Change.org petition to stop the rollback - please sign!

[bekgolf]

2 minutes ago, hammergolf said:

There are two VERY simple solutions to achieve what the usga and R&A want. Just as it is in most sports at the professional and elite amateur level, they use different equipment. It would be very easy for manufacturers to adjust designs to lower cor and adjust grooves in wedges to reduce spin (this has already been done before) The second option is to GROW the rough at tour venues to actually punish bomb and gouge. 
However, it’s only ego and power that stops the governing bodies from making a logical and sound decision. There is absolutely no reason to punish the 99.9% of golfers for what elite amateurs and professionals can do. Decisions like this just reinforce the fact that the usga not only have no concept of what golf is to the mass who love and play this game, but also how their arrogance and ego deter from growing the game.

 

I think that's the bottom line, that the elite who make the rules don't care one iota about the 99.9% who aren't elite golfers. 

 

We should be happy they let us have munis to play on and that we can buy equipment without a note from our pro, lol.

[Pepperturbo]

My wife and I play tennis... Nobody I am acquainted with has had issues with the ball change.  My buddy plays baseball, he's not been affected by the regulations in his sport either.  Also, the age of the participants in each of the aforementioned sports is different from the ages in golf. 

 

It makes sense for them to adjust equipment for both those sports; court and stadium perimeters CAN NOT increase.  However, neither of those sports facilities are comparable to golf courses, which vary greatly in size.  

 

It's my opinion, Golf leadership is assuming problems where they are unlikely to exist in the future.  Forty years ago, golfers had a long ways to go to be physically fit like players today.  As I see fitness, without robotic augmentation, pro golfers are as fit as they can get.  Thus, assuming they will be more fit in thirty years is poor judgment.  Leaving courses as they are, will work perfecting fine in the future.

 

All that needs to happen to reign in long hitters, narrow tournament fairways, lengthen the rough and simply put a stop of improving the golf ball for tournament play.  Leave the progression of technology alone.

 

Technology is the reason so many people have taken up golf, and why someone my age is still hitting the ball respectable distances.

Edited October 18, 2024 by Pepperturbo

[BlkNGld]

IIRC, during the initial comment period, bifurcation was one of the options put forth.   That one got pushback from the ball companies around having two versions of the same ball (or at least for the tour level ones).   Furthermore the PGAs expressed concern being the ones tasked with enforcing the rules and bifurcating would only further complicate it.

 

There's no way the USGA and R&A would have put forth the rollback proposal without high confidence that Augusta National would be in support.   When it became official, ANGC publicly endorsed it.   Tour pros and media opposed to the rollback take shots at the USGA or R&A over this, but they never mention Augusta's role.    I find that interesting, but not surprising.

[RolandofGilead]

On 10/16/2024 at 10:32 PM, Shilgy said:

However…there are a lot of players…such as many here on wrx…that do hit it solidly most often but not at tour speeds.  So please explain to me how this magic ball which hasn’t even been produced as yet will impact a pro 10-15% or more but just a percent or two for a 100 mph swinger.

First, the proposed rollback is about 5% (15 yards on a 320 yard drive). The incorrect 10-15% number is due to fearmongering - don’t let these scare tactics work on you!

 

Second, I am a high speed player and welcome a rollback. My city championship is contested on our three muni courses and they have become much too short to challenge good players. 

On 10/17/2024 at 12:56 PM, bekgolf said:

I want one of the magic balls or I'd like to see the list of current balls that meet the new spec.  Is that too much to ask?

Yes it is - I doubt the manufacturers want this information available to the public. If you think the USGA has a bad relationship with them now, imagine if they went behind their backs to publish this daya

23 hours ago, jwb10 said:

and since I've played since 1975 I can tell you how much better equipment is now than then.

 

On course golf participation in the US was about the same in 2017 as it was in 1990 despite the population growing by 33%. Improving technology has very little to do with golf participation.

23 hours ago, bekgolf said:

 

I think most of the golfing demographic who watch professional golf like it just the way it is. 

This group of people is shrinking every single year. Maybe the product on TV isn’t actually that good!

[Shilgy]

1 hour ago, RolandofGilead said:

First, the proposed rollback is about 5% (15 yards on a 320 yard drive). The incorrect 10-15% number is due to fearmongering - don’t let these scare tactics work on you!

