Feedback From USGA's Prototype Ball Testing Event
Lost in the PGA Championship hoopla was Monday's USGA-hosted competition for select Canadian Tour invitees to play modified balls as part of the organization's ongoing golf ball testing.
Prior to the competition, played August 16th at Greystone Golf Club in Milton, Ontario, the event was comprised of a small field organized by tour deputy Dan Halldorson, who you may recall, refused comment a few weeks back when it was revealed the USGA might be conducting tests in Ontario. The field of lucky rollback-ball testers played 18-holes with a small competition and purse featuring something in the neighborhood of $1500 for first place (reportedly it was a 67), coupled with an appearance fee in the $200-300 range.
Before the event, I called the USGA's Dick Rugge to find out more about the testing, but he kindly refused to even acknowledge whether it was taking place to protect the testing process. Naturally, I did not place a follow-up call to confirm the details below since many are subjective views and, well, how can one comment on an event that may or may not be taking place?
But thankfully, there's Facebook.
Your devoted blogger messaged as many players from the field as he could find on the social networking site to ask if they were invited to play in the event and if so, if they would talk about their experiences. But because the USGA had the players sign a non-disclosure agreement specifically mentioning the lowly media, I was (nicely) declined by several.
However, they did talk to their fellow players and friends! (And don't bother USGA, I did not Friend any of these poor souls just in case the Far Hills Police were inspired by their peers in Palo Alto).
Below is a summary based on two sources, with the each noted in describing what their friends experienced. One conversation was with a young Canadian Tour player who spoke to three peers that played in the event, including one present in his car as I interviewed the informant!
The other source played golf with a tester this week, who offered several details which were shared with me in several exchanges. I know the second player's name, but in order for him to cash his check and not face a lifetime wondering if his U.S. Open entry will be intercepted by the USGA testing department, his name will be withheld.
Miscellaneous anecdotes from the day:
- Testing began during the Clublink Jane Rogers Championship, with several Trackman and ShotLink-style devices set up to document play with today's equipment, followed by Monday's event with the shorter ball and further testing.
- The unmarked ball, described by both sources as having a shallow, odd dimple pattern with "a lot of flat surfacing," typically went about 20 yards shorter with the best hit drives.
- The ball did not spin much and flew unusually straight, as well as on a lower trajectory according to both sources. The younger Canadian Tour player whose friends also are under-25 types, said his buds described their experience as unenjoyable because the ball did not curve at all and played like a limited flight range ball. One of his peers also said the feel around the greens was "just awful."
- My other source, on the other hand, reported distinctly different views. An early 30's player of accomplishment, called the experience "unreal." He loved the shotmaking emphasis, the longer irons hit into greens, the overall emphasis on skill despite his misgivings about the straighter flight of the prototype. He also reported that his fellow playing partners were enthusiastic despite some concerns about the ball seemingly wiping away a distance advantage of one longer player in the group while not impacting others as much.
- The players who enjoyed their experience said their irons flew about one club shorter, which, combined with the distance off the tee lost, meant 2-3 clubs more into greens.He also reported loving shots around the green more and found that he could play all types of shots, both with backspin or of the bump-and-run variety. "Way better, so fun," was the feedback.
- There was a tub of the balls for the players to chip and putt with prior to the round, closely guarded by an official. The player whose friend contacted me wanted to take some with him, but was told no by an official. Each group had an observer of some kind and this player was only allowed one ball at a time. However, the player in question snuck one out and a photograph may be forthcoming.
- One player reported that the ball was made by Bridgestone.
- Greystone was setup up exactly as it was in the Jane Rogers tournament. The Canadian Tour player who did not compete in the Monday event but played in the Rogers reported that the course is one of the toughest they play on the tour, with greens running 13 feet on the Stimpmeter and a cut this year of five over. He described the design as "very modern-looking" and thought it was an odd selection because of its architecture.
- The younger player who spoke to his peers said one reported that if he had to play such a ball he'd "probably quit golf."
- The friend of the older player who contacted me had the chance to hit a few putts with the ball and said it reminded me of the old Titleist Professional. His Canadian Tour player friend concurred. Though the player said the ball "sort of self corrected in flight," saying "it would start to curve one way and then kinda stop. We have often said the same thing about the Pro V."
- Both sources reported that their friends were repeatedly assured that a ball rollback would not happen anytime soon. The players were told in no uncertain terms that the USGA and R&A were happy with the ball where it is now and there are no plans whatsoever to change ball rules.
- The older player was said to be "pretty suspicious" of this stance because he thought the amount of effort that went into the testing suggested otherwise. His conclusion, which was shared in a survey of some form that I'm trying to learn more about, was that the idea was "great," that he had "a lot of fun," and while he felt it restored a premium on ball striking, he was not convinced this was the right short ball to use in any form of rollback scenario.
You can also read more player feedback from Ian Andrew here.
I'm going to sit on this for a few hours before I react, but I know you'll have comments!
Thursday, August 19, 2010 at 08:38 PM
Reader Comments (28)
Self-correcting ball flight? = They'd better work on that one.
http://www.ktre.com/Global/story.asp?S=13005683
A good start though.
