Current PGA tour

Re: Current PGA tour

Postby Wknhacker » Mon Apr 30, 2018 8:14 am

Keep the modern Super Golf... let that continue on it's trajectory... but then also re introduce or nurture the Classic Game. Have two games, and see where things are at in 20 years.

Best of both worlds... but don't force people into one of the games only.


I agree with this 100%. However, if they bifurcate and have two tours (current super golf PGA tour and classic persimmon PGA tour), will the classic game have majors? And will those majors be played on courses like Augusta, St. Andrews, Royal Berkdale etc? Will the classic tour be regulated and governed by the USGA and R&A?

Is there a precedent with another sport where bifurcation was implemented?
"I have a tip that can take five strokes off anyone's golf game: it's called an eraser." - Arnold Palmer
User avatar
Wknhacker
 
Posts: 140
Joined: Mon Aug 17, 2015 7:39 am

Re: Current PGA tour

Postby Ded2Journey » Tue May 01, 2018 6:59 am

Wknhacker wrote:
Keep the modern Super Golf... let that continue on it's trajectory... but then also re introduce or nurture the Classic Game. Have two games, and see where things are at in 20 years.

Best of both worlds... but don't force people into one of the games only.


I agree with this 100%. However, if they bifurcate and have two tours (current super golf PGA tour and classic persimmon PGA tour), will the classic game have majors? And will those majors be played on courses like Augusta, St. Andrews, Royal Berkdale etc? Will the classic tour be regulated and governed by the USGA and R&A?

Is there a precedent with another sport where bifurcation was implemented?


Technically, baseball is right? I think golf could follow that model no problem.
"People have always been telling me what I can't do. I guess I have wanted to show them. That's been one of my driving forces all my life." -Ben Hogan
Ded2Journey
 
Posts: 788
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2014 4:54 pm

Re: Current PGA tour

Postby LesMurray » Tue May 01, 2018 8:46 am

Ded2Journey wrote:Technically, baseball is right? I think golf could follow that model no problem.


You don't just have softball vs. baseball but you also have aluminum bats vs. wooden bats. That would be an easy model for golf to follow - amateurs can use whichever driver and shaft material they want but the pros have to use steel and persimmon.
User avatar
LesMurray
 
Posts: 1287
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:32 pm
Location: Burbank, CA

Re: Current PGA tour

Postby jrich99 » Wed May 02, 2018 9:52 am

Interesting ball comparison video here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6B6U0DflaY


A few swings with each isn't enough data for his numbers to be all that meaningful, but it was cool to see the differences in construction when he cut them open.
User avatar
jrich99
 
Posts: 626
Joined: Wed Feb 23, 2011 7:34 pm

Re: Current PGA tour

Postby lagpressure » Thu May 03, 2018 3:59 pm

The wound ball was a much more sophisticated golf ball, with a lot of areas for customization .... different liquids, the inner rubber ball, size, thickness, and the windings, tension, cover etc. So golf balls could really feel and perform differently.

Obviously a would ball is much more labor intensive to create and much more expensive.. hence no one want to touch that former technology anymore.

A solid golf ball with a cover was common decades ago for "cheap range balls" and low end golf ball offerings. I still feel that way about any solid core ball. While more durable certainly, they are not better performing golf balls for good players who want to move the ball around to their advantage.

The modern solid core balls are durable, spin less, cost less to make and put more $$$$ in the companies bank accounts that make them.
User avatar
lagpressure
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8129
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:50 pm

Re: Current PGA tour

Postby k2baloo » Thu May 03, 2018 5:16 pm

The modern ProV1 and the Professional 90 had very similar spin numbers. The thought that the old balls spin significantly more is shown to not be accurate here. The ProV spun more off the wedge and went further off the driver.
I've played old balatas and they didn't spin too differently for me than a modern, urethane ball. They were slightly shorter for me. I could play either, but for durability reasons prefer modern golf balls. Balatas do have a nice, soft feel.
k2baloo
 
Posts: 968
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 5:43 pm

Re: Current PGA tour

Postby lagpressure » Fri May 04, 2018 8:11 am

k2baloo wrote:The modern ProV1 and the Professional 90 had very similar spin numbers. The thought that the old balls spin significantly more is shown to not be accurate here. The ProV spun more off the wedge and went further off the driver.
I've played old balatas and they didn't spin too differently for me than a modern, urethane ball. They were slightly shorter for me. I could play either, but for durability reasons prefer modern golf balls. Balatas do have a nice, soft feel.


