Forums

Ball choice

• DaddysKat 3,554 Posts

  Fri, Jul 25 2014 10:49 AM

  MRdesign:

  You explanation that WGT is affiliated with USGA etcetera is not correct. According to you if a player uses a different kind of ball in play he or she will be disqualified. How is it then that WGT provides the player with the standard ball? In your reasoning i had to be disqualified. 

  In real life, if you play in a Pro-Am style tourney, you are limited to 3 balls.  All 3 balls must be marked and shown to the starter and your opponents.  If you lose all 3 balls in an event, you are DQ'ed.  It seldom happens in Pro-AM.

  If you play in a tournament, the tourney director can institute and enforce the "one ball rule".  If you use another ball in the tourney other than the type you declared in one of these events, you are also disqualified.

  WGT says we are all playing as professional golfers ... hence the reason for the "one ball" rule.  While I think this should only be enforced during a ranked round, they enforce it in all games.  That's their call, since it's their game.

  @Alosso ... so you're 8 holes of a 9 hole practice game and you lose your last ball ... you know you have other balls in your inventory.  I didn't buy the balls when offered for whatever reason.  Now I can do one of two things ... finish the game with the starter balls and get the XP or quit.

  Maybe I have other balls in my inventory, so instead of springing for a new sleeve of balls I just load some different balls from my inventory.  Where did WGT make money in this example?

  If they were to allow me to load that other set of balls, I would be adding ball usage to those other balls in my inventory ... making them wear out quicker and, yes, eventually being forced to buy new balls or use the starters.  

  Plus, WGT already has the routine written to swap out golf balls ... so now it's just a new subroutine they have to write that calls the swapballs module ... not an entire program.

  It just might get the programmers something to do other than play Online Texas-Hold-em (or this game).  Plus, they will be wearing out a player's golf ball inventory ... so that's their incentive to add it to the practice games.

• ApexPC 3,164 Posts

  Fri, Jul 25 2014 11:45 AM

  DaddysKat:

  In real life, if you play in a Pro-Am style tourney, you are limited to 3 balls. 

  Where was that?

  I was never limited to 3 balls for any of the PGA Pro/Am's I played in as an amateur.

  On the first tee I did have to show the other players my mark and the make/model of ball I was playing for the round.

   

• srellim234 2,077 Posts

  Fri, Jul 25 2014 12:13 PM

  There is absolutely no way the PGA limits anyone in a Pro-Am to three balls. They would lose way too much sponsorship money by alienating all the CEOs they'd be throwing out of a round. They would also lose viewership and television money by throwing out many of the celebrities at tournaments like Pebble Beach. Some of those players would be paying a $10,000 entry fee for one or two holes! Limiting players to three balls would be a public relations nightmare.

  Allowing players to change to another ball in their inventory initially hurts WGT in the short term only because there are megamillions of hits in inventories that are unused. WGT collected for those already and profits from forcing new ball sales instead of allowing their usage. If they allowed them to be used, though, those inventories would eventually be depleted and players forced to buy using the current  system in place. No difference in income for the company at that point.

  WGT might actually see a very small uptick in ball sales if they allowed free substitution in practice games. Some players would probably buy different balls to play side-by-side using mulligans to help them better decide their ball of preference. That would probably be offset, however, by the shortsighted players who refuse to stock the bag properly now, quit the game, buy more balls at that point and start a round all over again. WGT is probably making a lot of money off of those wasted hits.

  WGT can cite the One Ball Rule all they want but the rule book doesn't  call for its use in practice, regular rounds and most club level tournaments.

• alosso 21,060 Posts

  Fri, Jul 25 2014 1:05 PM

  DaddysKat:

  @Alosso ... so you're 8 holes of a 9 hole practice game and you lose your last ball ... you know you have other balls in your inventory.  I didn't buy the balls when offered for whatever reason.  Now I can do one of two things ... finish the game with the starter balls and get the XP or quit.

  Maybe I have other balls in my inventory, so instead of springing for a new sleeve of balls I just load some different balls from my inventory.  Where did WGT make money in this example?

  In practice, I'd not give a d..., and in an important game, I'd make sure to have enough of the ball I'm used to.

  Plus, we can discuss it ad nauseam, but the game is as it is, and, hopefully, they have more important things to do than complicate practice by some ball choice.

   

  The whole discussion doesn't grasp the point IMNSHO.

  This way or another, the balls pay for our games. Any change to our profit will lead to balls becoming more expensive in compensation, any other change must be profitable to the company. Arguing and whining for the sake of single balls is moot.

