose.

A pampered course is a description of a course where bad shots are not penalize enough. Simple as that.

Well, all the courses I mentioned used on the tour will penalize a player if they hit it sideways, unless there
are adjoining fairways. Can't do much about that. So this pampered course thing is basically a non-issue.

And do not tell me what is rough. I play almost every week with a rough that you have no idea about and prolly is comparable to the massacre, at least.

Please! You think you're the only one whose played on a course with deep rough. Get over yourself D.

 

[Dariusz J.]

At this point in time...everybody.

Not me. Thus, not everybody.

Well, I've noticed by what you said right here!! And I agree with this AND this is exactly what almost every
course setup on tour adheres to. You're other comment about being way off line is unrealistic mainly because
of course layouts. These courses don't have the kind of routing that would allow that kind of rough. The rough
at PGA National this week is plenty penal and most of the players aren't hitting tee shots 30 yards from the
edge of the fairway. The ones that might is probably a small number and those that are most likely aren't in
contention. All these guys hit the ball well, especially the ones playing well and contending. Almost stupid to
have extremely deep rough anywhere on the course, it doesn't serve any real purpose.

Well, no. Just no. In all aspects. Let's leave this topic because we will never find a compromise.

Well, all the courses I mentioned used on the tour will penalize a player if they hit it sideways, unless there
are adjoining fairways. Can't do much about that. So this pampered course thing is basically a non-issue.

All depends what penalty is taken into account. I would take only such ones which makes those who hit fairways be in MUCH MORE advantageous position after tee shot than those who are wild off the tee. Surprisingly, the latter can still hit a green with the second -- no chance for that at all if I make a course layout. They could save pars only with great 3rd shot and/or great one putt, provided they are able to return to fairway with one shot after an errant teeshot.
Can you see the difference ?

Please! You think you're the only one whose played on a course with deep rough. Get over yourself D.

No, but I play on such a course very often. Moreover, I doubt you have ever played such rough judging on what you consider penal rough is/looks like.

Cheers

 

[gmbtempe]

It's a little tougher than you think to deal with the golf equipment OEMs. I do think the ball
needs to be dealt with just from a conservation standpoint of land and resources as you say.
But, if you mess with company profits, you'll find yourself in court dealing with a lawsuit.
The cost of that could destroy the USGA's very existence. They have to tread carefully when
changing the way the game is played. Tricky business. Just trying to clarify the definition of
a stroke has wide ranging implications. Keeping everyone happy with the rules and at the
same time preserving the integrity of the game is a thankless job.

Is the golf ball creating a problem with the average player? Professionals make up .001 of golfers, it seems to me the target should be what is best for the .999. I kinda feel the same way about the putter deal, not sure its making a difference to the people who are responsable for the existance of the game.

 

[gmbtempe]

That Miller really makes stuff up as he goes along! In a video for the Front 9 from the 15th of Jan 'Johnny Miller on Greg Norman's swing' he describes a move Norman did with his lead foot as a 'cricket' move to protect the wickets with his foot/leg. Complete BS!!! Shows that he doesn't understand anything about cricket either as you would get LBW (leg before wicket) if you would shield the wickets from the ball with your feet/legs.

Its allright, everyone seems to be doing it, even the physicists. Here is Robert Grober.

 

[Nitro7]

Not me. Thus, not everybody.

BS!! You're not being honest. No way anyone wants to give up 50 yards off the tee.

Let's leave this topic because we will never find a compromise.

I'm not looking for a compromise.

I would take only such ones which makes those who hit fairways be in MUCH MORE advantageous position after tee shot than those who are wild off the tee.

That's pretty much the way it is most times D. Being in the fairway versus way wide is
95% of the time much more advantageous on the vast majority of courses used on tour,
especially the ones I mentioned.

I doubt you have ever played such rough judging on what you consider penal rough is/looks like.
Cheers

Another brazenly poor assumption on your part!!!!

 

[Dariusz J.]

BS!! You're not being honest. No way anyone wants to give up 50 yards off the tee.

I already gave up 20 meters (at least) when I converted into stell shafted shorter heavy driver 3 years ago. Now, If everyone else loses the same as me due to the diminished CoR or different ball -- what should I worry about ? The chances remains still the same. Or maybe not -- the bigger the distance left to the target after the tee shot -- the better for me, since I will increase my advantages.

That's pretty much the way it is most times D. Being in the fairway versus way wide is
95% of the time much more advantageous on the vast majority of courses used on tour,
especially the ones I mentioned.

Well, I rarely can see it. Instead I can see often recovery shots onto the green from a deep black hole.



