Titleist golf ball study; Finally, some facts added to the debate

145791019

Comments

  • raynorfan1raynorfan1 Members Posts: 3,519 ✭✭
    Rapatt95 wrote:


    I was surprised at some of the names throwing up -23 and such




    I agree and I'm not quite sure how to interpret that.
  • golfer07840golfer07840 Smart ass from Northwest NJMembers Posts: 1,627 ClubWRX
    Bye wrote:

    raynorfan1 wrote:


    raynorfan1 wrote:



    Question. How would the side that's against he ball being rolled back distance wise feel if it were rolled back to a ball that simply spins more. One that's harder to hit straight ? But Retains the possibility of going the same distance as now on a perfect strike ? Coupled with a cc rollback of 100cc for driver. Would that be a fair compromise to the proposed ball rollback ?




    What problem are you solving for?



    I’d rather have them roll back the driver size/COR and wedge groove rules.




    And I get that. You'd rather hit a straight ball yes?



    I'm saying that the true issue isn't total distance . It's the ease at which it's achieved.



    And on top of that approach shots. We see less and less flighted , worked in shots to a tight pin. It's all high straight at it. It's a pipe dream I know as it won't happen. But if every tour player had to play a less forgiving iron ( one without perimeter weighting ) and a ball that spun more viewing in my opinion would be x100 more fun to watch. Cream would rise as usual. And we would see a lot more interesting pro tracer shots. Anyone think that isn't true ? If so I'd love to hear how straight is more fun to watch. Truth is it wont happen because of $. Can't sell less forgiveness to the masses. So the game is sold off bit by bit.




    I get it. But it reminds me of an aging high school basketball coach who has become a fan of Women’s NCAA basketball because “they still play the game the right way”.



    Some people would undoubtedly enjoy watching a high-spin shotmaking shootout. If the PGA Tour thought that this was the majority of people, they’d be mandating a spinny ball. The market wants bombers, bombers are what they’ll get.



    The reality is that we’re just going to plateau at a new normal. The top quartile guys will all hit their drives the same distance, and tournaments will be decided by short irons and putting - just like they always have been.




    This week at the Joberg open there was a 16 year old English junior in the field. He hits his 7 iron 225, carry. Some may say he is an exception but it's just what's coming. The PGA Tour average and highest ball speeds are increasing and the average angle of atack is moving towards a positive figure. We are a long way from plateauing.




    But that isn't just about the ball. That's about his swing and training and all the analytics he gets from the modern coaching these days. And he's probably fit as a triathlon athlete.

    Opinions are my own and are never to be taken seriously.
    and for God's sake, if you're going to whine about Jim Nantz, have the respect to spell his name correctly.
    WITTB:
    Driver: Callaway XHot Pro 9* Stiff
    3W: Tour Edge Exotics 13* Stiff
    3-4 HY: Callaway Rogue Stiff
    5-PW: Callaway Rogue Stiff steel, True Temper
    48* Titleist, 52* Callaway
    Putter: Nike Method
    Ball: ProV1 -- or whatever I find in the woods while looking for my ProV1

  • cxxcxx Members Posts: 3,052 ✭✭
    new2g0lf wrote:

    Shilgy wrote:

    cxx wrote:


    Work out all you want, the data does not support your conjecture. Everyone's distance exploded with the change in clubs and again with the new ball. The charts are right in the "study". Same guys, more distance.



    Taller people with a longer arc do get some free distance. But why do you think that there were so few tall players before the equipment change. Distance was still important then. Take a look at George Archer standing over the ball and you'll find your answer.
    Is that what this is? An excuse to not work out and be body positive? image/smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />

    Yes, I am quite aware that the modern equipment is better able to accommodate the tall player. Are you aware that in spite of having perhaps the best short game ever the biggest reason for Tiger's reign was his long game? He had more of a strokes gained advantage in the long game than the short. All of the top tour players are long. Yes, some are longer than others but there are no players on tour hitting it 240. Does not matter how good the short game is they need to have a fair amount of length. And all tour players have a good short game. Like in anything else some are better than others but all can chip and roll the rock.

