Much ado about nothing?

AustinCountyAg said:

---

I think growing the rough out and have bunkers actually play as a bunker and not a manicured sandy area with perfect lies would go a long way. When pros purposely hit into bunkers on certain holes because the miss is better there then they aren't serving their purpose…. The argument that older courses are obsolete for tour pros because they are too easy is a piss poor excuse. Just take away pro golfers from the argument and just look at the number of scratch golfers in the world. A quick google search says it's 1.5% of all golfers. Let people play the damn game and leave it alone. God forbid a handful of weeks out of the year some pros destroy a course and put up a ton of birdies. The world won't stop turning.

---

I think it was Nicklaus at Memorial a few years ago who simply took every other prong out of the rakes for the bunkers. Made them much more uneven and difficult. Just do things like that.

Prexys Moon said:

---

AustinCountyAg said:

---

I think growing the rough out and have bunkers actually play as a bunker and not a manicured sandy area with perfect lies would go a long way. When pros purposely hit into bunkers on certain holes because the miss is better there then they aren't serving their purpose…. The argument that older courses are obsolete for tour pros because they are too easy is a piss poor excuse. Just take away pro golfers from the argument and just look at the number of scratch golfers in the world. A quick google search says it's 1.5% of all golfers. Let people play the damn game and leave it alone. God forbid a handful of weeks out of the year some pros destroy a course and put up a ton of birdies. The world won't stop turning.

---

I think it was Nicklaus at Memorial a few years ago who simply took every other prong out of the rakes for the bunkers. Made them much more uneven and difficult. Just do things like that.

---

Yes, that should be on the table for sure. That could easily be adopted as a local rule for tournaments that wanted to do so. Growing the rough out also seems like a no-brainer. Has anyone proposed adding trees or enlarging bunkers instead of just adding length? If they're trying to "save the game for future generations" then start planting a few strategically placed oaks now. Not really kidding.

Maybe they should just quit dinking around and switch to these?

https://par3nearme.com/cayman-golf-balls/

A buddy from Cayman showed me these.

Just think how "woke" golf could be if the courses were only 1/3 as long? All that land freed up for low cost public housing. Less water use and less fertilizer. The golfing world could stop Global Warming IN ITS TRACKS with this one simple change. Greta Thunberg would shut her pie hole and become a caddy out of gratitude. And somehow it would eliminate racism too.

I think the change takes about 12-15 yards off of a drive that would go 320 yards

I don't think this saves any golf courses or saves any land

Yeah, like the driver size and COR limits, I'm mainly for "let's now hold the line" vs making these dudes play a ball that some have never played

12-15 yards is a lot to a player because thats a club different for your approach shot

I think like Danny said said it's more about staying here than anything for the courses. This change isn't some major relief for golf courses right now.

A 320 ball going 307 is a 4% reduction in distance.

A 260 ball would go about 250

Most casual golfers are probably playing used golf balls or balls they find...so those balls have most likely already lost at least 4% of performance. Now the ceiling is lower but I don't think it's a drastic change

Not right at this moment, but with the way the athletes and technology are trending, probably wise to get out in front of it.

For me it's just simply that this move is hampering the natural evolution of the game.

I agree that it will be nice to see more long iron approach shots but not at the cost of pushing back on the evolution.

Since forever golfers both ams and pros have hit the ball farther than their predecessors. Just like Bobby Jones hit it further than Old Tom Morris and Jack hit it further than Bobby and Tiger hit further than Jack.

And I'm not buying that ams are gonna be rushing to play the same ball as the pros. Yeah there will be some but it's not nowhere near what you think. Kinda like blades. Not every weekend warrior is gaming blades because that's what the pros use. Yeah some ams who shouldn't be playing them do but in the big picture it's very few.

Ag_07 said:

---

For me it's just simply that this move is hampering the natural evolution of the game.

I agree that it will be nice to see more long iron approach shots but not at the cost of pushing back on the evolution.

Since forever golfers both ams and pros have hit the ball farther than their predecessors. Just like Bobby Jones hit it further than Old Tom Morris and Jack hit it further than Bobby and Tiger hit further than Jack.

And I'm not buying that ams are gonna be rushing to play the same ball as the pros. Yeah there will be some but it's not nowhere near what you think. Kinda like blades. Not every weekend warrior is gaming blades because that's what the pros use. Yeah some ams who shouldn't be playing them do but in the big picture it's very few.

---

One of the best things about professional golf that separates it from every other sport is it's history. Iconic courses and major championship venues trending to becoming obsolete in large part due to the advances of equipment is not a block I'll be riding for. If your argument is about the players, the modern athlete is better across all sports, but they're not making the basketball smaller and raising the rim higher in the NBA. The longer players will still be longer. The game just doesn't need to be played on any bigger scale than it already is at the professional level.

And I don't disagree with that

I just think there needs to be different ways to keep those courses and majors from not being obsolete.

Looks like they are bringing it back 10-15 yards and are able to hold the line

I think the ball needs to go across all of golf though...if an amateur player wants to Monday qualify they will need to play new ball. College players would need to switch balls if they get sponsor invites or qualify for US Open. Otherwise if they get in they would need new driver and 3 wood set ups right? Sounds like a mess

New driver set up just to play in US Open qualifier or if they don't require it for qualifying then u need a new driver set up to play in US Open once u get in? Am I missing something?