BTW, have you played on a rough that no matter where you hit it you preferred not to find your first ball ? How many strokes you needed the most to get out of rough ? Answer frankly, D.


Cheers

 

[Nitro7]

Is the golf ball creating a problem with the average player? Professionals make up .001 of golfers, it seems to me the target should be what is best for the .999. I kinda feel the same way about the putter deal, not sure its making a difference to the people who are responsable for the existance of the game.

Well, no, the average hack can use anything they want and I don't think anyone will give a damn.

But, for all the players who play often and compete, starting with those at the public links and
country club level having betting games and then working up the chain of competition to local
competitions, to state and national events, to the high school, college ranks, to all the pros who
are playing around the world at the club pro level, mini tours, developmental tours, etc., etc.

These people are the core of golfers that keep the game going, they buy the most equipment
play the most rounds, join country clubs and take the game seriously. So for them it will make
a difference if the ball's velocity is reduced and the USGA decides a stroke does not include
creating an anchored pendulum.

Isn't the point of what is being contemplated here about what's best for the environment and our
precious resources and what's best for the integrity of the game? Tough issues to consider in a
world where most of the attention has been on how to make the game easier with innovative
technology and rapid improvements of equipment and golf course design that is producing
tougher and longer courses.

 

[Nitro7]

Other than you D, nobody wants to lose yardage if they have a choice. Period.

Well, I rarely can see it. Instead I can see often recovery shots onto the green from a deep black hole.

It's called talent D. The best in the world. They can hit remarkable shots you can't even dream about.

BTW, have you played on a rough that no matter where you hit it you preferred not to find your first ball ? How many strokes you needed the most to get out of rough ? Answer frankly, D.

Your english is pretty hammered here, but, if you mean have I played in rough where it's easy
to lose the ball, then yes I have, many times. The kind of rough where you can take hard swings
and not hardly move the ball a couple of feet. I don't know many players that enjoy that kind of
golf. It really doesn't define the best player and just ends up being a survival test. I'd rather play
where there is a chance for recovery if you can make a great swing and pull off a great shot.

 

[Dariusz J.]

Other than you D, nobody wants to lose yardage if they have a choice. Period.

I understand. But I said, there should be NO CHOICE. There is a must to do it and if someone does not like it, he can abandon golf and start throw darts.

It's called talent D. The best in the world. They can hit remarkable shots you can't even dream about.

You're naive. I am talking about rough similar to that where even Hogan needed 3 strokes to go out onto the fairway. No talent is big enough to overcome such unfavourable circumstances.

Your english is pretty hammered here, but, if you mean have I played in rough where it's easy
to lose the ball, then yes I have, many times. The kind of rough where you can take hard swings
and not hardly move the ball a couple of feet. I don't know many players that enjoy that kind of
golf. It really doesn't define the best player and just ends up being a survival test. I'd rather play
where there is a chance for recovery if you can make a great swing and pull off a great shot.

It is not a matter of enjoyment or not. Learn to hit fairways, therefore, you will not "not enjoy" being in the ass. Simple as that.

Cheers

 

[Nitro7]

I said, there should be NO CHOICE. There is a must to do it and if someone does not like it, he can abandon golf and start throw darts.

Unfortunately there is a choice and that choice is plainly clear, ams like to hit the ball
as far as they can and none of them want to abandon golf to go throw darts. You take
that kind of a hard line and it will blow up in your face. It just won't work out right.

You're naive.

Wrong again. Hogan just wasn't big or strong enough to get out of that rough in one shot.
I've seen both Nicklaus and Tiger pull it off. Tiger actually got the ball close to the hole!!

It is not a matter of enjoyment or not. Learn to hit fairways, therefore, you will not "not enjoy" being in the ass. Simple as that.

Talk about naive and pie in the sky thinking. EVERYBODY misses fairways so there is no scenario where
players play course setups with unplayable rough and totally avoid it. You're a pathetic dreamer D.

 

[Dariusz J.]

Unfortunately there is a choice and that choice is plainly clear, ams like to hit the ball
as far as they can and none of them want to abandon golf to go throw darts. You take
that kind of a hard line and it will blow up in your face. It just won't work out right.

You misunderstood me. I talk about USGA/R&A imposing a change -- similar to what happened with javelin throw. Noone will have anything to say. It will just be announced and implemented some year on 1st January. No more lengthening and destroying courses.

Wrong again. Hogan just wasn't big or strong enough to get out of that rough in one shot.
I've seen both Nicklaus and Tiger pull it off. Tiger actually got the ball close to the hole!!

From such rough ?

