Fansplaining: The Distance Debate


I’m still waiting for someone to explain why intended design matters at all. Should we delay tournaments when the wind doesn’t blow on links courses?


I think you must be trolling.


You have created enough straw men to start a corn farm


It’s shot values. It is identifying the golfer who can play all the shots and execute a strategy.


Haha he’s got to be trolling


My web browser came up way too quickly. Let’s roll internet speeds back to 1999. Stupid right?

Too much technology can be bad for some things, golf included, but we are not at that point with golf. It’s still REALLY hard.


@BigJake, let’s say you went to the Louvre to see the Mona Lisa, and the museum directors decided to paint over her dress with a more modern piece of clothing to match current trends. Would you feel a little upset that the airtist original rendition wasn’t honored? You probably wouldn’t care, but my point is certain golf course are art and to be best appreciated, certain elements (like the burn in front of #1 at St Sndrews) should be respected. When equipment takes these elements out of play the design is compromised.

As for equipment changes…do you use confirming wedges? I do. It’s harder to play with them but the governing bodies saw the need and I’ve complied.


You aren’t talking about painting over a dress. What you’re talking about is making everyone wear clothes from the 1500’s because that’s how things were when it was originally painted. Or maybe I should have to sail to Europe in a Columbus era ship to see the painting. Using an airplane to see the work really wasn’t the artist’s intention.


Stop feeding the troll. Let him return to his bridge.


Isn’t the entire ball debate a straw man argument at this point?


Umm do you want to explain, cause I’m not sure you know what that means.


Rolling the ball back is a straw man argument for the perceived issue of increasing driving distance. The causes of the increasing driving distance stat aren’t even agreed upon.


When you move tees back 100 yards onto other pieces of property then you’re changing the painting. If you’re unable to keep up @BigJake go back to Reddit, please.


I mean if you look at the graphs its pretty clear to see the jumps when certain technologies were implemented, the jump that corresponds with the mass switch to the ProV1 is one of if not the biggest, so I’m going to disagree with it being a “straw man.”

If you don’t think the increase in driving distance is an issue fine we’ll just disagree, just stop using fallacies to diminish the opposing point


I don’t agree with doing that.


Then we’re not that far apart. FYI- That’s what they do at St Andrews right now.


Couldn’t you just play the same kind of ball as a Pro and therefore still compare yourself against how they play? Nobody is stoping anyone from maintaining that tradition. At the same time, while the avg player may not want to lose distance, I ask, is this roll the ball back really targeted at them? Why do we get lost in the amateur convo and ignore that this whole thing came about because the professional golfer has outgrown the professional venues


Ams can also just #TeeItForeward


For sure. I’m just saying leave everything as is, including the ball. I want to know where this whole “ball goes too far” thing started. The first thing I remember is an interview with Gary Player ranting about it. At the time I just rolled my eyes because it sounded like “back in my day” old man nonsense, but now seeing the rampant golf channel regurgitation is kind of scaring me.


I’ve yet to ever hear a legitimate argument on why there can’t be two balls and governing bodies of professional, and amateur events can decide what is permitted just like distance devices and local rules