I agree with John. If they don't start limiting limiting ball distance, courses will continue to be lengthened to the point of ridiculous. It's fun to see the pros hit drives 350 or 375 yards but it is getting to where it is hard to believe. However, it is good for golf club manufacturers because all of us want to emulate the pros and we buy all of the latest stuff. Look on ebay at AD DI shafts for sale and see how much amateurs are paying for used AD Di 6s and 6x shafts trying to hit it as far as Tiger because that is the shaft he uses. it just goes on and on. It is good to see John and Ping taking a leadership position for the game and it is appreciated and gratifying.
Pat On Tue, Dec 20, 2011 at 9:48 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > ** > Thought this was interesting.. > John > shoptalk > > PHOENIX (December 19, 2011) - John Solheim, Chairman & CEO of PING, is > proposing that golf's rule making bodies consider a "Ball Distance Rating" > system (BDR) that would replace today's single golf ball limit with three > different ball distance limits - one that is the same as today's standard, > one that is shorter and one that is longer. Solheim's "A Long Term Response > to Distance" explains how including a BDR system with a new "Condition of > Competition" would give professional events and golf courses an efficient > way to address future concerns about distance. > > "A BDR Condition of Competition would create a simpler way to control > distance at the tour level - and keep the competitive design of the world's > great courses in play," said Solheim. "This concept addresses the unique > talents of the top 0.1% of the world's golfers without hurting the other > 99.9%." Solheim also noted that a key aspect of the idea is to give players > who would benefit from it the option of using a longer ball, a choice many > golfers may appreciate, especially when taking on today's longer courses. > "The distance rating of the ball used would factor into handicaps, just > like slope rating or choice of tee box does today." > > Solheim recently sent his BDR idea to golf's governing bodies, and > suggested it could be a positive factor in helping to sustain and grow the > game. "I appreciate the challenges faced by those who help govern the > game," said Solheim. "I am hopeful they give my idea further consideration > and use it as a starting point to address some of the issues the game is > facing. The positive impact golf has on so many groups requires that we > explore a variety of ideas to improve the health of the sport. I hope > others have suggestions to offer as well." > > John Solheim's "Long Term Response to Distance" follows: > > A Long Term Response to Distance > > For as long as I can remember, golf has been challenged by concerns over > driving distance. Unfortunately, over the past dozen or so years, many > actions taken in response to that challenge have often been short sighted, > costly and/or controversial - such as altering some of golf's most revered > courses and adopting restrictive golf club rules. Now, we learn average > driving distance on the PGA Tour just had another increase - it broke > through 290 yards for the first time (and with so many dynamic young > golfers working toward a Tour card, who knows where it will go from here). > So, once again we are hearing the question: "what, if anything, should be > done about it?" > > With so many other challenges facing the game, we need to be sure any > "distance discussions" focus on the long term - on solutions that can > quickly and easily respond to future increases in distance (no matter the > cause); on ideas that give professional events and courses a tool that > allows each to best address the distance concerns unique to their venue; on > proposals that recognize it is far simpler to adjust the ball to the > course, than to adjust the course to the ball. Finally, we need a response > that will resolve this issue once and for all. To get this discussion > rolling, here is how I think we can do just that: > > - Replace today's single golf ball distance limit with three different > "Ball Distance Ratings" (or "BDRs") - one that is the same as today's > limit, one that is shorter and one that is longer. > > - Adopt a "BDR Condition of Competition" - each event could apply the BDR > appropriate for its course design and yardage, and for the skill level of > the golfers competing at the event. > > - Include BDR as a factor in calculating handicaps - just as "slope > rating" or choice of tee box does today, the BDR of the ball you use will > factor into your handicap. > > BDR golf balls should have similar flight characteristics as today's ball > (trajectory, spin rates, etc) with the only variable being distance. Some > details may be challenging, but I have no doubt the USGA and the R&A are up > to the task. With distance as the only variable, an example of what could > be done would be to adopt a color code for the several BDRs (just like we > do with tee boxes), perhaps using "gold, silver and bronze". A "silver dot" > rating could apply to balls that conform to the current distance limits, a > "gold dot" rating to balls that are longer (perhaps 30 yards longer), and a > "bronze dot" rating for balls that are shorter than today's ball limit > (again, maybe 30 yards shorter). More