    Too many on here imo are looking at the rankings in the charts above and making false assumptions. 290 off the tee is not short. And yet some here are trying to say that Brian Harman is a short hitter at 289.9 off the tee AVERAGE last year. Please don't mistake a pros average for the typical amateur. The amateur thinks that his longest is how far he can hit it but also seems to think the pros average is far as he can hit it. Nothing of the sort.




    So true, averages do not give the proper insight to distance. As I said, when Spieth hits it 315 yards, Rory or DJ put it out 345 yards. Averages factor in too many variables that can bury the actual performance potential of some of the longer hitters.




    I never argued that distance is overrated. Distance is always important. It's fundamental to Broadie's strokes gained model. The thing I was pointing out is that the equipment had a lot to do with the distance gains. More so than the "athletic" golfer. The same guys were long before they started working out. Some guys were long and never bothered working out. They are still long.



    Player was one of the original workout fanatics. He still lagged well behind Nicklaus and Palmer at firestone on big three golf. He hit a lot of 4 woods into those par 4's.
  • youngwaldoyoungwaldo NJMembers Posts: 3,204 ✭✭
    I am still scratching my head on the "roll it back" campaign when we are asked to "tee it forward".



    Wk
    M5 Tour 9.0 TENSEI TOUR ORANGE 60TX 45"   
    M5 3W TENSEI BLUE 70X
    TM P760 3-5 & TM P730 6-PW TT DG TI X100
    VOKEY SM6 Black 5208M TTDG Tour Issue S400 Black Onyx
    VOKEY SM6 Black 5608M TTDG Tour Issue S400 Black Onyx
    VOKEY SM6 Black 6008M TTDG Tour Issue S400 Black Onyx
    TM MINI SPIDER
  • Rapatt95Rapatt95 wow Posts: 567 ✭✭
    raynorfan1 wrote:
    Rapatt95 wrote:


    I was surprised at some of the names throwing up -23 and such




    I agree and I'm not quite sure how to interpret that.


    I think it just speaks to the talent level of many golfers now. Put a lot pretty good golfers in the same field with an aggressive go get it attitude and scoring can happen
    Ping Anser 9.5* Aldila Tour Blue ATX75tx
    Adams Tight Lies Tour 18* 5w Aldila Tour Blue ATX75tx
    Cobra T-Rail 19* 3H Aldila Tour Green ATX75x
    Ben Hogan PTx 22*-34* C-Taper Lite 115x (Thank you GolfWRX and Ben Hogan!)
    Ben Hogan Ft Worth 15 C-Taper Lite 115x
    Ping Glide Forged 50* DG TI S400 (Thank you GolfWRX and Ping!)
    TM TP ATV 54* KBS Tour-V Wedge
    Vokey SM5 58* DG Wedge
    Ping iWi Anser
  • new2g0lfnew2g0lf Members Posts: 3,309 ClubWRX
    cxx wrote:

    new2g0lf wrote:

    Shilgy wrote:

    cxx wrote:


    Work out all you want, the data does not support your conjecture. Everyone's distance exploded with the change in clubs and again with the new ball. The charts are right in the "study". Same guys, more distance.



    Taller people with a longer arc do get some free distance. But why do you think that there were so few tall players before the equipment change. Distance was still important then. Take a look at George Archer standing over the ball and you'll find your answer.
    Is that what this is? An excuse to not work out and be body positive? image/smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />

    Yes, I am quite aware that the modern equipment is better able to accommodate the tall player. Are you aware that in spite of having perhaps the best short game ever the biggest reason for Tiger's reign was his long game? He had more of a strokes gained advantage in the long game than the short. All of the top tour players are long. Yes, some are longer than others but there are no players on tour hitting it 240. Does not matter how good the short game is they need to have a fair amount of length. And all tour players have a good short game. Like in anything else some are better than others but all can chip and roll the rock.

    Too many on here imo are looking at the rankings in the charts above and making false assumptions. 290 off the tee is not short. And yet some here are trying to say that Brian Harman is a short hitter at 289.9 off the tee AVERAGE last year. Please don't mistake a pros average for the typical amateur. The amateur thinks that his longest is how far he can hit it but also seems to think the pros average is far as he can hit it. Nothing of the sort.