 

Second, I am a high speed player and welcome a rollback. My city championship is contested on our three muni courses and they have become much too short to challenge good players. 

Yes it is - I doubt the manufacturers want this information available to the public. If you think the USGA has a bad relationship with them now, imagine if they went behind their backs to publish this daya

 

On course golf participation in the US was about the same in 2017 as it was in 1990 despite the population growing by 33%. Improving technology has very little to do with golf participation.

This group of people is shrinking every single year. Maybe the product on TV isn’t actually that good!

Cool, how much did you win the city champ by?  Actually, strike that.  You must be the winner at -13….yeah I looked it up.  Doesn’t sound like that much of a pushover. based on three round scores.  I see the senior flight winner was a guy I used to play with here in the Phoenix area.  Good player.

[RolandofGilead]

25 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

Cool, how much did you win the city champ by?

The scores and results have little to do with it. When polled, golfers commonly say that the ideal par four is driver and a mid iron. For good golfers, that literally does not exist on these courses anymore. Affordable public golf that challenges players of all skill levels should be a reality. 

Edited October 18, 2024 by RolandofGilead

[Shilgy]

1 minute ago, RolandofGilead said:

The scores and results have little to do with it. When polled, golfers commonly say that the ideal par four is driver and a mid iron. For good golfers, that literally does not exist on these courses anymore. Affordable public golf that challenges players of all skill levels should be a reality. 

Hmm, to me the score is the challenge.  Based on the scores I see they could have made the course longer and the challenge wouldn’t really have changed.  Same-ish scores would have resulted from hundreds of  yards longer.

 

Or, just go back to the old traditional irons labeling and those 9 irons you’re hitting in become 7 irons and you get the mid iron challenge you asked for.

 

As far as the last bit….”affordable” golf has never been the most challenging golf.

[RolandofGilead]

5 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

Based on the scores I see they could have made the course longer and the challenge wouldn’t really have changed.  Same-ish scores would have resulted from hundreds of  yards longer.

This is completely ignorant of SG and proximity data.

 

I do play old clubs (975D and iron sets with 38* 7i) and it’s still rare to hit more than 9i. 

[Archimedes65]

Everybody keeps quoting the USGA research for the 5-15 yards range, but what about Keegan Bradley’s comments after he actually tested the ball.  He said the distance loss was much more than they’re claiming, which makes sense, because if it’s only 5-15 yards this whole thing is a colossal waste of time.  I’d be willing to wager the ball is actually going to play much shorter than they’re saying on course.

 

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/usga-ra-golf-ball-rollback-players-reaction-tiger-woods-keegan-bradley-rickie-fowler#

Edited October 18, 2024 by Archimedes65

[TNwanabe]

17 hours ago, southpaw72 said:

Equating no one caring what the weekend hack does to not doing anything to control the future of the game is quite a profound stance. 
 

 

Ok

Edited October 19, 2024 by TNwanabe

[TNwanabe]

On 10/17/2024 at 6:23 PM, BigtimeHC said:

Some good banter going. And a lot of good points. Here is my biggest issue with the USGA and a big part of why I’m so ticked with the ball rollback:

 

First, they are doing an awesome job with the teaching and rules series on social media. And they’re doing a good job with their national championships, I particularly am a fan of the adaptive open series and hope they continue expanding it. I am happy for my yearly dues to go toward all of the above.
 

HOWEVER, they’ve spent time, money, and effort on this farce of a distance problem when the single biggest issue in golf at the pro, amateur, and recreational levels is pace of play. Those resources and minds could have been better spent by being pushed toward developing solutions to this problem. Pros are slow, college players are slow, elite Am’s are slow, casual rounds on the weekends are slow at too many courses. But instead of the governing body pouring money into what they do well and then trying to educate this new influx of golfers and create a culture (and expectation) of respectful, fast players, it’s been crickets. And even worse, they come up with some idea of a ball rollback that will cost golfers at all levels distance and potentially slow play down even further. It’s laughable

Post of the month imo

[gentles]

13 hours ago, hammergolf said:

