USGA and R&A Announce golf ball rollback for everyone!?!?!

[hammergolf]

3 minutes ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

That diatribe is great and all, but it doesn’t really matter.

 

The rule will have changed and the a non conforming ball is a non conforming ball.  Same as a 600 cc driver, shaved face driver, etc.  there’s non difference in using one or the other once the rule changes

Perfect response, are you a usga official? You are unwilling to debate facts and data or compromise so you respond just like the usga does…..

[Pnwpingi210]

4 minutes ago, hammergolf said:

Perfect response, are you a usga official? You are unwilling to debate facts and data or compromise so you respond just like the usga does…..

No you just said a bunch of stuff that had no relevance to my question, which was why only use a non conforming ball?  Why not any other non conforming equipment?

 

 

[hammergolf]

6 hours ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

No you just said a bunch of stuff that had no relevance to my question, which was why only use a non conforming ball?  Why not any other non conforming equipment?

 

 

Because there is ZERO data that prove a “non conforming” club provides any performance advantage. The groove issue with Ping, they were wrong. New wedges spin 1,000s of rpm’s more. The .083 COR ruling, first of all the difference between .083 and .085 in inches. In fact, people are playing clubs right now that exceed the .083 limit and they don’t even know it because the usga in their infinite incompetence has made a rule that the difference between conforming and non conforming can’t be noticeable to the human eye. The ball roll back, they don’t even have data on IF it will effect scoring at the professional or elite level.

This is the behavior of the usga, they take a position that has ZERO data to back it up and refuse to compromise in any way. Look, if they want to control the professional and elite level game, have at it. Even though there is no evidence that what they enact has any effect. But, hey they want to control that segment of the game so really make a difference. Put a .060 cor on woods. Leave the other 99.9% alone. Hardly any sport has the same rules for professional play as they do for recreational play. It would be very easy for the usga, R&A, and professional tours to limit distance for tournament play and keep equipment rules for recreational play as is. However they literally refuse to even discuss this as option. I’m a 2hdcp, and hitting a ball 10yds further will have little to no effect on my game. However, for a 14 hdcp senior golfer taking yards of every shot he or she hits makes the game harder for them. Why punish those golfers because Rory can hit it 350? Makes no sense and has no logic behind it. 

I don’t respect the usga and what they represent. They are an elitist organization that only  cares about power and control. They don’t care about the majority of recreational golfers, and their behavior shows it. Therefore I’ll play whatever I want and could give a rats a** what the usga or their apologists think of it.

Edited June 22 by hammergolf

[Pnwpingi210]

4 minutes ago, hammergolf said:

Because there is ZERO data that prove a “non conforming” club provides any performance advantage. The groove issue with Ping, they were wrong. New wedges spin 1,000s of rpm’s more. The .083 COR ruling, first of all the difference between .083 and .085 in inches. In fact, people are playing clubs right now that exceed the .083 limit and they don’t even know it because the usga in their infinite incompetence has made a rule that the difference between conforming and non conforming can’t be noticeable to the human eye. The ball roll back, they don’t even have data on IF it will effect scoring at the professional or elite level.

This is the behavior of the usga, they take a position that has ZERO data to back it up and refuse to compromise in any. Look, if they want to control the professional and elite level game, have at it. Even though there is no evidence that what they enact has any effect. But, hey they want to control that segment of the game so really make a difference. Put a .060 cor on woods. Leave the other 99.9% alone. Hardly any sport has the same rules for professional play as they do for recreational play. It would be very easy for the usga, R&A, and professional tours to limit distance for tournament play and keep equipment rules for recreational play as is. However they literally refuse to even discuss this as option. I’m a 2hdcp, and hitting a ball 10yds further will have little to no effect on my game. However, for a 14 hdcp senior golfer taking yards of every shot he or she hits makes the game harder for them. Why punish those golfers because Rory can hit it 350? Makes no sense and has no logic behind it. 

I don’t respect the usga and what they represent. They are an elitist organization that only  cares about power and control. They don’t care about the majority of recreational golfers, and their behavior shows it. Therefore I’ll play whatever I want and could give a rats a** what the usga or their apologists think of it.

They use CT now.  And there is data to support that a driver that fails the ct test (greater than 258 milliseconds) will produce higher ball speeds and fly farther distances.  That’s a performance benefit.  
 
