Golf rules: Why not go to a standard ball on tour?

[Clarkmeister]

Heard someone mention this on a radio show yesterday. At first I thought it was silly, but upon further reflection, why not? If the goal is to determine the best player, why not standardize and strip out as many variables as possible?

Could never happen of course, but I don't think its that ridiculous an idea. Standard clubs is a total pipe dream, but standard balls shouldn't be.

[Phat Mack]

Actually, I've always liked the idea of standard clubs. For some reason, I don't think the golf club industry would go along with it, however.

[HDPM]

But balls have different properties. A good ball for one player might be a bad ball for another. So if you pick the ball that is good for player X but bad for player Y, you have made equipment more of a factor, not less. A lot depends on what a player likes around the greens and the launch conditions for that player. It is one thing to limit the overall distance - that might help determine the best player. Forcing everybody to use the same ball wouldn't help IMO.

[Clarkmeister]

I'm sure there are baseball players who would perform better with balls that are different than the standard baseball. Mark McGwire and Tony Gwynn would probabaly prefer totally different setups.

I had thought about what you are saying in light of the Tiger Woods Nike ball controversy a few years ago when it came out that the one sold in stores isn't exactly the same as the one he hit. But the best players would adapt to the standard ball. The mediocre players don't have the advantage of companies customizing balls just for their particular swing.

[HDPM]

I thought a little of other sports that have the players play with a standard ball i.e. the other ball games. The difference is that in golf the other players dont have to handle or hit the ball of another player, unless in a foursomes match. And a lot of the difference is just feel. So why make players play with equipment that feels bad? Golf is different and I don't see the problem letting players play different balls. In fact, I really don't care about low scores or pros hitting it long. I don't see why it is a problem to put pros on old courses and have them shoot low scores on it. So what if in the '50's Palmer and Player shot 6 under for 4 days on course X and now pros shoot 35 under on it? I think that is a valid comparison to the past. The players now are just better, the equipment is better, scores are lower. Should we go back to gutta percha balls and hickory shaft clubs and see Tiger shoot 80 on a short course? No. I think the worriers need to relax about the hot equipment.

[Clarkmeister]

But it does make sense to limit the equipment. Just as MLB could easily develop a “better baseball” that would obsolete current stadiums, is the solution to just build bigger stadiums with deeper fences, or to limit the baseball technology? Why keep spending tens of millions of dollars on course renovation to keep distances etc. proportionate when we could simply place reasonable restrictions on the properties of a legal ball and on legal clubs?

One of the great things about baseball is that you can “sort of” compare between eras. Why take that away from golf?

[HDPM]

I say don't spend the money on courses and let the pros have at it. So what if Tiger shoots 62-65-63-64 to win somewhere? So what if Old Tom Morris shot 85 for twelve holes at Prestwick? Should we make it so Tiger shoots more like Old Tom? No. You can't compare eras anyway. I am fine with an overall distance limit on the balls, but that's about it.

Besides, people underestimate how much better the short game is today. Watch some old video of guys putting and chipping. It was pathetic compared to now. What are you going to do, make Tiger use as bad a putting stroke as some guy in the '40's?

[J.R.]

Why keep spending tens of millions of dollars on course renovation to keep distances etc. proportionate when we could simply place reasonable restrictions on the properties of a legal ball and on legal clubs?

Aren't their restrictions on clubs and balls already? So presumably somebody thinks they are already reasonable, whether or not that's true. I think golf club/ball manufacturers make too much revenue to easily submit to the standardization of equipment, and professional golf's success is driven, in large part, by the huge advertising dollars these manufacturers pump into the sport.

One of the great things about baseball is that you can “sort of” compare between eras

Do you really believe this? I'm not so sure Honus Wagner or Mickey Mantle can be compared that well to Todd Helton or Barry Bonds nor can Bob Gibson be compared that well to Pedro Martinez or Walter Johnson, but I'm not trying to baseball this thread so I'll stop.