Just freeze the ball specs where they are

KC_Ag14 said:

---

Ag_07 said:

---

For me it's just simply that this move is hampering the natural evolution of the game.

I agree that it will be nice to see more long iron approach shots but not at the cost of pushing back on the evolution.

Since forever golfers both ams and pros have hit the ball farther than their predecessors. Just like Bobby Jones hit it further than Old Tom Morris and Jack hit it further than Bobby and Tiger hit further than Jack.

And I'm not buying that ams are gonna be rushing to play the same ball as the pros. Yeah there will be some but it's not nowhere near what you think. Kinda like blades. Not every weekend warrior is gaming blades because that's what the pros use. Yeah some ams who shouldn't be playing them do but in the big picture it's very few.

---

One of the best things about professional golf that separates it from every other sport is it's history. Iconic courses and major championship venues trending to becoming obsolete in large part due to the advances of equipment is not a block I'll be riding for. If your argument is about the players, the modern athlete is better across all sports, but they're not making the basketball smaller and raising the rim higher in the NBA. The longer players will still be longer. The game just doesn't need to be played on any bigger scale than it already is at the professional level.

---

A couple of points:

All sports change their rules and adjust interpretations all the time. Carrying is basically legal now in the NBA. They added the three pointer. Football, baseball, hockey and all others including golf are modifying all the time.

There are already rules in place about equipment design. It's not like right now you can play as long of a ball as possible and this is imposing limits for the first time. The limits on equipment design have evolved over time. I don't understand why this evolution is different than others besides bifurcation.

bagger05 said:

---

KC_Ag14 said:

---

Ag_07 said:

---

For me it's just simply that this move is hampering the natural evolution of the game.

I agree that it will be nice to see more long iron approach shots but not at the cost of pushing back on the evolution.

Since forever golfers both ams and pros have hit the ball farther than their predecessors. Just like Bobby Jones hit it further than Old Tom Morris and Jack hit it further than Bobby and Tiger hit further than Jack.

And I'm not buying that ams are gonna be rushing to play the same ball as the pros. Yeah there will be some but it's not nowhere near what you think. Kinda like blades. Not every weekend warrior is gaming blades because that's what the pros use. Yeah some ams who shouldn't be playing them do but in the big picture it's very few.

---

One of the best things about professional golf that separates it from every other sport is it's history. Iconic courses and major championship venues trending to becoming obsolete in large part due to the advances of equipment is not a block I'll be riding for. If your argument is about the players, the modern athlete is better across all sports, but they're not making the basketball smaller and raising the rim higher in the NBA. The longer players will still be longer. The game just doesn't need to be played on any bigger scale than it already is at the professional level.

---

A couple of points:

All sports change their rules and adjust interpretations all the time. Carrying is basically legal now in the NBA. They added the three pointer. Football, baseball, hockey and all others including golf are modifying all the time.

There are already rules in place about equipment design. It's not like right now you can play as long of a ball as possible and this is imposing limits for the first time. The limits on equipment design have evolved over time. I don't understand why this evolution is different than others besides bifurcation.

---

To your first point, none of the rule changes you're alluding to in other sports come with the need to increase the dimensions of the court or field they're playing on.

To your second point, equipment will continue to evolve regardless of what regulation is put into place. The OEMs have every right to be upset about this (it should've been done 25 years ago), but the governing bodies are doing now what should've been done back then.

My point is that the continual lengthening of golf courses, specifically the courses where professional and major championship golf is played, due to our current golf technology is neither sustainable nor necessary. I don't think anyone would find less enjoyment in consuming professional golf if they were playing at 7,200-7,400 yards, rather than 7,800-8,000. I would even argue the players wouldn't mind either once they were doing it. Again, it's all proportionately relative when it comes to distance... the longer players will still be longer. More land would be preserved, meaning less expense on the hosting venues to expand and maintain. Rounds could possibly even take less time in some instances, and I think we're all behind them speeding up their pace of play. The professional and major championship level of the game simply doesn't need to be played at 7,500+ yards.

Just thinking outside the box and spit balling here but rather than reign in player's ability by regulating equipment why not change par on some of these holes?

For instance instead of making #13 at Augusta a lot longer why not just change the number on the card to a par 4?

This way you're not expanding the footprint of the course but you're still making it harder.

Plenty of holes have different pars for women/men/seniors so why can't a hole have a tournament par and amateur par? Still to get let the guys bomb it but also puts a premium on the approach shot into the green all while keeping pros from winning a major at -20.

Par is simply a construct. That's like making shots inside the arc 1 point, and behind the arc 2 points in basketball. Only changes the score, doesn't make anything harder. The goal here is to get a full examination of professional players through their entire bag without having to make the courses longer.

They already do this at almost all US Opens. Usually they have one or two par 5s that play as par 4s for the tournament.

PGA Tour just came out and said they will not abide with a Local Rule rolling back the golf ball.

I wondered what would happen if they did this. USGA's response was essentially "we appreciate the feedback".