    So true, averages do not give the proper insight to distance. As I said, when Spieth hits it 315 yards, Rory or DJ put it out 345 yards. Averages factor in too many variables that can bury the actual performance potential of some of the longer hitters.




    I never argued that distance is overrated. Distance is always important. It's fundamental to Broadie's strokes gained model. The thing I was pointing out is that the equipment had a lot to do with the distance gains. More so than the "athletic" golfer. The same guys were long before they started working out. Some guys were long and never bothered working out. They are still long.



    Player was one of the original workout fanatics. He still lagged well behind Nicklaus and Palmer at firestone on big three golf. He hit a lot of 4 woods into those par 4's.




    Distance is about the efficiency of the golf swing. Some guys come by swing speed naturally, Bubba and Daly have led the Tour in driving distance and I'd hardly call either one of them a gym rat. Guys like DJ, Koepka, Day, Tiger and Rory have made a conscious effort to enhance their swing speeds with training.



    The fact there's almost a 50 yard delta between Rory and Furyk in 2017 and that Furyk is averaging 8 yards less than he did in 2005 shows it's not all about equipment.
    Driver - Ping G400 MAX 10.5*
    Woods - XXIO 10 3W
    Hybrids - XXIO 10 3H, 4H, 5H
    Irons - Home - PXG Gen 2 0311P 5-GW Away - Ping i500 5-AW
    Wedge - Vokey TVD 56* K Grind
    Putter - Seemore Nashville mFGP2 SS Mallet Black
    Ball - KSig, TM TP5X, Snell MTB
  • rawdograwdog Cleveland, OHPosts: 3,015 ✭✭
    I had some time today to put together some fun charts for everyone. I don't have statistical significance numbers for each chart, but Titleist didn't do that work, either, right? Hopefully pictures are good enough. All data is from PGA tour website, compiled by me in Excel.



    I get the feel that a lot of you think distance and short game are mutually exclusive. Like if you hit the ball far, you're neglecting your short game. Here are charts of distance off the tee vs. strokes gained in the short game (brown) and putting (red). Maybe some weak correlations there, but I'm not seeing an overwhelming conclusion in either chart.



    Driving distance seems to make a bigger impact on strokes gained in approach shots (first blue chart). Makes sense... closer you are to the hole, easier the approach.



    But here is where we start to see a nice pattern... distance and strokes gained off the tee are directly related. Distance is a huge advantage in gaining strokes off the tee.



    So what about distance on earnings? Well, you can't just take total earnings, you need to control for number of events entered. So you look at distance versus winnings per event.



    Take a look at the green dots. No one under 295 yards averaged over $200k per event.



    You can cherry pick data all you want, but as you aggregate data points from everyone on tour in 2017, there are clear patterns.



    Better data = clearer picture.



    I'd be happy to repeat this for past PGA seasons as I have time. Would be cool to do a 3 or 5 year study and see how (if) things have changed.
    Cobra LTD Driver
    Aldila Rogue Black, 9.5* @44.5"
    In1Zone Single Length Fairway Woods

    Graffaloy ProLaunch Axis Blue @41.5" 5W = 19*
    Graffaloy ProLaunch Axis Blue @41.5" 7W = 23*
    Cobra F7 One Length Irons
    Nippon Modus 105 Stiff @ 36.5"
    6I = 24* 7I = 29* 8I = 34* 9I = 39* PW = 44* GW = 49* SW = 54* LW = 59*
    Odyssey #9 HT Metal X Milled @33.5"
    Maxfli SoftFli
  • straightshot7straightshot7 Members Posts: 2,908 ✭✭




    Isn't it also that the modern ball doesn't spin as much and makes it a lot easier to hit it straight?



    I wouldn't mind if they made the ball a little more like the old balata so guys could work it more and inferior ball strikers would be exposed.




    This is my gripe. Not total distance. It's that it's so easy to hit the high straight ball.




    Perhaps if you're part of the golfing elite.



    For those of us who play 3 times a month and are in the 14-17 hdcp range, there is nothing EASY about this game, no matter the type of ball we use.



    And I am in the MAJORITY of the golfing public




    I was referring to Tour Pros.



