Slower, Lower, Weaker
by TwoNuse on Apr 20, 2011 6:40 PM EDT
Email
Print"Faster, Higher, Stronger" is the current official Olympic motto (as opposed to the unofficial "How much will you give me for my vote" the IOC has taken to heart). The obvious idea behind the motto is the athletic goal of constantly getting better at your pursuit. How ridiculous would it be if the powers that be determined no track star who can run an under four minute mile or no basketball player over seven feet in height should participate because of the unfair advantage it would provide against other participants or the history of the game. You can probably figure out where this is going. More prevalent than any other hot button topic in the world of golf (more than even whether Tiger Woods should be boiled in pitch or merely tarred and feathered) is the distance issue.
The catalyst of this donation to the debate is a post on Geoff Shackleford's website. Shackleford falls squarely in the ‘golf ball goes too far' camp; which came up regarding the Italian phenom Matteo Manassero:
There's been quite a bit of chatter about Matteo Manassero's second pre-18th birthday win and most of it focuses on his lack of length off the tee. Naturally, I could use this opportunity to rant about how the game has become so power-lopsided that it's sad the game could potentially discriminate against a skilled but distance-deficient player from winning majors...
Putting aside for a moment that a 17 year old young man is not physically mature and further length will almost certainly follow any natural growth to come, the idea that distance deficient players are being discriminated against is so against all that is sports it is galling.
Sports aren't fair. People are born taller, faster, stronger, with better eye-hand coordination etcetera. But if everyone gets to play on the same field with the same rules, no one is discriminated against. And, unless Manassero is being forced to play on a different course with different clubs than say J.B. Holmes, he is being given every sporting opportunity. Is it fair Holmes hits it a mile farther than Manassero? No, but no less fair than if Manassero can hit his irons more precisely than Holmes. Or putt better.
Ah, the anti-length brigade will say, Holmes gets to hit his approach shot from 120 yards while Manassero has to hit his from 175. Absolutely; Holmes is using one of his skills (length off the tee) to his advantage. Length (properly utilized; just ask your playing partner who put in the woods again) is a skill that should not be shunned in comparison to what the anti-length brigade would call shot making. Look at Geoff's quote again; he doesn't consider power a skill. It is as if Shackelford believes the only reason Robert Garrigus is hitting 350 yard drives is due to technology that Brian Gay doesn't have access to.
I don't particularly care if governing bodies put restrictions on how far the ball flies (I think the gentlemen that run a certain Spring tournament in Georgia will be the first to designate a one ball rule, followed by a mad rush by weekend duffers to their local retailer to buy the Masters' ball). There are rules over driver size, spring effect and grooves an it hasn't caused a golfing apocalypse. But the constant howling over how the long ball will destroy all we hold dear in golf speaks less to what is actually happening in golf and more to the anti-length brigade's discomfort with progress. Which will do golf more damage than anyone reaching a par-5 green in two.
FanPosts are written by Waggle Room members. Viewpoints expressed do not necessarily reflect those of WaggleRoom.com, editor, Charles Boyer or any other writer or member.
55 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Two..You pose some good and serious points here...Let's
consider the Olympics for just a moment….I think if fair to say, that those playing Golf in the Olympics will be Professionals, not amatuers…I stopped watching Olympic basket ball for that reason….The SPIRIT if you will of the Olympics has been thrown under the bus in persuit of the almighty dollar…(see profit here)
Do you suppose there will be “one ball” for everyone in the Olympics ?…or will everyone be required to compete with the same clubs?….That would be the only way the playing field of which you speak would be “level”. After that, it would be to the players skill.
I don’t have a ready answer, but Tecknology is starting to ruin our sport (game)…It has to end somewhere…Both ball and clubs need to be re-addressed…If this happened, I wonder how many equipment manufactures would stay in business….Hell, it’s always about profits….That’s why they have to keep churiing out different, but same stuff year after year…Us great unwashed look in the Pro’s bag, see what they are playing, and can’t wait to get to an off site Pro Shop to plunk down out loot for the latest and greatest…Now it’s Black vs white paint…What a joke…..STUB
STUB
How is technology ruining the game? Rounds aren’t down becasue Bubba Watson can go driver/7-iron on a 525 yard par 5. Professional golf (and that is what people are talking about) may be different than it was 20 years ago, but what sport isn’t?
Oh, no argument on the difference in our sport....But....without that technology,
Bubba or Dustan or JB or any other of the bombers wouldn’t be able to do that….I defy them to hit an old Persimmon wood and the wound ball that far…It’;s been technology plain and simple…No, it hasn’t made much difference for the hackers, but that’s because they don’t know how to maxamize it anyway….So, IMHO…Technology has definitely made the most impact…..STUB
STUB
The rules of basketball are the same
but the advent of high school players, and an increased number of players from outside the US has changed the game.
