Has banning the anchor made a difference?

[AndyP]

Why bother building a fairway bunker, if in 10 years time, with new technology, it can be hit over?

[3Puttpete]

Why bother building a 170m hole if it can be hit over now?

[AndyP]

Why bother building a 170m hole if it can be hit over now?

How is that the same, when it is a target inside the distance that can be hit?

[3Puttpete]

But fairway bunkers are at the landing point of every ball?

[BUSHY]

Again, no answer? I'll assume you haven't quite worked out what the problem is either. Let's try it another way. Will golf no longer be played on the old course if Rory hits his driver 10m further in 10 years? Why is it obsolete? Why does golf have to be played to the same level it was 300 years ago? Why does par have to be 72 or 71 or 70 or whatever? What if we make all the par 5s par 4s so the pros are shooting 16 shots higher relative to par every tournament? What if we just scream things are different and we don't like it? Not all things mind you, we're ok with not using rocks and sticks, with steel woods and graphite shafts, with GPS, pro tracer, tv coverage and watching a stream using wifi.

Will golf no longer be played on the old course if Rory hits his driver 10m further in 10 years? Not likely, however it wont be played the way it was supposed to be played which is already well and truly over. If you weren't aware, more than 1/2 of the Championship tees on the Old Course aren't even on the course. They are infact OOB, some by more than 60m. The 14th is 80m behind the Blue tees almost in the 2nd fairway of the Eden. Now, can you just keep going back? No you cant, you are already intruding on the Eden and the New. Being able to fly most if not all the trouble makes this course obsolete in the truest sense. Doesn't matter what you have as par, the players of today are annihilating the place every time they tee it up. Yet it's not only the pro's doing it. THIS IS MY MAIN CONCERN!!!

Why does golf have to be played to the same level it was 300 years ago? I'm not saying that at all, but at least between say 1900 and 1990 the game was played in roughly the same manner. You only have to watch Masters footage from the 80's well before they put in the Tiger tee's. Nick Faldo hitting driver 2 iron to 13 when Bubba is hitting driver-wedge from 50 yards further back. Now on top of the equipment we have guys that are fitter, faster and stronger than even 30 years ago. It wont be the same but when will too far be too far?

Why does par have to be 72 or 71 or 70 or whatever? I agree, par is and always has been an arbitrary number. Doesnt really have anything to do with the distance argument. Brian Harman (a short hitter) was leading the US Open on the longest course ever so par- or protecting par- has very little to do with distance.

What if we make all the par 5s par 4s so the pros are shooting 16 shots higher relative to par every tournament? Same again.

[benno_r]

I don't think there is any sensible way to stop it though. The line is already blurred between top amateurs and pros, so it's unrealistic that equipment bifurcation will be a workable solution. And we can't say everyone use shorter balls, because the average chump on the street doesn't want to go back to hitting his 8i 115m (nor would I think manufacturers do it as their whole sales pitch is distance-distance-distance).

As sad as it might be, we might just have to admit that some of our classic courses may no longer be suitable for tournament play. And I don't see a problem with that. Like most sports, when venues are unsuitable, you move on - Nurburgring being a classic example - the venue is not suitable for the technology.

[AndyP]

But fairway bunkers are at the landing point of every ball?

Ideally, they are in an area where most players have to make a decision whether to take it on or not. If they can be easily cleared, there is no decision to make.

[3oneday]

I'd google, but I'd be surprised if "bifurcation" has been used before in the forum so thought that in the absence of Raz it should be higlighted.

[BUSHY]

I'd google, but I'd be surprised if "bifurcation" has been used before in the forum so thought that in the absence of Raz it should be higlighted.

And twice in one day.

[benno_r]

I'd google, but I'd be surprised if "bifurcation" has been used before in the forum so thought that in the absence of Raz it should be higlighted.

And twice in one day.

That word alone appears to have moved the needle more than Jordan in the last 2 days.

[Steve57]

*highlighted!

[TheNuclearOne]

I'd google, but I'd be surprised if "bifurcation" has been used before in the forum so thought that in the absence of Raz it should be higlighted.

Pffffft

Virge back in 2013 -

Yes you can says Mr Titleist rep, here is a ball with exactly the same specs as the 2009 ball. We call it the Plus Trajectory. Awesome says the player. Journalist sees this and writes some rubbish "look at me" article about the bifurcation of golf balls and how the Pro's get to play special golf balls that no one else can.

[3oneday]

I was wondering if anyone would go and look

[TheNuclearOne]

Yeah, 8 seconds of my life i'll never get back

[benno_r]

That's reverse bifurcation though. Different thing altogether...

[hippo10]

Again, no answer? I'll assume you haven't quite worked out what the problem is either. Let's try it another way. Will golf no longer be played on the old course if Rory hits his driver 10m further in 10 years? Why is it obsolete? Why does golf have to be played to the same level it was 300 years ago? Why does par have to be 72 or 71 or 70 or whatever? What if we make all the par 5s par 4s so the pros are shooting 16 shots higher relative to par every tournament? What if we just scream things are different and we don't like it? Not all things mind you, we're ok with not using rocks and sticks, with steel woods and graphite shafts, with GPS, pro tracer, tv coverage and watching a stream using wifi.