I’d argue the ball change applied to everyone is less of a punishment than bifurcation, as you’re suggesting.  Bifurcation or singling out a group or demographic and making them and only them use a lesser performing piece of equipment is more of a punishment by definition.

[hammergolf]

11 minutes ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

They use CT now.  And there is data to support that a driver that fails the ct test (greater than 258 milliseconds) will produce higher ball speeds and fly farther distances.  That’s a performance benefit.  
 
I’d argue the ball change applied to everyone is less of a punishment than bifurcation, as you’re suggesting.  Bifurcation or singling out a group or demographic and making them and only them use a lesser performing piece of equipment is more of a punishment by definition.

And that distance is inches…. If you can confirm that every professional player hitting it 1yd further is going to suddenly lead to course records falling I have some beach property to sell in Arizona to you. My point is, if you really want to limit what professionals and elite amateurs can do, then really limit them. But most importantly LIMIT ONLY THEM, not the other 99% of golfers who play recreational golf.

 

In what world can punishing golfers who present zero threat to the usga’s idea of the game, (which btw is nothing close to what recreational golf really is) be less than only punishing those who “theoretically” pose this threat to the game? (Which of course there is zero data to prove that they indeed do pose a threat) I mean course records and scoring averages are falling like flies right? Oh, that’s right they are not. But as I said previously if the goal is to limit what professionals and elite amateurs can do, then just control them. 
 

 

Edited June 21 by hammergolf

[Pnwpingi210]

Just now, hammergolf said:

And that distance is inches…. If you can confirm that every professional player hitting it 1yd further is going to suddenly lead to course records falling I have some beach property to sell in Arizona to you. My point is, if you really want to limit what professionals and elite amateurs can do, the really limit them. But most importantly LIMIT ONLY THEM, not the other 99% of golfers who play recreational golf.

 

In what world can punishing golfers who present zero threat to the usga’s idea of the game, (which btw is nothing close to what recreational golf really is) be less than only punishing those who “theoretically” pose this threat to the game? (Which of course there is zero data to prove that they indeed do pose a threat) I mean course records and scoring averages are falling like flies right? Oh, that’s right they are not. But as I said previously if the goal is to limit what professionals and elite amateur then just control them. 
 

 

It’s inches?

 

false….https://golf.com/gear/drivers/how-much-farther-would-you-hit-an-illegal-driver/. There are also threads in this forum where people have done the math.  Theres a  performance benefit to be hand by using a non conforming driver and it’s not insignificant.

 

i understand you’re passionate and that’s fine.  It’s doesn’t make what you are saying factually correct as pointed out by the fallacies in your argument's. 
 

 

[Nessism]

19 minutes ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

They use CT now.  And there is data to support that a driver that fails the ct test (greater than 258 milliseconds) will produce higher ball speeds and fly farther distances.  That’s a performance benefit.  
 
I’d argue the ball change applied to everyone is less of a punishment than bifurcation, as you’re suggesting.  Bifurcation or singling out a group or demographic and making them and only them use a lesser performing piece of equipment is more of a punishment by definition.

 

The only reason the USGA wants to change the ball is because elite golf course owners/members are crying that their beloved courses are being ripped up by tour pros, and -20 scores are being posted after four rounds.  The end.  So the USGA's response, is to change the game for EVERYONE.  

 

I for one can't afford to lose any more distance.  Father time has shortened my shots, and it sucks.  Yes, I know, move up tees.  And I have.  But that's not the point.  It's the point that the USGA is changing the game just because tour pros hit the ball "too far" to please elite club owners.  Wrong justification.

Edited June 21 by Nessism

[Pnwpingi210]

Just now, Nessism said:

 

The only reason the USGA wants to change the ball is because elite golf course owners/members are crying that their beloved courses are being ripped up by tour pros, and -20 scores are being posted after four rounds.  The end.  So the USGA's response, is to change the game for EVERYONE.  

 

I for one can't afford to lose any more distance.  Father time has shortened my shots, and it sucks.  Yes, I know, more up tees.  And I have.  But that's not the point.  It's the point that the USGA is changing the game just because tour pros hit the ball "too far" to please elite club owners.  Wrong justification.

I don’t have an opinion on this theory so I won’t get into a discussion on it.