Ben Hogan | www.palmbeachpost.com

Talk about naive and pie in the sky thinking. EVERYBODY misses fairways so there is no scenario where
players play course setups with unplayable rough and totally avoid it. You're a pathetic dreamer D.

But these are "the best in the world. They can hit remarkable shots you can't even dream about." as you said. So, such marvellous golf gods cannot sometimes hit more than 50% of fairways and sometimes a bit over 50% ? And we're not talking on an occasional shank, but about a routine for many of them. You contradict yourself totally.
Everybody misses fairways so everybody must be punished according to how big miss it is. Simple.

Cheers

 

[gmbtempe]

These people are the core of golfers that keep the game going


Isn't the point of what is being contemplated here about what's best for the environment and our
precious resources and what's best for the integrity of the game? .

I think the people that keep the game going are the 20+ handicap hacks you mention. Most of the club pros I know get free equiptment and free golf, in fact I think the desparity between your position and mine is the size of the grand canyon.

Why does every course have to be built to 7500 yards when 6500 is fine? I think course design has taken a complete back arsewards approach and does little to further the game, guys like Pete Dye and Jack Nicklaus have not been good for the game when it comes to their ultra high maintinence and rediculously difficult designs.

 

[Lifter]

guys like Pete Dye and Jack Nicklaus have not been good for the game when it comes to their ultra high maintinence and rediculously difficult designs.

I REALLY agree with the point about high-maintenance. How can we get rid of the perception that natural, burned-out brown is terrible and super-spongy green is awesome? I love burned-out brown!

 

[Nitro7]

I think the people that keep the game going are the 20+ handicap hacks you mention. Most of the club pros I know get free equiptment and free golf, in fact I think the desparity between your position and mine is the size of the grand canyon.

If you do some research I think you'll be surprised. Can't recall the exact numbers but the percentage
of golfers in the United States that are considered players who play often and take the game seriously
despite whatever their handicap is, is around 17%. Pretty sure the vast majority of golfers don't play
very often and don't regularly buy equipment. I'll have to dig up the NGF data numbers I have around
here somewhere.

Trust me, the majority of club pros get a discount on equipment (PUD) but not free. They deserve the
discounts and free golf, if and when they actually get a chance to play, because they work their butts
off promoting the game by giving lessons and servicing the golfing public. Been there done that.

Why does every course have to be built to 7500 yards when 6500 is fine? I think course design has taken a complete back arsewards approach and does little to further the game, guys like Pete Dye and Jack Nicklaus have not been good for the game when it comes to their ultra high maintinence and rediculously difficult designs.

Course designers like Dye and Nicklaus are hired contractors. They are being paid to build
golf courses based on what the client wants. If you're going to assign blame direct it towards
the people financing these courses who demand that they be of championship caliber. I find it
pretty amazing how much money people are willing to pay to play these courses and/or what
they are willing to pay to join the private ones. Doesn't seem to be a shortage of money with
these people. Fortunately there are still some very good courses around the country that can
be played for 50 bucks or less, especially if you're willing to play after 2pm.

 

[Jared Willerson]

. Fortunately there are still some very good courses around the country that can
be played for 50 bucks or less, especially if you're willing to play after 2pm.

The leaders tee off in the afternoon anyway.

Good points.

 

[Nitro7]

From such rough ?

That's some nasty rough isn't it!!

Tiger hit a shot at Firestone on 18 from a lie in the left trees in an area where the rough
hadn't been cut for over a week. It was close to that pic. It was so bad after they finally
found it and Stevie put the bad down and they sized up the shot, when they came back
they couldn't find it again. Tiger took a might slash at it like only he can do and not only
did he dig it out, but it threaded it's way through the trees and ended up on the green
within birdied range. Don't recall exactly but about 15/20 feet. The swath of grass he
took from the shot was huge.

Nicklaus has hit many shots from severe rough onto the green. I recall one shot in the
Open at Oakmont where he could barely find it or see it and he dug it out onto the green.
There were others too, a couple in the British Open back in the '70s from long nasty rough.

Everybody misses fairways so everybody must be punished according to how big miss it is. Simple.

Exactly, not only Hogan and past great ball strikers but players of today also. You're a rough freak,
I get it! There's an open field close to where I live, if you get to the States I'll take you there and
you can show me your prowess hitting shots from it. It's at least mid-thigh high and pretty thick.

 

[Nitro7]

The leaders tee off in the afternoon anyway.

That's exactly how we like to think about our late afternoon rounds Jared!!

We especially enjoy being on the golf course late in the day when it's nice
and warm, clear sky, slight breeze in the MIDDLE OF FEBRUARY!!