There are two VERY simple solutions to achieve what the usga and R&A want. Just as it is in most sports at the professional and elite amateur level, they use different equipment. It would be very easy for manufacturers to adjust designs to lower cor and adjust grooves in wedges to reduce spin (this has already been done before) The second option is to GROW the rough at tour venues to actually punish bomb and gouge. 
However, it’s only ego and power that stops the governing bodies from making a logical and sound decision. There is absolutely no reason to punish the 99.9% of golfers for what elite amateurs and professionals can do. Decisions like this just reinforce the fact that the usga not only have no concept of what golf is to the mass who love and play this game, but also how their arrogance and ego deter from growing the game.

in my view growing the rough doesn’t deter bomb and gouge, it simply creates even more advantage for longer hitters who can still hold greens with wedges (especially a wedge with a 7 iron shaft in it) 
 

Here’s a thought experiment - No one is going to argue for 80 yard wide fairways, and likewise no one would argue for 10 yard wide fairways. Given that, what is the right fairway width to negate bomb and gouge? 

[caniac6]

Reduce length of driver shafts. Reduce size of driver heads. Go back to wound balls. Those changes will make 7000 yard courses relevant again.

[Shilgy]

36 minutes ago, caniac6 said:

Reduce length of driver shafts. Reduce size of driver heads. Go back to wound balls. Those changes will make 7000 yard courses relevant again.

Go back to wound balls?  If folks complain about what the balls cost today the price of a Titleist Tour Balata or the like would be well over $75 today.

 

15 hours ago, RolandofGilead said:

This is completely ignorant of SG and proximity data.

 

I do play old clubs (975D and iron sets with 38* 7i) and it’s still rare to hit more than 9i. 

SG data is a bit out the window if you “rarely” have more than 9i in and are a 3.3 handicap.

[RolandofGilead]

23 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

SG data is a bit out the window if you “rarely” have more than 9i in and are a 3.3 handicap.

I should have just listed proximity. You don’t think difficulty (or scores, as you said) would be greater if the ball and clubs weren’t as juiced and the courses played a few hundred yards longer? That wild.

Edited October 19, 2024 by RolandofGilead

[hammergolf]

10 hours ago, gentles said:

in my view growing the rough doesn’t deter bomb and gouge, it simply creates even more advantage for longer hitters who can still hold greens with wedges (especially a wedge with a 7 iron shaft in it) 
 

Here’s a thought experiment - No one is going to argue for 80 yard wide fairways, and likewise no one would argue for 10 yard wide fairways. Given that, what is the right fairway width to negate bomb and gouge? 

Between 20 - 30yds depending on the length of the hole. The easiest way to deter bomb and gouge is to reduce cor on ALL woods, )not just drivers) and reduce surface treatments and groove volume on wedges and irons for elite amateur and professional play ONLY.  

[Shilgy]

1 hour ago, RolandofGilead said:

I should have just listed proximity. You don’t think difficulty (or scores, as you said) would be greater if the ball and clubs weren’t as juiced and the courses played a few hundred yards longer? That wild.

If you’re hitting 9i or less and still a 3 you’re either missing greens with said short iron or not hitting it close or your putting is not good.  Play 30 yards longer per hole and you’ll still have the same issues.

 

Nothing wild about it….if you’re hitting 9i or less but can’t score at the “too short for you” distance then the added distance wouldn’t matter much.

[RolandofGilead]

9 minutes ago, Shilgy said:

If you’re hitting 9i or less and still a 3 you’re either missing greens with said short iron or not hitting it close or your putting is not good.  Play 30 yards longer per hole and you’ll still have the same issues.

 

Nothing wild about it….if you’re hitting 9i or less but can’t score at the “too short for you” distance then the added distance wouldn’t matter much.

You’re all over the place, chief. If we stay on topic of approach shots in this competition instead of your breakdown of my personal golf game, rolled back equipment would add a club or two on average per hole. That makes the shots more demanding and further rewards good ball striking, versus the short iron and wedge fest that exists now. Longer courses would do the same, but the city doesn’t have budget or the space for that. It stinks that the ideal par four for most golfers, driver + mid iron, has disappeared in this environment.

[bekgolf]

As I read this I realize that we are in our own bubbles. 

 

The low single or plus who thinks golf is too easy bubble is a very small percentage of the people who will be affected by this rule.  However, that bubble makes a large percentage of wrx membership.