 

my questions were around the use of the term punishment when a change in rules is applied universally to all golfers, and why only use a non specific conforming ball?  Why not other non conforming equipment?

[hammergolf]

7 minutes ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

It’s inches?

 

false….https://golf.com/gear/drivers/how-much-farther-would-you-hit-an-illegal-driver/. There are also threads in this forum where people have done the math.  Theres a  performance benefit to be hand by using a non conforming driver and it’s not insignificant.

 

i understand you’re passionate and that’s fine.  It’s doesn’t make what you are saying factually correct as pointed out by the fallacies in your argument's. 
 

 

Two things:

1 The article you posted was based on cor, and second I stand corrected. .0822 to .832 is a gain of 2-3yds. Is it your position that a gain of 2 - 3yds off the tee has suddenly led to scoring averages and course records dropping? Once again, if the usga thinks this 2-3yds is a threat, which of course all the data says is wrong. Then control them. Reduce CT limits by 10 yds, 20 yds. But where is it logical to take that distance away from the other 99% of golfers? 
 

2 Once again, limit the hell out of professional and elite amateur play. There is no reason other than the arrogance and unwillingness of the usga to use common sense in logic when making a decision? I mean, based on their position, we need to take the aluminum bats away from middle schoolers because the MLB and NCAA are hitting too many homers. The solution is soooooooooo easy, bifurcation. 

[hammergolf]

13 minutes ago, Nessism said:

 

The only reason the USGA wants to change the ball is because elite golf course owners/members are crying that their beloved courses are being ripped up by tour pros, and -20 scores are being posted after four rounds.  The end.  So the USGA's response, is to change the game for EVERYONE.  

 

I for one can't afford to lose any more distance.  Father time has shortened my shots, and it sucks.  Yes, I know, move up tees.  And I have.  But that's not the point.  It's the point that the USGA is changing the game just because tour pros hit the ball "too far" to please elite club owners.  Wrong justification.

FACTS!

[hammergolf]

10 minutes ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

I don’t have an opinion on this theory so I won’t get into a discussion on it.

 

my questions were around the use of the term punishment when a change in rules is applied universally to all golfers, and why only use a non specific conforming ball?  Why not other non conforming equipment?

Ok let’s take the word punishment out it. Let’s use the word control instead. You do realize that a very large segment of golfers can’t hit a par 4 in regulation right? They need all the enjoyment, distance, and forgiveness they need. You do realize the average men’s handicap is 12.4 correct? Did you also know that the average women’s hdcp is 28.7? You think it’s ok making a VERY hard game even harder for them? Once again, making a little leaguer use the same bat as Aaaron Judge because he’s hitting 500ft homers is wrong and not based on logical thinking. Instead it’s based on control, arrogance, and an inability to compromise on an issue even if it’s wrong for the overwhelming majority of players in the game they claim to “grow and protect”

[Pnwpingi210]

2 minutes ago, hammergolf said:

Two things:

1 The article you posted was based on cor, and second I stand corrected. .0822 to .832 is a gain of 2-3yds. Is it your position that a gain of 2 - 3yds off the tee has suddenly led to scoring averages and course records dropping? Once again, if the usga thinks this 2-3yds is a threat, which of course all the data says is wrong. Then control them. Reduce CT limits by 10 yds, 20 yds. But where is it logical to take that distance away from the other 99% of golfers? 
 

2 Once again, limit the hell out of professional and elite amateur play. There is no reason other than the arrogance and unwillingness of the usga to use common sense in logic when making a decision? I mean, based on their position, we need to take the aluminum bats away from middle schoolers because the MLB and NCAA are hitting too many homers. The solution is soooooooooo easy, bifurcation. 

A non conforming driver can exceed 8.32 cor (257 ct I believe) the 2-3 yards you quoting is specific to the increase in yards for a 239 ct head (the limit) and a head that still passes at 257 ct but exceeds the limit.  There is a 18 millisecond tolerance.  A non conforming club could well exceed 257 ct, resulting in more than 2-3 yards as that article points out.

 

2.  Cool.  I’m not arguing for or against the change or bifurcation.  I would argue that only applying the ball change to pros and elite amatuers meets the criteria of punishment more than a ball change for all.

[Nessism]

19 minutes ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

I don’t have an opinion on this theory so I won’t get into a discussion on it.