    It makes sense to have different rules on Tour.



    Like the move to wooden bats in baseball once you reach a certain level.
  • cxxcxx Members Posts: 3,052 ✭✭
    new2g0lf wrote:

    cxx wrote:

    new2g0lf wrote:

    Shilgy wrote:

    cxx wrote:


    Work out all you want, the data does not support your conjecture. Everyone's distance exploded with the change in clubs and again with the new ball. The charts are right in the "study". Same guys, more distance.



    Taller people with a longer arc do get some free distance. But why do you think that there were so few tall players before the equipment change. Distance was still important then. Take a look at George Archer standing over the ball and you'll find your answer.
    Is that what this is? An excuse to not work out and be body positive? image/smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />

    Yes, I am quite aware that the modern equipment is better able to accommodate the tall player. Are you aware that in spite of having perhaps the best short game ever the biggest reason for Tiger's reign was his long game? He had more of a strokes gained advantage in the long game than the short. All of the top tour players are long. Yes, some are longer than others but there are no players on tour hitting it 240. Does not matter how good the short game is they need to have a fair amount of length. And all tour players have a good short game. Like in anything else some are better than others but all can chip and roll the rock.

    Too many on here imo are looking at the rankings in the charts above and making false assumptions. 290 off the tee is not short. And yet some here are trying to say that Brian Harman is a short hitter at 289.9 off the tee AVERAGE last year. Please don't mistake a pros average for the typical amateur. The amateur thinks that his longest is how far he can hit it but also seems to think the pros average is far as he can hit it. Nothing of the sort.




    So true, averages do not give the proper insight to distance. As I said, when Spieth hits it 315 yards, Rory or DJ put it out 345 yards. Averages factor in too many variables that can bury the actual performance potential of some of the longer hitters.




    I never argued that distance is overrated. Distance is always important. It's fundamental to Broadie's strokes gained model. The thing I was pointing out is that the equipment had a lot to do with the distance gains. More so than the "athletic" golfer. The same guys were long before they started working out. Some guys were long and never bothered working out. They are still long.



    Player was one of the original workout fanatics. He still lagged well behind Nicklaus and Palmer at firestone on big three golf. He hit a lot of 4 woods into those par 4's.




    Distance is about the efficiency of the golf swing. Some guys come by swing speed naturally, Bubba and Daly have led the Tour in driving distance and I'd hardly call either one of them a gym rat. Guys like DJ, Koepka, Day, Tiger and Rory have made a conscious effort to enhance their swing speeds with training.



    The fact there's almost a 50 yard delta between Rory and Furyk in 2017 and that Furyk is averaging 8 yards less than he did in 2005 shows it's not all about equipment.




    Yeah Furyk is getting up there in years. Rory was long when he got to the tour. He wasn't working out then, but is now. Not much distance gained 310 in 2012, 317 in 2017.
  • youngwaldoyoungwaldo NJMembers Posts: 3,204 ✭✭





    Isn't it also that the modern ball doesn't spin as much and makes it a lot easier to hit it straight?



    I wouldn't mind if they made the ball a little more like the old balata so guys could work it more and inferior ball strikers would be exposed.




    This is my gripe. Not total distance. It's that it's so easy to hit the high straight ball.




    Perhaps if you're part of the golfing elite.



    For those of us who play 3 times a month and are in the 14-17 hdcp range, there is nothing EASY about this game, no matter the type of ball we use.



    And I am in the MAJORITY of the golfing public




    I was referring to Tour Pros.



    It makes sense to have different rules on Tour.



    Like the move to wooden bats in baseball once you reach a certain level.




    That being said then no amateurs can play in pro events.



    Wk
    M5 Tour 9.0 TENSEI TOUR ORANGE 60TX 45"   
    M5 3W TENSEI BLUE 70X
    TM P760 3-5 & TM P730 6-PW TT DG TI X100
    VOKEY SM6 Black 5208M TTDG Tour Issue S400 Black Onyx
    VOKEY SM6 Black 5608M TTDG Tour Issue S400 Black Onyx
    VOKEY SM6 Black 6008M TTDG Tour Issue S400 Black Onyx
    TM MINI SPIDER
  • raynorfan1raynorfan1 Members Posts: 3,519 ✭✭
    Rapatt95 wrote:

    raynorfan1 wrote:
    Rapatt95 wrote:


    I was surprised at some of the names throwing up -23 and such




    I agree and I'm not quite sure how to interpret that.