  Citing the One Ball Rule is as moot as is "realism" - expensive green fees are real as well - do you want them?

• JFidanza 1,676 Posts

  Fri, Jul 25 2014 1:07 PM

  alosso:

    we can more effectively use up the balls. Wouldn't that mean less ball sales, less revenue?

   

   

  use up the balls = need to buy more balls = more revenue 

  ?

  That was my 1st line of thinking but maybe I'm not totally accurate, (1st cup of coffee..)

  I was just answering a question: good idea? Yes. 

  Likely to be adapted by WGT? IDK.

  [ I'm still waiting for the avi to be see thru during putting, always. I don't think there is a person who's putting who demands 'Gee, I wish my player was always solid! I like it when I can't see the dots.' But I digress. ]

   

• alosso 21,060 Posts

  Fri, Jul 25 2014 1:59 PM

  JFidanza:

  alosso:

    we can more effectively use up the balls. Wouldn't that mean less ball sales, less revenue?

  use up the balls = need to buy more balls = more revenue 

  ?

  Unfortunately not.

  These single unused balls "store" some thousand shots in my inventory. If they stay unused, I have to buy shots = balls earlier. More sale - more revenue.

  It's about like the unused toothpaste problem.

• srellim234 2,077 Posts

  Fri, Jul 25 2014 2:00 PM

  alosso:

  ... expensive green fees are real as well - do you want them?

  You keep bringing the realism of green fees as a means of dismissing the ball issue. Totally unrelated.

  Players can continue to ask for more realistic enforcement of golf rules. Ball substitution, drop zones, etc. Make enforcement of the rules they cite as realistic as possible. They're the ones that advertise themselves as realistic.

  Charging green fees is not a rule. Just over an hour from here is a 9 hole golf course that is run as a community outreach by a church. Non profits (other churches, charities, schools, sports teams,etc.) are allowed to book the course for free for fundraising tournaments. Members of that church are allowed to play for no green fees or membership fees after whatever tourney is done that they booked that day. Donations from the church members across Southern California pay for the course and maintenance. It's a phenomenal program and they take very good care of that course.

  Should WGT decide that green fees are necessary to add realism to the game, they are perfectly entitled to do so. They can make that business decision based on what they think the market will bear. We, as customers, will decide if we want to pay those green fees. I suspect the majority of players will leave if they charge green fees for every course they have. You can bet, however, that if they thought they could make one additional dollar by charging green fees they'd be doing it already.

  If you are so desperate to have WGT charge green fees, start a new thread as part of Product Suggestions. It is a separate issue.

• alosso 21,060 Posts

  Fri, Jul 25 2014 2:34 PM

  srellim234:

  You keep bringing the realism of green fees as a means of dismissing the ball issue. Totally unrelated.

  Oh no. Somehow the game must be payed for - by ball price or other means like - for instance - green fees.

  I prefer the way it is - each player deciding about the amount he pays vs. ball quality.

  srellim234:

  Charging green fees is not a rule.

  I say, not charging them is a minor exception. Even your singular example includes money payment - the funds raised from the players. It's obvious that such sponsored or promotional events have different cashing rules than straight commercial operation.

  srellim234:

  If you are so desperate to have WGT charge green fees

  I am not - read what I wrote including the part that you dropped from your quote.

  And, feel free to whinge for a change in the company's policy of ball usage etc. - IMNSHO it's useless.

  'nuff said - good night!

• srellim234 2,077 Posts

  Fri, Jul 25 2014 3:23 PM

  In my heart I know you're right about WGT using the balls to pay for the game. Rather than have shoe come in and lie to us citing the One Ball rule., he should come in here and be honest. Cite the fact that WGT is using all those unused ball strikes to pay for the game. If they were truly trying to enact the One Ball rule, they would be more sympathetic to the players and attempt to correct some errors in the way they are implementing it.

  As I pointed out, the drop in income to WGT would be quite temporary in exchange for a lot of goodwill and more realism. Eventually people are going to be running out of those leftover balls. When those unused hits are finished, players will continue to buy balls at the present rate.

• alosso 21,060 Posts

  Sat, Jul 26 2014 12:31 AM

  srellim234:

  In my heart I know you're right about WGT using the balls to pay for the game.

  To me, this is all that counts.

  Furtheron & IMHO they kept the program slim from the start, avoiding any options like dropping and ball change... Realism is limited to the pictures and the shots, they obey the rules to a wide extent but not completely.

  Most important: The game is as it is, period!

  The rest is folklore to me - wishful thinking, stories and reasoning just to promote individual positions and claims.