What about the lengthening of courses
as a result of that same technology? Every course built these days, have a set of tees that measure 7200 yards at least. The game has become slower due to people playing tees that are beyond their ability, to mention just one instance.
People playing tees beyond their ability has nothing to do with lengthening courses (except that there are more tees for the weekend golfer to delude him or herself on). Overestimating ability happens in all walks of life; even those without titanium and four layer balls.
As for your first point, most course lengthening is based out of the ego of the course owner and not of necessity. Every player is playing the same course, regardless if it is 6800 or 7200 yards. Pinch the fairways in past 300 yards and let the rough grow if it is so important to ‘defend the course’ when the big boys show up and mow it down for the remainder of the season.
A never ending debate.......
I agree that courses can be ‘beefed up’ for the pros,which would be a better way to go that constantly adding yards.Two is spot on-narrow the fairways,grow the rough.and have fast greens.Make them use their skill to get around.As for length off the tee,you’ll always have bombers.Do they have an advantage?-yes,but do they win all the time-no.What enabled Tiger to win so often had more to do with his short game skills than length off the tee.When Nick Faldo won all his majors he wasnt one of the longest hitters on tour.Matteo is a young kid and as he grows he will gain those yards anyway.
The powers that be will however do something to change things and the favourite seems to involve changes to the ball.I remember Arnold Palmer and Jack Nicklaus both being in favour of this.Jose-Maria Olazabal had a novel way of looking at the problem-He once suggested just lowering the number of clubs that could go in the bag-now that would be interesting!!!!
Two problems as I see it with the length issue
1. Courses have been and are being built to the 7000 yard plus specs. The horse has already bolted on that one.
2. The old courses that haven’t got any wriggle room to make what they already have any longer, so they become obsolete.
No matter how much people should use their brains and play the length and tees that is appropriate to their ability – most won’t. With that come the 5 hour plus rounds. We should be figuring out how to make the game quicker not slower and having longer and longer courses is not the way to do that. That is what the ball has done to course architecture and will continue to do so. Then you have the economics of maintaining longer and longer courses….
Pinching the fairways in and letting the rough grow hasn’t worked so far and can’t imagine what will change to make it happen. The wedge grove rule sure didn’t.
I understand Chip,so whats the answer?
Changing the ball is the favourite one and I guess they will do it.As for the average golfer playing off tees that dont suit their length-I dont get it-who in their right mind can enjoy a round of golf if their struggling to hack it around taking loads of strokes,.that is purgatory not enjoyment.,.What about Olazabals suggestion? As a pro do you see any merits? I usually play with 3 friends and all of us bar 1 have 8-9 clubs in the bag to play a round-the other one always takes 14.Hes an 18 handicapper and we find that because he has so many clubs hes constantly in a dither about which one to use.We rib him about it but he carries on in his own sweet way analizing every shot.
Guess what? when hes not with us and were joined by someone else who carries less clubs we get around the course almost an hour quicker.
by scrumsndswings on Apr 21, 2011 10:17 AM EDT up reply actions
Scrums
Put the spin back on the ball is my solution for the pros at least.
When they changed the wedges, what happened? Nothing – if anything it made it easier because they knew what the ball was going to do. When it was spinning, it was a bit of a lottery as to whether it would or wouldn’t and then there were plenty of times when you got too much. Now it just stops, that’s making it easier for the big boys.
If you made a ball that went just as far, but was spinning more, that means sidespin too, not just backspin. The problem with the ball as I see it, is that it goes too straight and that’s what lets the not so great ball strikers stay with the greats. Put the spin back and you bring back the shotmakers. If the ball goes thirty yards left when you hit it out of the toe, instead of 5, distance will no longer be the premium it is now.
by chip n'putt on Apr 21, 2011 10:35 AM EDT up reply actions
Ok the balls the answer and most pros seem to agree.........
so I guess it will happen sooner or later.Anyway enjoy playing in the US-great courses-and play off the right tees :0)
Youre gonna miss your babies……..Yani been acccepted yet!!
by scrumsndswings on Apr 21, 2011 11:02 AM EDT up reply actions
Thanks Scrum
I will and I will and no, she hasn’t. Jazz is being a right royal princess, bugger….
by chip n'putt on Apr 21, 2011 11:11 AM EDT up reply actions
Most normal tour events
cater for the bomber off the tee. They think it sells better, seeing 340 yards drives. TV demands it to some extent.