    I think it just speaks to the talent level of many golfers now. Put a lot pretty good golfers in the same field with an aggressive go get it attitude and scoring can happen




    Except those same guys can't do it in a full field big event. Which leads me to hypothesize that these down-card PGA Tour events are played on courses that are set up too easy for them. If I think about the two events that are local to me - the Travelers and the Dell Championship - there is no doubt that the Travelers (where some super low scores have been shot by guys you never heard of) is on a dramatically easier course.
  • cxxcxx Members Posts: 3,052 ✭✭
    youngwaldo wrote:






    Isn't it also that the modern ball doesn't spin as much and makes it a lot easier to hit it straight?



    I wouldn't mind if they made the ball a little more like the old balata so guys could work it more and inferior ball strikers would be exposed.




    This is my gripe. Not total distance. It's that it's so easy to hit the high straight ball.




    Perhaps if you're part of the golfing elite.



    For those of us who play 3 times a month and are in the 14-17 hdcp range, there is nothing EASY about this game, no matter the type of ball we use.



    And I am in the MAJORITY of the golfing public




    I was referring to Tour Pros.



    It makes sense to have different rules on Tour.



    Like the move to wooden bats in baseball once you reach a certain level.




    That being said then no amateurs can play in pro events.



    Wk




    Sure they could. They'd just have to follow the pro rules. Kind of like the club rules in unrestricted USGA events like the US Open.
  • Rapatt95Rapatt95 wow Posts: 567 ✭✭
    edited Dec 11, 2017 #194
    raynorfan1 wrote:
    Rapatt95 wrote:

    raynorfan1 wrote:
    Rapatt95 wrote:


    I was surprised at some of the names throwing up -23 and such




    I agree and I'm not quite sure how to interpret that.


    I think it just speaks to the talent level of many golfers now. Put a lot pretty good golfers in the same field with an aggressive go get it attitude and scoring can happen




    Except those same guys can't do it in a full field big event. Which leads me to hypothesize that these down-card PGA Tour events are played on courses that are set up too easy for them. If I think about the two events that are local to me - the Travelers and the Dell Championship - there is no doubt that the Travelers (where some super low scores have been shot by guys you never heard of) is on a dramatically easier course.


    It is a short course, under 7000 I think? You give those guys a short course and good conditions, they’ll shoot 58



    I definitely think if they just grow out the fairways a hair and make the rough an actually punishment to avoid and strategy comes back into play dramatically
    Ping Anser 9.5* Aldila Tour Blue ATX75tx
    Adams Tight Lies Tour 18* 5w Aldila Tour Blue ATX75tx
    Cobra T-Rail 19* 3H Aldila Tour Green ATX75x
    Ben Hogan PTx 22*-34* C-Taper Lite 115x (Thank you GolfWRX and Ben Hogan!)
    Ben Hogan Ft Worth 15 C-Taper Lite 115x
    Ping Glide Forged 50* DG TI S400 (Thank you GolfWRX and Ping!)
    TM TP ATV 54* KBS Tour-V Wedge
    Vokey SM5 58* DG Wedge
    Ping iWi Anser
  • new2g0lfnew2g0lf Members Posts: 3,309 ClubWRX
    cxx wrote:

    new2g0lf wrote:

    cxx wrote:

    new2g0lf wrote:

    Shilgy wrote:


    Is that what this is? An excuse to not work out and be body positive? image/smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />

    Yes, I am quite aware that the modern equipment is better able to accommodate the tall player. Are you aware that in spite of having perhaps the best short game ever the biggest reason for Tiger's reign was his long game? He had more of a strokes gained advantage in the long game than the short. All of the top tour players are long. Yes, some are longer than others but there are no players on tour hitting it 240. Does not matter how good the short game is they need to have a fair amount of length. And all tour players have a good short game. Like in anything else some are better than others but all can chip and roll the rock.