This is where I think the difference is.

These machines that measure spin rates are doing so initially right after impact, correct?
I am more concerned with the spin rate from peak apex of trajectory down to the ground. There is no way that a modern ball falls from the apex down
to the ground with the same spin characteristics. I could hold my shot shape with balata and keep some curve on the ball as it descended downward. The modern balls hit the apex and lose their shape as they fall.... they tend to just drop down straight.... which is just horrible and very frustrating if you are a good striker.

So I don't know the science on it, or why, but as a player this is fact. It might be the dimple pattern as well, or the ball's ability to maintain sidespin rates, but there is a huge difference.

The other issue is that hitting a balata ball 20 years after it left the factory is not an accurate valuation of the ball as we used them. We used to question the tour reps about how many weeks the balls had been sitting around. There is no doubt that the balatas were much more responsive than modern balls regarding side spin workability.
User avatar
lagpressure
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8129
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 12:50 pm

Re: Current PGA tour

Postby LesMurray » Fri May 04, 2018 8:23 am

lagpressure wrote:I am more concerned with the spin rate from peak apex of trajectory down to the ground. There is no way that a modern ball falls from the apex down
to the ground with the same spin characteristics. I could hold my shot shape with balata and keep some curve on the ball as it descended downward. The modern balls hit the apex and lose their shape as they fall.... they tend to just drop down straight.... which is just horrible and very frustrating if you are a good striker.

So I don't know the science on it, or why, but as a player this is fact. It might be the dimple pattern as well, or the ball's ability to maintain sidespin rates, but there is a huge difference.

The other issue is that hitting a balata ball 20 years after it left the factory is not an accurate valuation of the ball as we used them. We used to question the tour reps about how many weeks the balls had been sitting around. There is no doubt that the balatas were much more responsive than modern balls regarding side spin workability.


John, I have a bunch of Wilson Staff Duo Spin balls. I'll bring some up for you to try. It will be interesting to see if these are more workable than ProVs.
User avatar
LesMurray
 
Posts: 1287
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2013 5:32 pm
Location: Burbank, CA

Re: Current PGA tour

Postby k2baloo » Fri May 04, 2018 9:09 am

It's possible that spin rates vary more later in flight than when they're measured.
Also possible dimples play a factor.
However, the sidespin terminology should be avoided IMO. The amount of 'side spin' is just a product of the spin rates and the axis of rotation. There's nothing magic in a ball that allows it to know if it's rotating on a tilted axis....
k2baloo
 
Posts: 968
Joined: Wed May 15, 2013 5:43 pm

Re: Current PGA tour

Postby hanisch » Fri May 04, 2018 11:26 am

k2baloo wrote:It's possible that spin rates vary more later in flight than when they're measured.
Also possible dimples play a factor.
However, the sidespin terminology should be avoided IMO. The amount of 'side spin' is just a product of the spin rates and the axis of rotation. There's nothing magic in a ball that allows it to know if it's rotating on a tilted axis....

Agreed that there's nothing magical _in_ a ball to know on which axis it's rotating. However, if we consider the larger system which includes the immediate environment around which the ball is flying, we see that there is (for all practical purposes) a constant force in a particular direction (down) always acting on the ball. This force to which I'm referring is of course gravity due to the earth. Sidespin can thus be a meaningful term with respect to this always present force.
hanisch
 
Posts: 53
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:30 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Top Threads (2000 Club)

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest