BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: WOWZERS on December 01, 2016, 09:17:55 AM
-
Link included below. Comments are from Jack Nicklaus complaining that advancement in golf ball technology is the reason for course closures.
I think some could draw a similar conclusion with the advent of new bowling ball technology.
https://www.yahoo.com/sports/news/jack-nicklaus-blames-golf-ball-132904968.html
-
Yea, because with the new clubs and balls, golf has just become too damn easy. :o
-
His view is from a course designers view. Just like bowling centers. Its always someone else fault. The economics of the golf industry are heading down the same path that bowling took about 15 years ago. There is no grass roots growth of the sport. As the older generations quit the game there are no new ones to take their place.
-
Golf has always had a high turniver rate due to the difficulty of the game. Technology advances in golf are very similar to bowling but dont benefit the average golfer who often has a difficult time just getting the ball airborne witout a big slicece.
-
His view is from a course designers view. Just like bowling centers. Its always someone else fault. The economics of the golf industry are heading down the same path that bowling took about 15 years ago. There is no grass roots growth of the sport. As the older generations quit the game there are no new ones to take their place.
Exactly. If the land a business occupies is worth more for another purpose, then there will always be someone willing to redevelop. Drive In movie theaters, Bowling Alleys, Golf Courses, Older style shopping centers are all destined to be replaced in a lot of areas.
-
Golf has always had a high turniver rate due to the difficulty of the game. Technology advances in golf are very similar to bowling but dont benefit the average golfer who often has a difficult time just getting the ball airborne witout a big slicece.
But the same thing is true for bowling. League bowlers are no longer the "average" and I would venture to guess that the reactive balls don't really help most of them either.
The average golfer is little more than the once or twice a month have a beer and pizza bowler in my opinion.
Although it is probably a lot harder to get a bowling ball out of a sand trap. ;D
-
Based on what Jack is saying you could make the comparison. But unlike bowling, most in the golf world do not feel it is the ball that is the culprit of the decline in participation. At least golfers understand economics are more to blame.
And Jack has been complaining about golf balls for years, this is nothing new.
-
I think the most common perception that I thought of when I first read the article before starting this thread was the common link of the "older" greats complaining how technology has changed the game they were once good at. How many of the older great bowlers come out against technology advancements and many folks want to go back to the days of pre-resin, etc. I still remember Voss looking into the TV camera and stating to "ban sanded bowling balls" or something similar to that.....
-
It is funny, and not a coincidence, that bowling and golf have had a lot of tech advances, and that the regulatory bodies of both sports have invested a lot of time and money into researching the same basic physics of round, spinning objects traveling toward a distant target. They have researched coefficient of restitution (COR), rebound/spring effect, surface dynamics, core size/shape/rg/diff and cover hardness or softness, to name a few. Different games, but not so different issues.
The new elite young players are intelligent, physically gifted, well schooled in their craft from a young age and unafraid to go for broke. The advantage of experience is still present, but at times it shrinks in the face of someone who matches their game up very well with the conditions at hand. Hate it if you want, but I can tell you from my experience that whining never improved my game, or attitude, but hard work and a willingness to try something different or uncomfortable can yield results if you really want to continue to try and be your best!
-
This quote from the article sums it up for me.
Courses have had to change along with it. It's now a slower game and more expensive than before, and that can't be a good thing."
I have stated it before, we sure do pay a ton of money for that increase in strike percentage.
-
but golf is alot more popular then bowling
-
Well said Luke. Not so sure golf is more popular than bowling.
-
This thread is a Sawbones flashback. :)
Since, I am involved in the golf industry I can male a few points from the Nicklaus article. I would agree from a professional standpoint or those that have 105+mph driver swing speed that can take advantage of the new ball that they have made some courses outdated and too short. ie. Merion, Baltusrol, etal. Look what the USGA has had to do to play these old gems. Look what Augusta National has had to do with lengthening it's course for The Masters.
BUT, how many players have 105+ driver SS? less than 15% of the golfing public. None of us are PGA pros nor PBA pros. So, that discussion is down the tubes.
The main reason golf has dropped off is the pace of play and amount of time one is going to put into a sport (note I say sport golf is a way harder endeavor to master than bowling given the parameters and playing rules of the different sports.) Most can't give 4 to 5 hours to a game. Hence why we have a proliferation of 3 person leagues which take 1:30 hours. Majority of bowlers don't want to bowl 3 hour 5 man leagues.