    Too many on here imo are looking at the rankings in the charts above and making false assumptions. 290 off the tee is not short. And yet some here are trying to say that Brian Harman is a short hitter at 289.9 off the tee AVERAGE last year. Please don't mistake a pros average for the typical amateur. The amateur thinks that his longest is how far he can hit it but also seems to think the pros average is far as he can hit it. Nothing of the sort.




    So true, averages do not give the proper insight to distance. As I said, when Spieth hits it 315 yards, Rory or DJ put it out 345 yards. Averages factor in too many variables that can bury the actual performance potential of some of the longer hitters.




    I never argued that distance is overrated. Distance is always important. It's fundamental to Broadie's strokes gained model. The thing I was pointing out is that the equipment had a lot to do with the distance gains. More so than the "athletic" golfer. The same guys were long before they started working out. Some guys were long and never bothered working out. They are still long.



    Player was one of the original workout fanatics. He still lagged well behind Nicklaus and Palmer at firestone on big three golf. He hit a lot of 4 woods into those par 4's.




    Distance is about the efficiency of the golf swing. Some guys come by swing speed naturally, Bubba and Daly have led the Tour in driving distance and I'd hardly call either one of them a gym rat. Guys like DJ, Koepka, Day, Tiger and Rory have made a conscious effort to enhance their swing speeds with training.



    The fact there's almost a 50 yard delta between Rory and Furyk in 2017 and that Furyk is averaging 8 yards less than he did in 2005 shows it's not all about equipment.




    Yeah Furyk is getting up there in years. Rory was long when he got to the tour. He wasn't working out then, but is now. Not much distance gained 310 in 2012, 317 in 2017.




    Which would indicate it's not really about the equipment.
    Driver - Ping G400 MAX 10.5*
    Woods - XXIO 10 3W
    Hybrids - XXIO 10 3H, 4H, 5H
    Irons - Home - PXG Gen 2 0311P 5-GW Away - Ping i500 5-AW
    Wedge - Vokey TVD 56* K Grind
    Putter - Seemore Nashville mFGP2 SS Mallet Black
    Ball - KSig, TM TP5X, Snell MTB
  • J13J13 Dad golf Members Posts: 15,261 ✭✭
    Hawkeye77 wrote:


    LOL, Jack Nicklaus an anti-technology activist - **** on Wally!



    It's not a "study" so it can't be the best study. There are a few charts that show some pretty simple correlations and don't even try to explain the other variables or control for them, not a study.



    It's a PR piece designed to spin (pun intended) all the talk about the golf ball being the problem.



    Plenty of issues in the debate, Crossfield sensibly addressed some of them besides the golf ball, but this is nothing but unabashed marketing rhetoric by Titleist (and thanks for the ProV1s, I love them).




    You are correct.
    Callaway Flash SZ 9* / ROGUE 130msi Silver 70TX
    Nike VR Pro LTD 15* / Aldila RIP 80X
    Srixon 745's 4-PW / Modus Tour 120 TX
    Callaway MD3 50, 54, 60 / Modus 125
    Odyssey White Hot Versa #6 Tour issue
    Srixon Zstar XV


    GolfWRX WITB Podcast - Irons reveal 11/14/18 http://www.golfwrx.c...utm_content=sub

    GolfWrx WITB Podcast 2017 : http://www.golfwrx.com/482668/tgtg-golfwrx-forum-member-j13-talks-witb-and-club-testing/

    WITB- http://www.golfwrx.c.../page__st__1590

    INSTAGRAM- @Jminis13
  • BForresterBForrester Unregistered Posts: 1,261
    **** This just in ****



    Tobacco industry study indicates that cigarettes are safe and non-addictive





    Thanks, but I don't trust any "study" in which the organization has a financial interest in the outcome of said study.
    Taylormade M1 8.5o Aldila Tour Green 70x 44"
    Taylormade RBZ 3w 15o Aldila Tour Blue 70x
    Taylormade Rescue Dual 19o R-Flex
    Mizuno JPX-850 Forged 4-GW DG S300
    Mizuno S5 (54, 58)
    Odyssey Tank Cruiser #1
  • golfer07840golfer07840 Smart ass from Northwest NJMembers Posts: 1,627 ClubWRX
    dlygrisse wrote:

    mosesgolf wrote:

    gvogel wrote:


    By the way, when I was playing pretty good golf back in the late 70's and 80's, we took it for granted that some par 4 holes, in some conditions, were not reachable in 2 shots. Only the really long guys could get to a 420 yard par 4 playing into the wind.



