When my dad was the Director of Golf research at Spalding in Chicopee during the late 1930s, they did a lot of “distance” testing of golf balls...and you’re right, the 100 compression Dot went farther no matter who hit it, including the ladies and longest hitter of the day...a pro named Jimmy Thompson. I have a circle graph made using data from Edgerton’s ultra high speed photos which shows his velocity and acceleration.(I guess somebody could compute approximate distance from that.) Dad said he could hit the ball about 290 yards. Bobby Jones was about 270-280 yards. (I have a graph with his velocity and acceleration, too, and his velocity was a bit less than Thompson.)
Frankly, I don’t care much for the 3-ball suggestion. I guess the USGA could require everyone to go back to “classic clubs” like a driver no longer than 43” with a steel shaft and persimmon driver head, when playing the “classic courses.” Yeah, right. To increase distance for the amateurs, maybe they could allow the smaller English-size golf ball again...I could get an extra 10 yards out of that, which was especially nice in the winter. For me, when I was younger, it played just like an American-size ball in the summertime...never had to adjust my club distances for the cold. Uh huh. Yes, I like to watch today’s better conditioned pros bomb the ball off the tee. I enjoy the comparison with the average players. I wouldn’t want to see the pros forced to play a ball which won’t go as far as the one I play. And, it takes a better swing to keep a longer drive in play...a poor swing with a longer ball flight is going to put the ball in more trouble. A lot of pros today are hitting less than driver off the tee on many holes for that reason...their 3W or hybrid has the same margin of error as the “classic” driver. If they can bomb today’s driver and ball over the trees, or curve the shot around a corner on a longer hole to have a short iron in...hey, that’s just good golf. Of course, there’s been more talk about shortening the course for amateurs and seniors lately than lengthening them for pros...our gold tees are for pro or top amateur tourneys, blue tees are for the younger male player, white tees for 50-plus ages and orange for all the really old guys (age plus handicap index = 90). They say our seniors playing from white tees make our courses about equal to an 8100 yard golf course for today’s pros. Moving the tees up for average players is easy enough...the tees are already there, just move up the tee markers...don’t need a longer ball. Bernie bl...@att.net From: Tom Flanagan Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 12:59 PM To: shoptalk Subject: RE: ShopTalk: Ping Ball Distance Rating Remember when golf balls were sold by "compression number?" 80, 90 and 100? What's the difference from that to what Solheim's proposing? Way back then, an 80 compression ball was variously described as "a cold weather ball, a ladies ball, or an old man's ball." 100's were for hard hitters or hot weather. 90's were for "the average" golfer, whatever that meant. A few years ago some pro did well with a Noodle "Lady" ball - super soft, or so it was assumed. Then there was the Precept Senior, the Top Flite soft ball, and others. Even the vaunted Titleist Pro V series are "soft." There's Srixon. There are at least three different flavors of Bridgestone - 5, 6, 7. Nicklaus proposed years ago that golf balls should be made to limit distance. Others have agreed. I think of way back in the dark ages of golf - Bobby Jones, Snead, Hogan, et al. They were hitting it 300 yards using the balls of the 20's and '30's. Its all about talent folks. As to re-learning how far a gold, silver or bronze ball goes off my clubface, isn't that already a question? I've advocated for years the addition of loft measurements on irons - my 27 degree club goes just as far as your 5-iron. I sure am not opposed to a standard way of measuring golf ball distance - but isn't that in some sense, what USGA does now vis a vis "conforming and non-conforming" golf balls? What did "100" compression mean anyway. I recall two studies. One from Australia, one from (I believe) from Ohio State University. The results from testing 100, 90 and 80 compression balls was that regardless of clubhead speed, the 100 compression ball traveled farther than the 90, and the 90 farther than the 80. The problem for "Joe Golfer" with the 100 compression balls was the hard feel - remember the Top Flite "Top Rock?" So sure, a really soft ball and a really high clubhead speed will likely show a reduction of distance, but how to explain the Noodle? TFlan > Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2011 11:48:01 -0500 > From: dtutel...@optonline.net > Subject: Re: ShopTalk: Ping Ball Distance Rating > To: ShopTalk@mail.msen.com; shoptalk@mail.msen.com > > I agree, John. > This is very interesting. > > John Solheim, like his father, is an engineer. That means he is a > problem solver. I think this is a good attempt to solve a real problem. > > The difficulty is that the USGA and R&A tend to solve emotional > problems first, then real problems if there is time to work on it. > (Sorry guys, but you have been upholding the appearance of > "tradition" while giving away the store for the past decade and a > half; can't take you seriously any more.) > > Personally, I think there are LOTS of pluses, and Solheim expresses > them very well, so I won't dwell further on them. Instead, let's look > at the minuses, the problems, his proposal introduces. > > (1) Real: Every golfer will need three different sets of yardage > distances for their clubs. It's hard enough with just one. Before > thinking about how much of a problem this poses, we need to have a > concrete proposal on what the gold, silver, and bronze yardages are. > > (2) Real: Testing. Is the USGA's "Overall Distance Standard" a > satisfactory test, and we merely change the threshold distance for > conformance? Or do we need a new test, as long as we're overhauling > the standard?