The First Tee golf youth program is much like the USBC youth program. I doubt there is much difference there depending on locality.
There are many other reasons but I touched on a few that relate to the Nicklaus article and golf vs. bowling in general.
BTW....Mr. Nicklaus is one of those that supports Tee It Forward.
-
Well said Luke. Not so sure golf is more popular than bowling.
It's certainly more marketable, I doubt there would be so many willing sponsors creating multi-million dollar prize funds if it didn't reach a significant audience.
-
Research shows there are almost twice as many "bowlers" as there are "golfers" in the US when you compare participation. Over 24 million people played golf at least once in 2015 while 45.9 million people bowled at least once in 2015. There were almost 2 million league bowlers while there were very few golf league members.
I believe the main reason for the discrepancy in sponsorship funds is the demographic. Golf draws in a more affluent demographic with more disposable income and thus the marketing of it is different. I can't imagine a time in the near future where bowling will pass golf in that aspect.
What is more surprising is the number of bowling centers in the US is hovering around 4900 yet the number of golf courses is over 15,000.
-
Research shows there are almost twice as many "bowlers" as there are "golfers" in the US when you compare participation. Over 24 million people played golf at least once in 2015 while 45.9 million people bowled at least once in 2015. There were almost 2 million league bowlers while there were very few golf league members.
I believe the main reason for the discrepancy in sponsorship funds is the demographic. Golf draws in a more affluent demographic with more disposable income and thus the marketing of it is different. I can't imagine a time in the near future where bowling will pass golf in that aspect.
What is more surprising is the number of bowling centers in the US is hovering around 4900 yet the number of golf courses is over 15,000.
Even a small bowling center can get more customers through the door in one day than a golf course. You can bowl couple of games and be on your way. Golf your choice is to play the entire course or half of it.
-
If you want to compare participation numbers then count all the people that go to a driving range once or places like Topgolf. Bowling counts the 3 year olds that use a ramp and bumpers.
-
If you want to compare participation numbers then count all the people that go to a driving range once or places like Topgolf. Bowling counts the 3 year olds that use a ramp and bumpers.
You just described most of house bowlers out there.
*Ducks*
-
If you want to compare participation numbers then count all the people that go to a driving range once or places like Topgolf. Bowling counts the 3 year olds that use a ramp and bumpers.
I understand numbers like these are never completely accurate. Hell, should we count Putt-Putt? What about the guys who don't play but putt at Golfsmith? I even have friends who don't bowl but love Wii bowling.
I just thought it was interesting to see on average, there are supposedly 10,000 unique bowlers per center and almost 1,600 unique golfers per golf course. Bowling centers obviously can handle more bowlers than a golf course can handle golfers, I was just surprised to see the difference.
-
Here is the thing I find interesting. Ask a guy who has an old set of clubs in
-
Ironic that no one is bitching about how USGA has done nothing to keep and increase the number of golfers.
-
Here is the thing I find interesting. Ask a guy who has an old set of clubs in
Back in the 80's a friend (very good golfer) picked up a used set of golf clubs in good condition for me for something like $50.
I figure when I got good enough that the clubs were holding me back, I'd buy newer ones.
I still have those same clubs.
-
Ironic that no one is bitching about how USGA has done nothing to keep and increase the number of golfers.
If they had lost 90% of their membership and the PGA Tour prize funds were less than they were in the 1970's, I suspect you would hear more complaints.
-
Ironic that no one is bitching about how USGA has done nothing to keep and increase the number of golfers.
If they had lost 90% of their membership and the PGA Tour prize funds were less than they were in the 1970's, I suspect you would hear more complaints.
To compare USGA/local USGA State members to exempt card holding regular tour PGA players is like comparing USBC members to regular PBA tour players. Remember when the PBA tried what the PGA does having an exempt tour?
-
Ironic that no one is bitching about how USGA has done nothing to keep and increase the number of golfers.
If they had lost 90% of their membership and the PGA Tour prize funds were less than they were in the 1970's, I suspect you would hear more complaints.
To compare USGA/local USGA State members to exempt card holding regular tour PGA players is like comparing USBC members to regular PBA tour players. Remember when the PBA tried what the PGA does having an exempt tour?
I was comparing USBC membership to USGA membership and PBA tour to PGA tour prize funds. The reality is that no other sport has even remotely declined as much as bowling over the last three decades.