 

my questions were around the use of the term punishment when a change in rules is applied universally to all golfers, and why only use a non specific conforming ball?  Why not other non conforming equipment?

 

I don't play tournaments.  If you force me to use a ball that's shorter than what I've been playing for decades, that's punishment against ME.  

[Pnwpingi210]

3 minutes ago, hammergolf said:

Ok let’s take the word punishment out it. Let’s use the word control instead. You do realize that a very large segment of golfers can’t hit a par 4 in regulation right? They need all the enjoyment, distance, and forgiveness they need. You do realize the average men’s handicap is 12.4 correct? Did you also know that the average women’s hdcp is 28.7? You think it’s ok making a VERY hard game even harder for them? Once again, making a little leaguer use the same bat as Aaaron Judge because he’s hitting 500ft homers is wrong and not based on logical thinking. Instead it’s based on control, arrogance, and an inability to compromise on an issue even if it’s wrong for the overwhelming majority of players in the game they claim to “grow and protect”

Governing bodies make rules.  Rules control parts of the game and how it’s played.  No disagreement from me in that

[Pnwpingi210]

1 minute ago, Nessism said:

 

I don't play tournaments.  If you force me to use a ball that's shorter than what I've been playing for decades, that's punishment against ME.  

Well, can’t argue with how you feel about something.

[Nessism]

5 minutes ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

Governing bodies make rules.  Rules control parts of the game and how it’s played.  No disagreement from me in that

 

And these governing bodies should be "for the people", not "for the elite club owners".  What's next, take voting rights away from "non (elite rich)  land owners"?  

[hammergolf]

10 minutes ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

A non conforming driver can exceed 8.32 cor (257 ct I believe) the 2-3 yards you quoting is specific to the increase in yards for a 239 ct head (the limit) and a head that still passes at 257 ct but exceeds the limit.  There is a 18 millisecond tolerance.  A non conforming club could well exceed 257 ct, resulting in more than 2-3 yards as that article points out.

 

2.  Cool.  I’m not arguing for or against the change or bifurcation.  I would argue that only applying the ball change to pros and elite amatuers meets the criteria of punishment more than a ball change for all.

I mean wouldn’t you punish those who present the supposed threat and not the 99% who don’t?

[Pnwpingi210]

Just now, Nessism said:

 

And these governing bodies should be "for the people", not "for the elite club owners".  What's next, take voting rights away from "non (elite rich)  land owners"?  

Not even sure what to say to that other than false equivalency?

[hammergolf]

9 minutes ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

Governing bodies make rules.  Rules control parts of the game and how it’s played.  No disagreement from me in that

Yes, and governing bodies that truly have the best interests of 99% of their golfers make rules accordingly instead of refusing to compromise.

[Pnwpingi210]

1 minute ago, hammergolf said:

I mean wouldn’t you punish those who present the supposed threat and not the 99% who don’t?

Repeating myself.  Not arguing for or against, just usage of the repeated word punishment for a rule change that applies universally to all.

[Pnwpingi210]

1 minute ago, hammergolf said:

Yes, and governing bodies that truly have the best interests of 99% of their golfers make rules accordingly instead of refusing to compromise.

Governing bodies did recommend bifurcation.  Tours and OEMs rejected it

[Pnwpingi210]

I’ll back out of this.  I was discussing how people were framing this (punishment) and why would you only choose to use a non conforming ball when potentially performance enhancing non conforming equipment is available.

 

we hashed both of those out.

 

not going to argue about how people feel about a ball change 🙂

[Shilgy]

20 hours ago, Double Mocha Man said:

 

Everyone will want to be a short hitter like the guy that just won the US Open.

I’d love to be longer than tour average like JJ! 304.6 on the year is not short.

 

For all of those crying about the rollback you forget a few things….

 

1) many of us grew up playing a ball shorter than the rollback ball will be. So big deal!

 

2)  all this whining about the cor or ct being a matter of inches in difference off the tee doesn’t matter a bit.  All you have to do is to do what the pros have done to hit it longer. Work out! Get fit! Speed train! 
 We had a long drive contest at our member guest this year.  347 won….and the event was held on a slightly uphill hole.