I wouldn’t ‘blame’ TV. People like seeing the ball go a long way, whether it is baseball, football or golf. John Daly became a folk hero because of the way he bashes the ball before anything else; that had nothing to do with TV. It is the same reason there are more professional long drive events than professional closest to the pin events.
I like seeing good golf.
but on a course where it’s easy to bomb it and wedge to the green is boring. A 300 yard drive is nothing new nowadays, yet commentators go nuts over a 330 yarder that was downhill anyway.
Old courses are not obsolete
Yes, bombers can fly their balls past strategic danger that wasn’t possible 25 years ago. But it seems to me (and I am in no way a architect) said strategic dangers can be moved as easy as finding another 50 yards. Golf has panicked by assuming the only defense against distance is more distance.
Also, these ‘obsolete’ courses continue to take the average golfer’s lunch the other 35 weeks they are in use. So we are going to change everything for the one week Stuart Appleby shoots a 59?
They are getting that way Two
St Andrews if the wind doesn’t blow would be one glaring example. They changed the road hole by lengthening it by 50 yards to try and make it play the way it used to. Look at Augusta as another. It is nothing like the course it was even 20 years ago. The courses that can’t be lengthened because of space constraints, can’t and won’t be considered for tournament play.
Yet, the average handicap worldwide hasn’t come down one little bit. The average time it takes to play, unfortunately has gone the other way.
How many golf courses in the US have or are in the process of folding and why? One of the major reasons is because the owner wanted to build a 7000 plus yard monstrosity that has no playability for the average Joe, but might one day hold a Tour event.
First of all, when doesn’t the wind blow at St. Andrews?
More seriously, St. Andrews’ worth as a course is not directly connected to how many strokes under par Louis Oosthuizen ends up on a given week. Same with Augusta. Or Oakmont, or Pinehurst. Irrelevant of how the best golfers in the world carve up a course, those iconic courses will be on the wish lists of golfers until the sun’s flames engulf the earth.
Once again I insist course designers and architects panicked when distance increased and looked for every nook, cranny and unused parking lot to extend their holes. And it actually detered any decision on ball specs; kicking the can down the road 50 yards at a time.
As for folding golf courses in the US, it is more likely a glut of courses built as the centerpiece of ousing developments and highly leveraged business plans that popped when the economic downturn hit have more effect than the playability of a 7200 monstrosity. Not to mention the average Joe is playing less becasue his $ are going to pay for gas than frustration over a 488 par 4.
Royal St Georges will play over 100 yards longer this year..............
and be cut to a par 70 for the Open.
When Ben Curtis won there in 2003 it was 7106 yards.This year 7211 yards.Theyve lengthened the 3rd,7th,9th and 15th and the 4th hole is going to play as a par 4 instead of a par 5.
by scrumsndswings on Apr 22, 2011 4:40 AM EDT up reply actions
Interestingly enough,
I played Royal St Georges last year and the 4th was a par 4, as it was back in ‘93. I don’t recall it being a par 5 in ‘03, but it was always a par 4 in the old days. You needed a 240 carry if you took on the huge bunker, which leaves you a good shot to the elevated green. Play safe left, and you have to draw one in. Great par 4, easy par 5 for any one who can hit the ball 200 yards. As always, the test will be if it has rained, as in ’93 prior to the tournament, scores would be lower or if it is baking hot, firm fairways and windy, it’ll be high. Great course, IMO
I read it on one of the websites Eas.maybe I need glasses :0).......
Are you thinking of going to watch the action?
by scrumsndswings on Apr 22, 2011 9:34 AM EDT up reply actions
Next year mate
Been a bad year, but it’s closer to home next year, Royal Lytham and St Annes. I’ll be going there, might even see a few of you, some come over from the States as well.
I played there...Wind was up 20 MPH....I never hit so
many fades,, draws and punch shots in my kife….Easy, I was so tired when I finished, I could hardly lift the pints….hahahaha……Was a guest of the Pro employed by that Major Dept Store, that over charges by 200 % for everything….My wife used to run in the door with her battle cry “CHARGE IT” couple of times, when the bill came, I thought I had bought the damm store…..STUB
STUB
Don't remember the year anymore, but it
was in the 70’s…..Come to think of it, I think I shot in the 70’s too….STUB
STUB
I think that the point of the balls being regulated is a step
alibet a small one in the right direction….I asked Two if the Olympics were going to require 1 ball….I was serious, but that will never happen…Too many different companies making them, and special balls for each player on staff….No player out there today plays with the same ball…Same as their equipment….All tweaked to each individual.