-
Regular PGA and PGA Champions plus LPGA to a lessor extent has sponsors so it has $$$$$.
PBA few sponsors no money it's that simple.
-
Regular PGA and PGA Champions plus LPGA to a lessor extent has sponsors so it has $$$$$.
PBA few sponsors no money it's that simple.
Wasting your time with this. Facts are irrelevant if they don't fit the agenda.
-
Regular PGA and PGA Champions plus LPGA to a lessor extent has sponsors so it has $$$$$.
PBA few sponsors no money it's that simple.
Wasting your time with this. Facts are irrelevant if they don't fit the agenda.
True Milo. To compare bowling and golf is ludicrous for the most part as 'Bones would say.
-
Regular PGA and PGA Champions plus LPGA to a lessor extent has sponsors so it has $$$$$.
PBA few sponsors no money it's that simple.
Wasting your time with this. Facts are irrelevant if they don't fit the agenda.
Sponsors invest because there is an audience to market too...bigger audience, more sponsorship dollars. Assuming roughly 2% of membership is interested in the "sport" of bowling, this becomes a math problem because 2% of 10 million is more than 2% of 1 million. More members equals more consumers equals more sponsors, but don't let facts get in the way.
-
Regular PGA and PGA Champions plus LPGA to a lessor extent has sponsors so it has $$$$$.
PBA few sponsors no money it's that simple.
Wasting your time with this. Facts are irrelevant if they don't fit the agenda.
Sponsors invest because there is an audience to market too...bigger audience, more sponsorship dollars. Assuming roughly 2% of membership is interested in the "sport" of bowling, this becomes a math problem because 2% of 10 million is more than 2% of 1 million. More members equals more consumers equals more sponsors, but don't let facts get in the way.
Regular PGA and PGA Champions plus LPGA to a lessor extent has sponsors so it has $$$$$.
PBA few sponsors no money it's that simple.
Wasting your time with this. Facts are irrelevant if they don't fit the agenda.
Sponsors invest because there is an audience to market too...bigger audience, more sponsorship dollars. Assuming roughly 2% of membership is interested in the "sport" of bowling, this becomes a math problem because 2% of 10 million is more than 2% of 1 million. More members equals more consumers equals more sponsors, but don't let facts get in the way.
Sponsors pay for exposure. And people do not watch televised sports just because they participate in the sport. So your "facts" don't fit your agenda. But I'll give you a C- for effort anyway.
-
Regular PGA and PGA Champions plus LPGA to a lessor extent has sponsors so it has $$$$$.
PBA few sponsors no money it's that simple.
Wasting your time with this. Facts are irrelevant if they don't fit the agenda.
Sponsors invest because there is an audience to market too...bigger audience, more sponsorship dollars. Assuming roughly 2% of membership is interested in the "sport" of bowling, this becomes a math problem because 2% of 10 million is more than 2% of 1 million. More members equals more consumers equals more sponsors, but don't let facts get in the way.
Regular PGA and PGA Champions plus LPGA to a lessor extent has sponsors so it has $$$$$.
PBA few sponsors no money it's that simple.
Wasting your time with this. Facts are irrelevant if they don't fit the agenda.
Sponsors invest because there is an audience to market too...bigger audience, more sponsorship dollars. Assuming roughly 2% of membership is interested in the "sport" of bowling, this becomes a math problem because 2% of 10 million is more than 2% of 1 million. More members equals more consumers equals more sponsors, but don't let facts get in the way.
Sponsors pay for exposure. And people do not watch televised sports just because they participate in the sport. So your "facts" don't fit your agenda. But I'll give you a C- for effort anyway.
We are talking about participation sports, not NASCAR or the NFL. When bowling had 10's of millions of members it was on ABC Wide World of Sports and there were plenty of main stream sponsors, now not so much. The sport was strong when membership was strong, that's called causation (the relationship between cause and effect).
-
If people were interested in bowling, then they would watch and sponsors would pay. It's that simple.
The fact is, popular interest in sports come and go. Bowling has probably had it's day (and may yet again), NASCAR isn't as popular today as just a few years ago. The NFL viewership is down this year. NBA is doing great. College football is more popular than ever as is Soccer. Golf has probably passed it's peak just like Indy car racing.
Trends come and go. Buy don't let fickle public interest get in the way of your grudge.
-
If people were interested in bowling, then they would watch and sponsors would pay. It's that simple.