 

3) one post last page(I’m not going to quote it) referred to leaving the fairways cut longer “like the days of yore”.  US Open fairways were cut shorter than the greens most here play and they had very little rollout because of the vast amounts of rain received at Oakmont.   The fairways you play at home today are also likely cut shorter than courses of the 70’s.

 

4) The “short hitter” that won the US Open drove the green at the 312 yard par 4 17th on Sunday. That whole is straight uphill.  Again…that’s not short.

 

Last…. as @Pnwpingi210 has been pointing out it’s not a punishment to go back.  What difference does it make if everyone is playing to the same specs?  Pride gets hurt because you’re shorter than you used to be?  I would bet with a wee bit of training and better contact you’d hit the new ball further than you do now.

 

I’ve been against the rollback as well since it was first announced but am changing my opinion. Mostly based on many of the arguments against it in this and other threads.  The ball is the only logical way to reign in distance.  Smaller driver heads would be a negligible difference.  If you can swing hard with a 3 wood there would be no control worries about a smaller driver heads.

 

So play what you want until 2030. But my guess is if you continue playing the current ball after that you would be scorned as a cheater by your golf pals the same as if one attempted to use the Polara or other hot non conforming balls available today.

 

 

 

[Nessism]

1 minute ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

Repeating myself.  Not arguing for or against, just usage of the repeated word punishment for a rule change that applies universally to all.

 

Again, I don't play against anyone, other than myself, and against par on the course.  

 

The USGA is changing the rules for everyone, based on the needs of the 1% ers.  Actually, less than 1%ers.  

 

The governing bodies should protect US, the regular players.  NOT the Tours and OEM's.  If they didn't want bifurcation, the USGA should say TOO BAD for you.

[hammergolf]

Just now, Pnwpingi210 said:

Repeating myself.  Not arguing for or against, just usage of the repeated word punishment for a rule change that applies universally to all.

But it doesn’t universally apply to all. THATS THE POINT. The usga is changing a rule because it feels like a minuscule segment of players may pose a threat. So instead of doing what any logical human or governing body would do and only apply a new rule to them, they refuse to compromise and apply the rule to the overwhelming majority of the constituents they claim to help. It’s not that they can’t make an equipment rule for the professional and elite amateur game, because they have already done it. It’s that they refuse to even look at data that clearly shows their unwillingness to compromise “for the good of the game”. Hmm wonder where I’ve heard that phrase before…..

[hammergolf]

3 minutes ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

Governing bodies did recommend bifurcation.  Tours and OEMs rejected it

That’s half true, the PGA Tour and Wally rejected it. It wasn’t presented to any other tours or OEM’s. 

[hammergolf]

1 minute ago, Nessism said:

 

Again, I don't play against anyone, other than myself, and against par on the course.  

 

The USGA is changing the rules for everyone, based on the needs of the 1% ers.  Actually, less than 1%ers.  

 

The governing bodies should protect US, the regular players.  NOT the Tours and OEM's.  If they didn't want bifurcation, the USGA should say TOO BAD for you.

Maybe we should come up with a new slogan for the usga. Something like “for the good of the game” oh wait….

[Pnwpingi210]

Just now, hammergolf said:

But it doesn’t universally apply to all. THATS THE POINT. The usga is changing a rule because it feels like a minuscule segment of players may pose a threat. So instead of doing what any logical human or governing body would do and only apply a new rule to them, they refuse to compromise and apply the rule to the overwhelming majority of the constituents they claim to help. It’s not that they can’t make an equipment rule for the professional and elite amateur game, because they have already done it. It’s that they refuse to even look at data that clearly shows their unwillingness to compromise “for the good of the game”. Hmm wonder where I’ve heard that phrase before…..

This is factually incorrect.  It’s changing a rule  for conforming equipment that applies universally to all players that choose to play by the rules of golf.  Doesn’t matter how far you hit, what your handicap is, or what your name is.

[hammergolf]

Just now, Pnwpingi210 said:

This is factually incorrect.  It’s changing a rule  for conforming equipment that applies universally to all players that choose to play by the rules of golf.  Doesn’t matter how far you hit, what your handicap is, or what your name is.

What is the reasoning behind needing a rule change?

[Pnwpingi210]

2 minutes ago, hammergolf said:

That’s half true, the PGA Tour and Wally rejected it. It wasn’t presented to any other tours or OEM’s. 

False.  OEMs opposed bifurcstion