    Now it seems that the current generation feels entitled to reach any par 4 in two shots because of equipment advances. Your conclusion will be different than mine.


    IMO every par 4 should be reachable in two. image/wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />
    By whom? Under what conditions? With what clubs?

    To make a blanket statement like that every par 4 would have to be pretty short.




    According to the USGA, a scratch player can reach a par 4, 470 yards in 2 shots, and a Bogey golfer should be able to hit a 370 yard par 4 in two shots. So how about the other holes that fall in between?



    Depends on skill level I suppose.



    So you're correct, saying that every par 4 should be reachable is incredibly vague.

    Opinions are my own and are never to be taken seriously.
    and for God's sake, if you're going to whine about Jim Nantz, have the respect to spell his name correctly.
    WITTB:
    Driver: Callaway XHot Pro 9* Stiff
    3W: Tour Edge Exotics 13* Stiff
    3-4 HY: Callaway Rogue Stiff
    5-PW: Callaway Rogue Stiff steel, True Temper
    48* Titleist, 52* Callaway
    Putter: Nike Method
    Ball: ProV1 -- or whatever I find in the woods while looking for my ProV1

  • jacobEDGEjacobEDGE Members Posts: 1,984 ✭✭
    dlygrisse wrote:

    mosesgolf wrote:


    IMO every par 4 should be reachable in two. image/wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />


    By whom? Under what conditions? With what clubs?

    To make a blanket statement like that every par 4 would have to be pretty short.



    jacobEDGE wrote:


    I mean courses are designed and the score is calculated so that you hit par 4's in two shots.



    Every hole on a course is meant for a 2-putt. That means a Par 3 allows you one stroke to reach the green, Par 4s allow you two strokes to reach the green, and Par 5s allow you three strokes to reach the green. Then you 2-putt and get your par. The score you're supposed to achieve. You reach a par 5 in two? Or you make a one putt? Then you get rewarded with birdie.



    So yes, the game of golf was literally created and intended for golfers to take 2 strokes to reach a Par 4 green.




    If you can't reach the par 4's in 2 shots, you need to move up a tee.
  • J13J13 Dad golf Members Posts: 15,261 ✭✭
    jacobEDGE wrote:

    dlygrisse wrote:

    mosesgolf wrote:


    IMO every par 4 should be reachable in two. image/wink.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=';)' />


    By whom? Under what conditions? With what clubs?

    To make a blanket statement like that every par 4 would have to be pretty short.



    jacobEDGE wrote:


    I mean courses are designed and the score is calculated so that you hit par 4's in two shots.



    Every hole on a course is meant for a 2-putt. That means a Par 3 allows you one stroke to reach the green, Par 4s allow you two strokes to reach the green, and Par 5s allow you three strokes to reach the green. Then you 2-putt and get your par. The score you're supposed to achieve. You reach a par 5 in two? Or you make a one putt? Then you get rewarded with birdie.



    So yes, the game of golf was literally created and intended for golfers to take 2 strokes to reach a Par 4 green.




    If you can't reach the par 4's in 2 shots, you need to move up a tee.




    Correct. Unless it's a long par 4 and there's 15mph or more wind in your face you should be able to get to the green in 2.
    Callaway Flash SZ 9* / ROGUE 130msi Silver 70TX
    Nike VR Pro LTD 15* / Aldila RIP 80X
    Srixon 745's 4-PW / Modus Tour 120 TX
    Callaway MD3 50, 54, 60 / Modus 125
    Odyssey White Hot Versa #6 Tour issue
    Srixon Zstar XV


    GolfWRX WITB Podcast - Irons reveal 11/14/18 http://www.golfwrx.c...utm_content=sub

    GolfWrx WITB Podcast 2017 : http://www.golfwrx.com/482668/tgtg-golfwrx-forum-member-j13-talks-witb-and-club-testing/

    WITB- http://www.golfwrx.c.../page__st__1590

    INSTAGRAM- @Jminis13
  • bscinstnctbscinstnct Members Posts: 26,087 ✭✭
    edited Dec 11, 2017 #201
    rawdog wrote:


    I had some time today to put together some fun charts for everyone. I don't have statistical significance numbers for each chart, but Titleist didn't do that work, either, right? Hopefully pictures are good enough. All data is from PGA tour website, compiled by me in Excel.