The fact is, popular interest in sports come and go. Bowling has probably had it's day (and may yet again), NASCAR isn't as popular today as just a few years ago. The NFL viewership is down this year. NBA is doing great. College football is more popular than ever as is Soccer. Golf has probably passed it's peak just like Indy car racing.
Trends come and go. Buy don't let fickle public interest get in the way of your grudge.
Again, there are no facts in your posts, only opinion. Discussions are more interesting when they are factual, but that would require higher intelligence on your part and that clearly isn't possible.
-
Facts are facts. You not agreeing with them do not make it not true.
-
Facts are facts. You not agreeing with them do not make it not true.
Thanks for your subjective opinion, but just so there's no confusion with my objective approach based on facts I provided definitions for you:
Subjective - placing excessive emphasis on one's own moods, attitudes, opinions, etc.; unduly egocentric.
Objective - not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased.
-
http://www.si.com/nfl/photo/2016/10/20/nfl-television-ratings-decline-causes (http://www.si.com/nfl/photo/2016/10/20/nfl-television-ratings-decline-causes)
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nascar/2016/07/01/nascar-declining-attendance-tv-ratings-fans-social-media/86573130/ (http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nascar/2016/07/01/nascar-declining-attendance-tv-ratings-fans-social-media/86573130/)
http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2016/10/pga-tour-ratings-wrap-2016-cbs-nbc-fox-viewership/ (http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2016/10/pga-tour-ratings-wrap-2016-cbs-nbc-fox-viewership/)
But you know, I thought about your "facts" and you are right. It's all the USBC's fault. Why the hell aren't they doing something about this??
Actually, the reason for decline in all sport that have seen declines is USBC's fault.
They better get off their ass and use the $10 a year I send them. And don't dare ask for more either.
Have a nice day. It's a typical beautiful November Saturday in Central California and I have better things to do than deal with the town dullard.
I could go bowling, but USBC has done nothing to encourage me to do so.
-
http://www.si.com/nfl/photo/2016/10/20/nfl-television-ratings-decline-causes (http://www.si.com/nfl/photo/2016/10/20/nfl-television-ratings-decline-causes)
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nascar/2016/07/01/nascar-declining-attendance-tv-ratings-fans-social-media/86573130/ (http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nascar/2016/07/01/nascar-declining-attendance-tv-ratings-fans-social-media/86573130/)
http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2016/10/pga-tour-ratings-wrap-2016-cbs-nbc-fox-viewership/ (http://www.sportsmediawatch.com/2016/10/pga-tour-ratings-wrap-2016-cbs-nbc-fox-viewership/)
But you know, I thought about your "facts" and you are right. It's all the USBC's fault. Why the hell aren't they doing something about this??
Actually, the reason for decline in all sport that have seen declines is USBC's fault.
They better get off their ass and use the $10 a year I send them. And don't dare ask for more either.
Have a nice day. It's a typical beautiful November Saturday in Central California and I have better things to do than deal with the town dullard.
I could go bowling, but USBC has done nothing to encourage me to do so.
First, what in the world does NASCAR and the NFL have to do with a participation sport like golf or bowling. Secondly, your talking about a 5% decline in golf viewership, I wish bowling was within 50% of its peak...but hey don't let logic or reason get in the way of your opinions.
-
Perhaps I am missing something here, but what does posting numerous complaints about the USBC or the decline of bowling on a ball reviews site accomplish? I would think posting them or sending them to the USBC would accomplish more.
-
Perhaps I am missing something here, but what does posting numerous complaints about the USBC or the decline of bowling on a ball reviews site accomplish? I would think posting them or sending them to the USBC would accomplish more.
They're too busy running a professional tour and promoting their numerous "Open" tournaments to be bothered with membership decline. I would be happy to pay $100 a year if there were actually programs designed to acquire and retain members but apparently the best they could do was this PDF last updated six years ago.
http://usbcongress.http.internapcdn.net/usbcongress/bowl/associations/pdfs/2010-2011/Forms%20and%20Manuals/Membership/Volunteer%20mbshp%20recruit%20plan%207-14-10.pdf
They aren't listening and anyone with a differing opinion from Chad Murphy is labeled as negative which is the same tactic being used by many on this forum. The fact is our game has been in a tailspin for decades and apparently the solution is to run the PWBA and focus on "Open" tournaments which does little to attract the vast majority of current/prospective members. Our game deserves better than the USBC is capable or willing to provide, but most on this forum are the elite and the current strategy caters to them so they defend it.
