USGA Testing Rolled Back Balls On Canadian Tour's Finest?
Tim Campbell reports that the USGA may be preparing to do some testing with the rolled-back balls submitted for testing by manufacturers in an unofficial Canadian Tour gathering. It'll be a rigorous amount of data to collect, but I'm sure over one round they'll get the answer: everything is A-okay!
Asked about an unofficial upcoming dialed-back ball day, Tour deputy director Dan Halldorson threw up his hand like a stop sign last week during the Players Cup at Pine Ridge. He said he couldn't speak about it.
What we do know is that the Tour, after one of its events next month, is going to have a couple dozen of its players come back on a Monday for some research.
They'll play in what could be termed a one-day tournament. It might be better termed a lab experiment, and they'll all play with the same kind of golf ball -- one of these less-zippy models.
Word is these "prototype" balls will be anywhere from 10 to 20 per cent shorter, with the 20 per cent figure applying only to the hardest-hit and longest shots from the driver.
The group of pros will include Wininpeg's Adam Speirs. They will have just played a 72-hole tournament and will have assembled a good diary of information about distances and clubs hit.
But just one round with the rolled back ball? Really?
Wednesday, July 21, 2010 at 06:31 AM
Reader Comments (23)
Never happy, are ya? You actually expect them to stage what, a four-day event in the middle of the season, or better yet, a summer-long series in which every player participates willingly and for free. Get real.
Think of this As A Start. A small hint that someone besides classic course mavens are concerned about the performance of the modern golf ball. The feedback from the one-day event can then be used to inspire further research as the game slowly moves toward a realistic solution to a ball that is 30 to 60 yards longer than the balatas of only 15 to 20 years ago.
We all know the USGA was simply asleep at the wheel when ball technology started to leap in the late 90's but fearing expensive lawsuits from manufacturers, they chose to do nothing and look what we have today: a tour where accuracy off the tee means little, where golf courses are stretched to the limit and where a once brisk stroll has turned into a cart-driven, never-walk, five-hour ordeal that's driving people from the game and whose expense is preventing all but the well-to-do from entering.
Ain't it time to admit that the "new grooves" were a nice attempt but a complete failure when it came to controlling professional distances? No, few amateurs are mauling golf courses as a result of technolgy, but when the PGA Tour makes even the greatest layouts obsolete, it's high time to do something about THAT. 190-yard NINE IRONS? Just plain silly.
So if the USGA comes back and says we did field testing and we've concluded that the 20% rolled back ball made little difference in how things played out, will I be getting an apology for suggesting one day wasn't enough?
Ear.
jb
This is good news IMHO.
It's also an excuse for journalists to write it up AND pursue reactions from R&A officials to Weiskopf's remarks regarding discussions at the Champions dinner. That's grist for the mill every golf reporter can have fun with -- excuses to talk to a long list of immortals and a short list of empowered mere mortals.
Geoff, agreed more than one day would be better, but I'm not worried that the results of one day will squelch progress toward a rollback and I'm not optimistic that they'll be advanced much either. After all, these players have grown up playing bomb and gouge and may not have much shot-shaping skills to bring to bear. And I don't know anything about the course and whether or not it has the kind of classic design that rewards ball position equal to distance, e.g., a draw landing in a certain spot gives you a long rollout (exciting) and length equal to a ProV1x simply bombed over the rollout to the same spot (boring), or even if the course setup would permit players to reap that kind of reward.
Also, what would constitute success? The spectators finding the round more interesting than the tournament round the day before? The players rating the experience as more fun?
There is a whole set of attitudes behind the push to rollback that go toward qualitative experiences we tend not to push and instead argue about preserving classic courses, reducing land use, time spent, money spent on maintenance, all the quantifiable benefits. While these arguments succeed in degree, the future of golf depends on recovering its true spirit, which has been severely gored by the Bomb and Gouge Era.
That makes a 320 hitter a 256 hitter. That's massive overkill, IMO. That 64 yard difference isn't ALL the ball... What's a long hitter going to carry it? 240? GMAFB.
If they're serious about testing a 20% reduction, they might as well just go to the Cayman ball.
And what happens when the 240 hitter is reduced 10% and now hits it 216? You're taking away an 80 yard difference and reducing it to 40. How fair is that? Does anybody really think that the 320 yard power hitter should lose HALF of his advantage over a 240 yard bunt-hitter?
If they're going to do this (and I hope they do to some extent), the reduction needs to be managed so that all the power hitter is losing (relative to the advantage he has) is the relative benefit he gets from these balls vis-a-vis the wussy-hitters, and NOT taking away an advantage fairly earned.
Gee, Geoff, an apology? What for? After all, the PROOF will be IN ! And we'll all know that the Distance Culprit is the FITNESS TRAILER and the NUTRITIONIST. Uh huh........
I was being somewhat afacetious in my remarks about a summer-long series dedicated exclusively to rolled-back ball testing but if you want something done, don't the ruling bodies have to start somewhere? Certainly, no-one wants to play at 7,200 yards with a ball downgraded 20% so the course setup is certainly going to be a factor. But what if they play at 6,800 yards -- less than a 6% reduction in length. Will the longest drive top out at 280? Will the 175-yard five-iron make a return? Will the best still shoot 65?
Here's the real issue to me. I can't say I've noticed much of a change in my 4-handicap game over the past 20 years. Yes, I've upgraded with clubs and balls over that time, but my scores haven't improved and I'm certainly not banging it on par fives in two where it once required three and very few of the best players I know automatcially march back to the tips at ANY golf course over 7,000 yards. My point is: THIS IS PGA TOUR problem. You and I aren't making courses obsolete: it's touring pro's only. This points to "bifurcation" as the solution.... as in two sets of rules -- one for amateurs and one for pro's. Can't be done? Well, in the case of U-groove wedges, IT ALREADY IS.
Should a "pro tour ball" be available for amateurs? Sure... be my guest but even the purist that I am won't be joining you. Today I'm topping out at say, 275 yards, but if the "new ball" reduces my most mighty blast to 220 yards, I'l be sticking with the 2010 ProV1.
Don't know if it's ever been mentioned but there is a precedent for this in high level sport: the javelin. It got to the stage where the men were chucking it out of the stadium, or at least on to the track where they'd spear the 800m runners. They changed the centre of gravity so that the new javelin had a steeper parabola.
Don't know how that helps. Just drop the ball back around 12% and everyone - pros and amateurs - will be happy, and everyone can play all the world's courses as they were intended.
Cheers.
If you think the only problem is on the Tour, go out sometime and watch a good group of high school golfers. If they aren't near the 300 yard mark with their drives, they know they have no chance of Div. I golf.
So as a result all amateur events need to be played on 7,400 yard courses. Otherwise you see and lot of 3 wood/pitching wedge golf. Not the best way to promote fun or a thorough test of one's skill in the game.
Given the difficulty of the game, does anybody believe that a rollback would increase the already stalled golf business?
After it happens I'll find out how it went and report back...... Nobody in my house will care, I might as well pass along the info here where someone will.........
I was hitting about 230 - 250 before and now am 250 - 280. No question about the difference because of club technology.
Also, fatgoalie makes an excellent point.....most idiots out there, purely for ego and machismo, play from the blue/black because they don't want to seem like wussies out there, but don't have the skill level or the distance to do this.
There should be a HUGE billboard at the first hole of every muni, which all hackers should follow.
And the first rule should be play the whites god dammit!
This would be the fastest, cheapest way to speed up play.