 

One idea would be to play courses that challenge the golfer instead of making golf harder for everyone.  I'd love to see another PGA event at Sahalee, I believe it would be a great challenge for the pros.

[RolandofGilead]

32 minutes ago, bekgolf said:

instead of making golf harder for everyone.

Golfers claim to love the challenge provided by the game. Golf is hard. Why do they get up in arms when talking about it getting a few % more difficult? If golfers are full of crap, at least admit it.

 

I personally don’t believe the amount of added difficulty would make be substantial, and a lot of the bellyaching comes from golfers who are losing speed and are clawing to every last mph they have. It’s a good thing these golfers weren’t at this stage of their golfing life in the era of persimmons, pre-solid core balls, etc. On the other hand, a larger % of people played golf in those eras and did just fine. The OEMs and pro golfers and PGA have scared golfers into compliance. The best solution would be for the governing bodies and OEMs to work together to release some actual data on post-rollback conforming balls, but their relationship seems to be too dysfunctional for that to happen. Alas.

Edited October 19, 2024 by RolandofGilead

[StoutKing]

On 10/16/2024 at 6:23 PM, Nessism said:

 

I have no problem watching a tournament where the winning score is -20.  What's the problem?  

It's amazing that after years and years of talking about this that people still believe this is about score.  This thread should be locked like the other one.  LOL

[Nessism]

3 minutes ago, StoutKing said:

It's amazing that after years and years of talking about this that people still believe this is about score.  This thread should be locked like the other one.  LOL

 

So, you are saying it's not about score?  What's it about then?

[StoutKing]

7 minutes ago, Nessism said:

 

So, you are saying it's not about score?  What's it about then?

With all due respect have a look at the old locked thread.  Everything is in there.  I was in favor of bifurcation because it's needed for elite players, and just not the ball.  The tour nixed that.  This minor rollback is going to happen anyways so there are bigger fish to fry for me.  I lose distance each year and I still enjoy golf.  I'll move up to red tees someday if it means reaching a green in regulation.  This whole thread is pointless because it's happening regardless.

[bekgolf]

12 minutes ago, Nessism said:

 

So, you are saying it's not about score?  What's it about then?

 

It's about current golfers breaking Jack's records except they aren't doing it with persimmon!  I'm mostly kidding.

[Nessism]

Bottom line: the USGA gets it wrong again.  2010 groove rule, and now roll back the ball.  These clowns are HURTING the game, not helping it.  

[Archimedes65]

Just buy a bunch of the old balls and ignore the USGA ruling unless you’re playing in a tournament that requires the nerf.  90% of the golfing public doesn’t even carry a handicap index.  I doubt they care whether the ball they’re playing is USGA compliant.  And of the 10% that do, the vast majority of them don’t regularly play in USGA rule governed tournaments.

[bekgolf]

37 minutes ago, RolandofGilead said:

Golfers claim to love the challenge provided by the game. Golf is hard. Why do they get up in arms when talking about it getting a few % more difficult? If golfers are full of crap, at least admit it.

 

I personally don’t believe the amount of added difficulty would make be substantial, and a lot of the bellyaching comes from golfers who are losing speed and are clawing to every last mph they have. It’s a good thing these golfers weren’t at this stage of their golfing life in the era of persimmons, pre-solid core balls, etc. On the other hand, a larger % of people played golf in those eras and did just fine. The OEMs and pro golfers and PGA have scared golfers into compliance. The best solution would be for the governing bodies and OEMs to work together to release some actual data on post-rollback conforming balls, but their relationship seems to be too dysfunctional for that to happen. Alas.

 

FWIW I'd play in a pasture with a cleek, lofter, niblick and featherie if that was all that was available.  Love the game and always will.  It's too bad I didn't discover it until later in life.

[caniac6]

5 hours ago, Shilgy said:

Go back to wound balls?  If folks complain about what the balls cost today the price of a Titleist Tour Balata or the like would be well over $75 today.

 

SG data is a bit out the window if you “rarely” have more than 9i in and are a 3.3 handicap.

I think I still have a couple sleeves in the garage.

[MickeyTankBank]

I like the arguing about something that's still 5 years away like anyone actually knows how it will effect the average golfer. 

[caniac6]

When you get old, the ball seems to rollback a bit every year.