BDR levels could be added, if needed, > to address future increases in driving distance by Tour professionals. > > If the game adopted a "BDR Condition of Competition", I believe the vast > majority of events would choose to allow the same balls (and ball limit) > used today. Most courses hosting professional tour events were built with, > or have added, sufficient length to challenge the world's best golfers. > Perhaps a small number of tournaments, those played at some of the game's > classic courses, would find it exciting to put the original design elements > of the layout back in play by requiring shorter rated golf balls. These > events may even generate a lot of interest, and TV viewers. A key point of > this idea is that it puts control over those decisions with the event > itself. It also gives each venue a new "long term" option for responding to > future increases in driving distance - bring in the bull dozers, or simply > adopt a new BDR. > > I recognize asking tour professionals to occasionally switch to a > different rated ball creates a new challenge. However, rising above golf's > toughest obstacles is what they do best. These skilled athletes likely > realize that imposing equipment limits on tens of millions of amateurs - a > group that is critical to golf's future - is not the best way to resolve > issues unique to competitions played at the highest levels. I think the > most talented professional golfers in the world would be willing to switch > to a shorter ball once in awhile, if that would benefit the remaining 99.9% > of us. > > Giving amateurs the option of playing a new, longer rated, ball is another > key aspect of this idea. Many golfers find it very difficult to play > today's longer courses. Using a longer ball should make that experience > more enjoyable. It may even bring some ex-golfers back to the course. > Perhaps this idea could even reduce the time needed to complete some > rounds, a goal shared by everyone. > > There will likely be occasions when amateurs tee it up with a shorter > rated ball. Some golfers may choose to do so when playing some classic > courses, ones that cannot add yardage, in order to bring out the > competitiveness of the original design. Others may choose to do so because > it has a positive impact on their handicap. Some courses might even > recommend using a shorter rated ball. Higher handicap players may find it > easier to play alongside more experienced golfers - from the same tees - > when using different rated balls. Each of these choices gives some control > over the distance issue where it is needed most - with the golfer and the > course. > > This proposal could also help the USGA and the R&A. The handicap system > may benefit from adding "ball rating" as a factor. This solution is also > consistent with the Joint Statement of Principles announced by the USGA and > R&A in 2002: it provides an immediate and an efficient way to address > future increases in distance, and it is not bifurcation - amateurs and > professionals will still play to a ball limit, just not necessarily the > same one on the same course. Adopting a few new ball distance ratings is > basically the same as adding a few more tee boxes - and adding tee boxes is > not bifurcation. > > In order to fully evaluate this idea, the constructive input of golf ball > manufacturers will be needed (PING currently does not sell or manufacture > golf balls, but we did for over 20 years). I realize this suggestion > presents challenges, but a BDR system brings with it new opportunities as > well. Adding new categories of "conforming" golf balls should lead to > exciting new ways for golf ball companies to competitively innovate, and it > could increase golf ball sales. If it were as simple to develop a club > rating system that included a similar opportunity to innovate longer > drivers, I know I would welcome it. However, if golf once again chooses to > address driving distance, it needs a practical long term solution, and I > believe a BDR system would do the job. > > All of us, including those in the manufacturing community, have a > responsibility to offer new ideas and appropriately work with the rule > making bodies to help improve the game It can be done, as demonstrated by > the positive results from the November 2010 Vancouver forum, and the > solution PING provided in resolving the Eye2 controversy on the PGA Tour in > early 2010. I will continue to do what I can, and I believe others will as > well. The game has seen many positive changes over its long history, > changes that appropriately recognize the relationship between the challenge > and the enjoyment of the game at all skill levels. I believe a BDR system > would provide a way to continue do just that - for a long time to come. > > John A. Solheim > > Chairman and CEO of PING > ** > > -- > > ** > > > > > Thanks! > John Muir > > skype: jhmuir > AIM: [email protected] > 810.923.7396 > http://clubmaker-online.com > http://gripscience.com > http://clubmaker.mobi > http://thedriverstudio.com > > Golf equipment updates at http://twitter.com/golfcast > > Facebook-- > http://www.facebook.com/pages/Clubmaker-Online/181867993392?v=wall > &mid=20b6914G6046d421G0G66 > > sponsored by the new Aldila RIP BETA > http://www.clubmaker-online.com/products/aldila.rip.html > > > > > >