It sounds like the manufacturers tried to make them a crappy ball that no one would like.
Back in the stone ages when I played competitive golf, there were guys who could really bomb the ball. BUT, they all had to dial back their swings b/c the ball spun so much that they had trouble controlling direction. If they didn't hit it dead square, it would spin off into the trees and they would be dead.
The problem with today's bombers is that they don't have to pay any accuracy price for swinging for the fences.
His friend made an interesting point though - why are people worried that golfers are hitting it farther? There is progress in every sport through new training and new equipment just as their is progress in us as humans as we continue to learn new things. Maybe we should just embrace it all?
*Sinister investigative reporting :awesome.....perhaps a new cable summer series....young touring pro with great looking squeeze bounds thru the country from tourney to tourney trying to get hand on a sleeve of the German Uboat marked balls rumored to have been used in Canada .
Weekly series self contained story, but the dangling link is the quest for the ball, and another clue as to where it can be found, revealed in the last minute every week, serial style.... with the hero playing a casual round and his golf cart starting to run off a cliff, damsel watching in horror.....
Each new show revealing the cart landing below the bluff in what may or may not be a bunker, depending upon alien placed blue dots, with sperical object flying off in the distance, strangely with German uboat markings on the side. Could it be? Is the ball actually an alien spacecraft, able to self correct in flight? What are the ROG governing occupied balls? 2 stroke penalty? DQ? Extra sprnkles on ice cream?
Official nails our hero walking off the 18th, arm on shoulders. Black Suburbans with men in dark suits and sunglasses are talking to their wrists.
The possibilities are endless, and if the story line is (this) bad, then at least the good looking girlfriend will warrent watching.
Tuesdays at 9 pm.
Has to be better than Haney.
great repoting, G.
digsouth
*did they really thinh the word would not get out, or was this an unplanned planned leak?
One would think they would do testing on a more traditional course.
I think many or most of us would like to see a return to shotmaking - working the ball, flighting the ball etc. In terms of television viewing, how much would more shotmaking enhance the experience? We would know they are carving the ball, but we would never see it wihtout shottracker.
I realize that there is more involved here than just viewing and ratings, I 'm just curious about this aspect of it.
I would give the powers that be a lot more credit for this event if they had done it five years ago, but maybe better late than never??
I'm all for a lighter ball(which incidentially is available now)-it goes shorter and is more likely to be affected by sidespin-cost of change versus changing drivers and courses-almost nil.
Yes Ky I wasnt a fan of the professional-but only because I couldnt play it as well as the balata-like most people my opinions can be a bit selfish!
FWIW, I love to see shotmaking. It is bad enough that TV spends too much air time on boring putting, few irons and tee shots, but they roll along on someone playing well, and then rarely show the trouble hole, or the great 30 yard slice recovery, you know unless it's what's his name ,ot your know, the contender.
digsouth
Change the ball for the Tour. Good bye Tour. If you got a 18 yr old kid who flies it 310 off the tee and then all of a sudden he's forced to play a ball that goes 270 and feels goofy around the green--what are the chances he says good bye to trying to get a Tour card. Maybe he says screw it or maybe not. Whatever it seems counter productive to roll back the ball at this point to make a few courses relevant and a Very Few of the worlds best hit it shorter. Put the brakes on the ball. OK. Anyone under the age of 25 want A roll back? Doubt it.
Let's summarize some of the common complaints about golf balls, and the status quo. I'm not subscribing to any/all of these theorems, just saying they are representative...
~Modern balls go too far, at least for elite players.
~Modern balls are too effective at reducing spin with driver while still providing spin with short irons. This gets boiled down to, "Modern balls should be made to spin more, to emphasize shotmaking."
~Modern balls are extremely advantageous for longer hitters and elites; they have done little for average players. A gulf has been widened between classes of players.
~Modern balls have assisted elite players in obsoleting classic championship courses, on a distance basis.
If we look into the anecdotal evidence from the recent Canadian Tour experiment, it would appear that the experiment went in the direction of rolling back distance, without adding spinniness to the balls (and, with more spin, forcing players to throttle back). For some observers, this seems like the wrong way to go. I'm not sure I agree. We all recognized that the technology problem is one for elite players, not recreational players. Recreational players, by and large, don't have distance problems, insofar as they can always move up a tee or two. Recreational players DO have problems with slices and hooks. And a greatly-increased spin-rate ball regulation might just drive those players crazy.
But what about a low-spin ball with rolled back distance? The advantgage there, goes to the stronger and fitter player. It is more of Wally Uihlein's "power game" paradigm. Should that be instinctively opposed by devoted acolytes of Geoff Shackelford like me? I don't think so. If golf becomes a game where the equipment is scaled back to fit the existing courses (as I'd strongly argue SHOULD happen), but at the same time, emphasizes fitness and strength in hitting low-spin balls, is that wrong? I don't think so.
It may be that it is the same group of people that I am simultaneously congratulating and condemning...