-
Remember this. In the 70s bowling had much higher tv ratings than golf which should have resulted in much better sponsorship than was actually achieved. Probably multiple reasons but the one cited most often was demographics of the viewing audience. Big corporations didnt believe that bowling audience had the same level of disposable income as golf audiences. It went back to the old pool room, blue collar image of bowlers. The wall street elite didnt bowl and they pretty much viewed bowlers as low class.
-
Back in the 70's when the numbers for bowling were at it's peak the sponsors were focusing their advertising dollars on products that appealed to blue collar necessities, not the amount of disposable income which may be true for golf.
Examples such as shaving cream, pain relievers/aspirin, spark plugs (Spitfire), car tires/tuneups (Firestone/Goodyear), mufflers (Midas) the latest greatest car deals to be had for blue collar level transporation (they weren't pitching Cadillacs or Lincolns).
The advertisers always knew that a high level of disposable income did not exist in bowling market and therefore, big ticket items which produced large profits for the sponsors fell to the golf market. Hence the difference in the level of sponsorship/ prize funds.
There were differences then, now, and will be in the future because although they appear to be similar, in reality they are completely different markets in the world of sports.
-
It really showed up in the pro ams which golf used to bootstrap itself into the charity market. Corporate execs willing to pay upwards of 1000 to play with their top golfer. The same companies willing to pony up huge prize fund dollars for great publicity. No such possibility in bowling.
-
Jack should just fish....golf is hurting because the under 30 crowd does not have the time to play 18....it's about a 6 to 7 hour day when you factor on driving time, playing time and eating time...
And the game is too expensive....the golf ball has nothing to do with the lack of play.
Jack wants to scale back the driver and the ball.... if this was done a big hitter would barely be 200 yards...
-
What demographic is golf losing? If it's the casual golfer it ain't the golf ball. Most hackers use crap balls, refurbs, or balls found during a round. That along with cheap clubs, or clubs better then them and not properly fitted in most cases.
Golf has fallen off in popularity, and started to shrink back from where it has gotten too big for it's customer base. It happens.
Not the golf balls fault. Hack golfers with bad form can't hit a Pro-V1 any better then a Top Flight.
-
Golf had the Tiger effect were everyone wanted to take up the game.
After a while they found out how hard golf is and many have quit.
The biggest problem with the golf ball is that it is making some classic courses obsolete. They are limited on space and can not have length added.
While club and ball technology has helped golfers, only the few with high swing speeds really get the length effect from the ball. The average golf handicap is pretty much the same today as it was 40 years ago. You don't hear of large number of holes in one shot or sub par rounds by a lot of amateurs.
-
The Tiger effect is wearing off. It has brought more minorities to the game, but golf sees the same problems as bowling, lack of interest from millennials.
What a few golf course have tried to do is make golf a little easier and faster by changing the size of the hole. Shots around the green account for more than half of the hacker's total shots so anything that can make that aspect of the game easier for them will hopefully keep them engaged and play more. Not everyone is in favor of the larger hole (THS), but it can have its place.
http://www.bigholegolf.com/ (http://www.bigholegolf.com/)
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/04/golf-15-inch-holes (http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/04/golf-15-inch-holes)
-
The Tiger effect is wearing off. It has brought more minorities to the game, but golf sees the same problems as bowling, lack of interest from millennials.
What a few golf course have tried to do is make golf a little easier and faster by changing the size of the hole. Shots around the green account for more than half of the hacker's total shots so anything that can make that aspect of the game easier for them will hopefully keep them engaged and play more. Not everyone is in favor of the larger hole (THS), but it can have its place.
http://www.bigholegolf.com/ (http://www.bigholegolf.com/)
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/04/golf-15-inch-holes (http://ftw.usatoday.com/2014/04/golf-15-inch-holes)
Let's lower the basket in basketball to 8' so everyone can dunk. :)
-
Lets see if I can some this up. People quit bowling because it is too easy and they quit golf because it is too tough.
Seriously, not sure about golf but bowling started to die at the organized level when other activities started cutting into hunior bowling. 40 years ago every house in town was full with juniors on Saturday morning. Only a small percentage went on to adult leagues, but a small percentage of a big number is still signifivant
-
hogwash..... if this was true golfers would be breaking par...FEW CAN BREAK 80 WITHOUT CHEATING....