If I understand you correctly 3pp you'd be ok with distance gains continuing out of control. If that happens you're faced with a couple of options:
1) Continue to lengthen courses which is costly, impossible for many courses with boundary issues and has a negative impact on things like speed of the game, maintenance costs etc. Longer courses are also disproportionately harder for people that don't hit the ball very far (juniors, seniors etc) making it less enjoyable.
2) Disregard par and strategy, let ball and club technology continue to increase the distances that are hit so that most courses are reduced to an 'executive' style pitch'n'putt for pros and good amateurs. I don't know when the last time you played a pitch'n'putt was but it certainly doesn't test every aspect of your game and golf loses something if that style dominates what is seen by people on tv. The loss of strategy when hazards and angles are rendered irrelevant by distance is a big loss for me. Take the fear of not being able to carry a hazard out and you'll reduce the mental challenge and associated mistakes that are a big part of what makes golf so enthralling.

[3Puttpete]

If I understand you correctly 3pp you'd be ok with distance gains continuing out of control. If that happens you're faced with a couple of options: 1) Continue to lengthen courses which is costly, impossible for many courses with boundary issues and has a negative impact on things like speed of the game, maintenance costs etc. Longer courses are also disproportionately harder for people that don't hit the ball very far (juniors, seniors etc) making it less enjoyable. 2) Disregard par and strategy, let ball and club technology continue to increase the distances that are hit so that most courses are reduced to an 'executive' style pitch'n'putt for pros and good amateurs. I don't know when the last time you played a pitch'n'putt was but it certainly doesn't test every aspect of your game and golf loses something if that style dominates what is seen by people on tv. The loss of strategy when hazards and angles are rendered irrelevant by distance is a big loss for me. Take the fear of not being able to carry a hazard out and you'll reduce the mental challenge and associated mistakes that are a big part of what makes golf so enthralling.

IDGAF how far or short they hit the ball. You've pointed out what you think is wrong but haven't offered a solution. Pretty standard stuff from the "they hit it too far. They should change the ball" crowd. Whether it's the ball or clubs or shafts or time in the gym or whatever, you need to answer a very simple question. How far should they be allowed to hit the ball? Then we put a creek across a fairway 30m short of that distance. There's your strategy. Except, of course, for the blokes who can't hit that far anyway. There's no strategy there. And as for your argument that all this distance will/does detract from tv viewing, I'm sure it's just a coincidence that the increase in distance is pretty closely aligned to the explosion in tv money. Tiger-proofing the game when Tiger's paid the bills for 20 years doesn't make sense.

[benno_r]

Let's just call anyone who hits it long a cheat.

Just like people using long putters, they are playing within the rules, but so many just don't like the "vibe". Ergo, "CHEATERZZZZ!!!"

[3Puttpete]

Let's just call anyone who hits it long a cheat.

Just like people using long putters, they are playing within the rules, but so many just don't like the "vibe". Ergo, "CHEATERZZZZ!!!"

Yeah!!!! And we should do "something"

[BUSHY]

IDGAF how far or short they hit the ball.

Well that's painfully obvious.

As far as a solution, rule makers have already acted by limiting certain variables that contribute to out-of-control distance gains. COR of driver faces being one. If their data is to be accepted then the past 10-15 years has seen limited gains due to regulation but in that time fitness has evolved and launch condition theory has evolved. Manufacturers will always find a way but with current regulations we hopefully wont see an increase like the ones we have seen in the past.

[3Puttpete]

Well that's painfully obvious. As far as a solution, rule makers have already acted by limiting certain variables that contribute to out-of-control distance gains. COR of driver faces being one. If their data is to be accepted then the past 10-15 years has seen limited gains due to regulation but in that time fitness has evolved and launch condition theory has evolved. Manufacturers will always find a way but with current regulations we hopefully wont see an increase like the ones we have seen in the past.

General waffle. What's the number?

[wazamac]

COR off the driver face is 83. I think.
All manufacturers would be at this point so no face would be hotter than any other.
What they do with weight placement, slots etc... is the difference IMO.

Shaft technology probably has a bit to do with it as well.
Are there restrictions on the shafts apart from the length?

[Jazz18]

To answer Bitters original question about anchoring, I think it's effected some more than others and I think that's easily seen in the results. Webb Simpson has clearly found a solution he's comfortable with and can be seen in his results as someone pointed out earlier. Keegan Bradley has not and again, results reflect this.

As far as ball/club tech gains, one solution could be to reduce the targets the players have to aim at. While there's a lot of argument about the way the USGA sets up golf course to make them ridiculously hard, there's something to be said for tweaking course set up to make the game more challenging and then returning it to normal when the circus leaves town. There would be many things that could be done that don't cost the earth and could make a big difference if we are worried about defending par for example. These could be permanent things (like a couple of extra bunkers here and there) or temporary things like narrowing fairways and lengthening rough.

[3Puttpete]

Finally an idea!

Smaller targets. Put the mower away. Simples.

[Dotty]

Finally an idea!

Smaller targets. Put the mower away. Simples.

And the bunker rakes too.

Hazards should be hazards, and not an artificially manicured surface to play off.