Golf Ball Coaster

Ridiculous Golf Item Of The Week

No one will ever mistake The GolfBlogger for a tree hugger, but this is just ridiculous:

Nationwide Tour golfer Tripp Isenhour

was charged with two misdemeanor counts of cruelty to animals and killing a migratory bird as a result of the incident, which took place Dec. 12 at Grand Cypress Golf Club in Orlando, Fla. The charges carry a maximum penalty of 14 months in jail and $1,500 in fines.

Isenhour was taping a video called “Shoot Like a Pro” and was interrupted by the noise of the bird, according to news reports. He eventually knocked the bird out of a tree with one of his shots.

According to court documents, Isenhour got upset when a red-shouldered hawk began making noise, forcing another take. He began hitting balls at the bird, then 300 yards away, but gave up.

Isenhour started again when the hawk moved within about 75 yards, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission officer Brian Baine indicated in a report.

Isenhour allegedly said “I’ll get him now,” and aimed for the hawk.

A few shots later, witnesses said he hit the hawk. The bird, protected as a migratory species, fell to the ground bleeding from both nostrils.

I will confess to once killing a bird on a driving range, but that was a complete accident. I hit the ball, and the bird darted right in front of it about 50 yards out, exploding in a mass of feathers. I felt really bad.

But deliberately trying to hit a bird—with multiple shots no less—is just barbaric.

Slow play on the golf course has come increasingly under fire both on public courses, and on the Tours. For most of us, pace of play on the Tours is not an issue—Tiger’s complaints not withstanding. But among amateurs on public courses, slow play is being blamed in part for a general decline (or at least stagnation) in the number of rounds played.

There’s been a lot of discussion about the reasons for the five hour round. Experts blame practice swings, not playing ready golf, and course routing issues. But I think the principal one is that amateurs are playing from the wrong tees. The simple fact of the matter is that most golfers are not good enough to play from the tips (or even the blues)—and yet so many do. Consider:

• The average drive of the average male golfer is 192 yards (according to the USGA and major manufacturers). That same golfer, however, thinks that he hits the ball 230 yards on average.
• Only one in 50 golfers routinely hits drives of 250 yards or more.
• The average female golfer hits a drive of 135 yards. Seniors on average are able to drive 180 yards.
• All golfers, in fact, consistently overestimate the length of their shots—both on drives and from the fairway.
• The average score for a round of golf remains at 100—where it has been for many decades. Just 22% of golfers manage to break 90 on a regular basis. Only 5% manage to break 80.
• The average handicap for a man is 16.1. The average handicap for a woman is 28. And considering that it’s only the most dedicated golfers that bother to keep an official handicap, the handicap for the general population is likely much higher
• Less than 1 percent of the golfing population plays to a low single digit handicap.

Here’s why it matters: Playing a short drive from the back tees is going to add at least one shot for fourteen of the eighteen holes on the course. On a par 4, a drive that falls short of the legitimate range of your short to mid irons (wedge to seven) drastically reduces your chance of hitting the green in regulation. You may have the length to cover the distance in two, but with a long iron or wood as your second, chances are that you won’t hit the green. So you end up taking an extra shot or two trying to get up from a greenside bunker or grass.

Further, if you’re forced to hit a driver on every hole to get the distance required, you also increase your chances of landing in the rough, in the trees, or worse. In that case, even if you DO hit it 250 yards, you add a shot getting out of trouble. On a par 5, golfers not only face this risk on the tee shot, but also on the second, where the necessity of playing a long wood to get into scoring range presents a second opportunity to get into trouble.

Then there’s the lost ball issue. When you are forced to constantly hit the big sticks, you’re going to lose balls. And time will be lost looking for them.

All of those shots add up. Assume three minutes for each shot per player (travel time, locating the ball, picking a club practice swings, watching the ball flight, putting the club away, etc.). Multiply that by 14 extra shots per round per player and you’ll find that each player loses 42 minutes to poor tee selection; for the group, that adds up to 168 minutes. Even with some overlap (two players preparing at the same time), and holes where you don’t actually take the extra shot, that adds an hour-and-a-half to two hours to a round.

Poor tee selection thus explains the five to six hour round very neatly.

I’ll add that it’s possible poor tee selection will add a shot on all eighteen, since playing from the back tees also reduces your chances of hitting a green on a par 3.

Playing from the wrong tees (and the insane lengths of courses these days), also may explain why—even as equipment improves—scores have remained constant. Any playing gains in equipment have been more than offset by the added distance (either by the course design, or self-inflicted by playing from the tips). Players purchase a driver that’s “ten yards longer” and then play from tees that are twenty yards further back.

Playing from the correct tees not only will improve pace of play, it also will improve player scores, and thus enjoyment of the game. And all of that can only be good for the game.

Acer XP Step Cavity Iron

There’s a lot going on with the Acer XP Step Cavity Irons. They begin with a notched sole area that moves the weight toward the heel and toe, where it is needed most. Moment of intertia is increased with an undercut cavity; the step cavity fine tunes this weighting even further.

How many dimples are on a golf ball?

While it varies from model to model, golf balls typically have between 300 and 500 dimples. On average, it seems that balls have around 330 dimples; 336 has been cited as typical.

Dimples typically have a depth of 0.010 inches.

Some models have extraordinary numbers. The Dimplet has 1070 dimples: 656 small ones, and 414 large. By contrast, the new Caesar ball has none—it’s as smooth as a billiard ball.

Dimples however, are necessary for a golf ball’s flight. They have two effects.

First, a bit of physics: Any moving object leaves a wake in the air behind it; wakes in turn create drag, slowing the object. Reducing drag is a key to going faster. That’s why “drafting” works in NASCAR. Having a second car immediately behind the first reduces the wake of the first car, allowing it to go faster. The second car also goes faster because it doesn’t have to push as much air out of the way.

Dimples work to reduce drag by creating microscopic eddies on the surface of the ball. This has the effect of reducing the following wake of air. A smaller wake means less drag.  Although it’s counterintuitive, because of the wake, a smooth ball actually has higher drag.

The dimples also work with spin to create lift. The spinning ball creates higher air pressure on the bottom of the ball than on the top. Like an airplane wing, this forces the ball upward.

Golf balls actually “fly”—they aren’t just shoved through the air.

This principle was discovered by early ball makers, who, when molding gutta percha balls by hand would press random marks into the surface. Later, molds were created that had the impressions built in. Early models, such as the one shown at left had a cross-hatch pattern rather than dimples. The effect, however, was the same.

An Illinois man landed his plane on a golf course in order to get his son to a tennis lesson.

Weird Golf Story of The Week

Earlier this week, the teachers in my building were instructed to attend an in-service called “Love and Logic,” presented by a Dr. Bob Sornson.

It turned out to be three of the most excruciating hours of my life. Worse, we all have to attend part two next week.

Sornson comes across as condescending, vapid and insipid. I found his “insights” into teaching nothing more than vacuous platitudes.