Putting spin back on the ball will definitely have an effect….However, and as we all know, the big deal with the groves, was a joke…A political move between Mfgr’s and the Tour bosses…
There is another side of this coin…Does that make 3 ? oh well….There have been several polls conducted on this issue, but one I found particularly interesting, was done at the Club Level, under the PGA label….They polled the memberships and asked what was the most important aspect of equipment to them….Interestingly, only 2% said they wanted better fitting equipment for their games…..Overwelmingly, 90 some percent, men and women said….THEY WANTED TO HIT IT LONGER….
The manufacturers of equipment-balls, etc…are geared to the PUBLIC HACKERS….They use the Pro’s as advertising media to sell the products….IF MY FAVORITE PRO PLAYS GOT ROCK SPECIALS, WELL BY DAMM I GOTTA TO….
Until this stops being a trimming on the cake issue by ALL GOVERNING BODIES not a damm thing will get done…But it does make for good conversation….STUB
STUB
What would you call a hacker ?
No players I know and play with buy new pro v 1’s. 55 dollars a dozen here, that is too much. We find a few mind you. And some pl;ay off 7. So what would you call a hacker stub ? Those who can’t break 100 ? none of them buy top equipment.
I am a big, shining rebut to that statement
I don’t break 100 regularly, but I have Cleveland wedges, a Taylor Made driver and the top of the line balls. I get seduced by the marketing and spend my discretionary income on new equipment. In fact, the manufacturers depend on suckers like me that believe I could play better with ths new thing.
Ok, some do.
I wouldn’t call you a sucker, but I would advise lessons before you buy the top stuff, unless you have a lot of money. No one I know here in the UK started out with 1000 dollars of equipment unless they were well off.
I call myself a sucker, don't worry about it
Intellectually, I know my scores aren’t going to be much different using the R11 driver than using the R7. But, not unlike a lot of golfers, I’m seduced by the marketing.
And I have taken lessons, and I didn’t drop a bunch of $ on equipment when I started out. But now than I know golf will be a part of my life for as long as I am able, that is where my $ is going.
Easy, I used the term "hacker" as a generality...Sorry
I look at the people who can play in the 80’s and 90’s, which according to MOST SURVEY’s is where the general golfing population plays….These are also the one’s who run out and buy the latest and greatest….Never mind taking lessons etc, to improve the game….
Here in the States, and I don’t know what the price is, 90 % of the groups I mentioned above, play the prov’s…men and women….It’s the number 1 selling ball in the states….Head and shoulders above whatever is in second place…
I think there is a huge difference between golfers in the UK and the States….It’s estimated that here, most…now mind you I said most…golfers change equipment every 3-4 years…And yes, they buy top of the line stuff and pay top dollar….I personally know of a couple of guys who change yearly, at around 800.00 a set….One of these clowns has more Golf bags in his garage than Golf Galaxy…New bag every year…At least 300.00 each…
People are always going to believe the advertising…It sells cars, clothes, and everything in between…Golfers are no exception….All seduced by the sirons sweet song of “better”.
The manufacturers have to keep churning out the same-different stuff year after year to keep the factories open….You can only invent the wheel so many ways….They advance the technology a bit each time, and today, Taylor Made tells you they can adjust your driver, so you don’t even have to swing it, and it will move the ball 300 plus yards…Ain’t that something…we can sit in the clubhouse, drinking pints, all the while watching our clubs hit the ball, go find it and hit it again….BOY, I LOVE PROGRESS….
Even the “kids” today play with top of the line equipment….Go to the colleges here and check it out….Years ago, Karstin Solheim, was trying to get his foot in the door with his PINGS…Smart man he….He DONATED ping equipment to all the major golfing schools free of charge….That’s how Ping got it’s start….the start of investment cast vs forged…The metal wood, vs good persimmon….TECHNOLOGY…look around you and see how your whole life has been affected by it…some good and some ?…..STUB
STUB
Agree with all that Stub.
there was a survey once that 80% of golfers all over the world, never break 90. I’d say on the Pro v ball thing, most UK players in clubs wouldn’t buy new Pro v’s…but i do find a few so someone is !
It must be some stupid Yanks that are coming
over there and playing….I haven’t lost a ball in years….I start each round with a new sleeve of 3…rotate balls each hole..that makes each ball play 6 holes…When Done, I give them to a friend for his Shag Bag… By the way…Drink lots of Pints, so you put on a few more lbs. of MUSCLE for that August match….That way, you won’t have to swing as much as force the ball around the course….stay thirsty my frsiend….Scrums, buy the gentleman another pint…..STUB
STUB
Average golfers go for length,thats a given.......
I like Callaway Warbird balls,but I accept that its probably all in the mind.We have lots of trees on my home course and when I have to looking for my ball (not easy coz its thick stuff and you might see Hansel and Gretel on your way) I usually come across at least a couple of other ‘lost’ balls.Like Eas said not many Pro V’s.Most popular is Maxfli…………..maybe us Brits are just ‘cheap’ or we dont give a damn about advertising.:o).
But a changes in the ball has to come……..but just for the pros not the rest of us.I hope!!
by scrumsndswings on Apr 21, 2011 2:48 PM EDT up reply actions
My gawd Scrums...gasp, gasp...they
still making Maxfli’s ?..I thought that was a relic of the past…Or, is it just that you have be hording them for several years….STUB
STUB
Someone gave me...
A dozen of the New Maxfi’s to try out and I hate to admit it, but I really liked they way they bounced off of the face of the club and very controllable. No complaints here from a 40 year user of Titlest
"pain is only weakness leaving the body" jumpn
Wendy...what balls do you find whilst
in the woods and dales…..STUB
STUB
A quick look in my bag
shows a selection of Titleist, TopFlite, Dunlop & Ultra. I hope it’s clearly understood that these finds are whilst I am looking for playing partners errant drives?
I would bet the Olympics will go with a one ball rule
I’m sure the R&A and USGA are terrified of the lawsuit Titleist would reign on their respective heads if they instituted a one ball rule; or at least the advertising $ they would lose. They would love to hide behind the IOC to see what the world would look like with a official ball. Heck, the IOC would probably hire Titleist to make the ball to shut them up.
A deal with Titleist? Now thats a real possibility.:0) Is Maxfli that out of date?
by scrumsndswings on Apr 21, 2011 5:20 PM EDT up reply actions
Scrums, it's so out of date, I don't even remember if
that’s how to spell it….j/k…..I can’t remember the last time I saw a Maxflui….really….There won’t be a deal with Titleist or any other company…Two was jerking our chains….He was right about the lawsuits….If I had a sponsor who made ball X, and you had a sponsor that made ball Y and now they said we had to play ball Z….My Suits woulf be waiting for the court house doors to get unlocked to file the law suits..
Just a question here.,…Doesn’t Tennis have just one ball?…I’m serious….If so, how do they get away with that….I know there are lots of different rackets, but what about the balls….STUB
STUB
Stub it's pretty obvious that I'm no expert on balls............
I like Callaways but I’m not too proud to use balls that I find in good nick-maybe Maxfli make their money from the more economically astute Brits-I also come across plenty of Top-Flite,Ram and Dunlop…………dont tell me…………way out of vouge.;0)
As for tennis balls……………where’s Court.????
by scrumsndswings on Apr 21, 2011 6:14 PM EDT up reply actions
Someone would have to make the Olympic ball. Why not the company who leads golf ball sales?
It wouldn’t be a Titleist ball; it would be an Olympic ball. There would be no manufacturer markings; The building of the ball would be outsourced to Titleist (or any manufacturer that gets the contract). And since the IOC isn’t in the pocket of manufacturers like R&A and the USGA, they wouldn’t worry about possible repercussions.
Tennis, like almost every other sporting organization, controls and provides the ball. I believe the golf ruling bodies would win any lawsuit if they decided tomorrow on a tour ball, but the time and $ it would cost to adjudicate isn’t worth the ban.
Interesting two
making an Olympic ball might pave the way for the powers that be, taking 10% off the ball and presto, the courses are fine again. Bubba’s 340 drive now becomes 306 when he really lets one go. When pros used balata balls and we mortals used the old two piece balls ( which went further than if we had a balata ) pros could have hit bombs then, but those two piece balss had no control the pros needed. 10% off is the only answer, IMO
Benjamin, my boy........................Marketing!
Mr. McGuire: I want to say one word to you. Just one word.
Benjamin: Yes, sir.
Mr. McGuire: Are you listening?
Benjamin: Yes, I am.
Mr. McGuire: Plastics. (insert Marketing)
Benjamin: Just how do you mean that, sir?
from The Graduate
Oh, Mama, can this really be the end
To be stuck inside of Mobile
With the Memphis blues again
-R. Zimmerman
Getting back to slower, lower, weaker
I play with a regular group of 5 to 8, we play Stableford, $5 a man, winner take all. There’s several in the group who out drive me by 50 to 90 yards whom I beat regularly. My lack of distance forced me many years ago to become very good with my short game or die. Darwinism at it’s finest.
Oh, Mama, can this really be the end
To be stuck inside of Mobile
With the Memphis blues again
-R. Zimmerman
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Have a golf story tip? Contact editor Charles Boyer and he will follow the story! Thanks!
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