    I get the feel that a lot of you think distance and short game are mutually exclusive. Like if you hit the ball far, you're neglecting your short game. Here are charts of distance off the tee vs. strokes gained in the short game (brown) and putting (red). Maybe some weak correlations there, but I'm not seeing an overwhelming conclusion in either chart.



    Driving distance seems to make a bigger impact on strokes gained in approach shots (first blue chart). Makes sense... closer you are to the hole, easier the approach.



    But here is where we start to see a nice pattern... distance and strokes gained off the tee are directly related. Distance is a huge advantage in gaining strokes off the tee.



    So what about distance on earnings? Well, you can't just take total earnings, you need to control for number of events entered. So you look at distance versus winnings per event.



    Take a look at the green dots. No one under 295 yards averaged over $200k per event.



    You can cherry pick data all you want, but as you aggregate data points from everyone on tour in 2017, there are clear patterns.



    Better data = clearer picture.



    I'd be happy to repeat this for past PGA seasons as I have time. Would be cool to do a 3 or 5 year study and see how (if) things have changed.




    "Take a look at the green dots. No one under 295 yards averaged over $200k per event."



    Thank you. Also,



    It looks like all but 2 of 17 or so the players who average under 280 made less than 50k/event. And neither of those two made over 100k.



    Of the 6 players who made over 250k/event. All but one averaged 300 off the tee.
  • golfer07840golfer07840 Smart ass from Northwest NJMembers Posts: 1,627 ClubWRX
    augustgolf wrote:


    Some of my thoughts:



    I loved it when I got a 44" graphite shafted driver for my HS graduation from the pro I had worked for the previous 3 years. I could hit it easily 15-20 yards further.



    Got my first 40 cc driver a few years ago & combined with the B330RX, I could still pop it off the tee around 270+/- at +50 years of age. Liked that too.



    But a hole over 470 yards, on a course designed over 30 years ago was created to accept a long iron or fairway wood approach.



    Holes designed to have short iron approaches should have much smaller greens complexes with much more trouble around them.



    This is why the older courses are being overpowered by today's players & equipment.



    How can we put that challenge back into the game without the extreme expense of greens re-designs?



    I'll admit I don't have answers but can see the problem clearly




    Are they really being over powered? It's not like a "shorter" course like Harbour Town is surrendering a bunch of 57's as scores.



    When I start to see the winning score after a 4 round tournament sitting at -40 and the runner ups only being 2 shots behind, I'll start to believe the hype of the courses being "over powered" by the pros.

    Opinions are my own and are never to be taken seriously.
    and for God's sake, if you're going to whine about Jim Nantz, have the respect to spell his name correctly.
    WITTB:
    Driver: Callaway XHot Pro 9* Stiff
    3W: Tour Edge Exotics 13* Stiff
    3-4 HY: Callaway Rogue Stiff
    5-PW: Callaway Rogue Stiff steel, True Temper
    48* Titleist, 52* Callaway
    Putter: Nike Method
    Ball: ProV1 -- or whatever I find in the woods while looking for my ProV1

  • golfer07840golfer07840 Smart ass from Northwest NJMembers Posts: 1,627 ClubWRX
    Shilgy wrote:

    cxx wrote:


    Work out all you want, the data does not support your conjecture. Everyone's distance exploded with the change in clubs and again with the new ball. The charts are right in the "study". Same guys, more distance.



    Taller people with a longer arc do get some free distance. But why do you think that there were so few tall players before the equipment change. Distance was still important then. Take a look at George Archer standing over the ball and you'll find your answer.
    Is that what this is? An excuse to not work out and be body positive? image/smile.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':)' />

    Yes, I am quite aware that the modern equipment is better able to accommodate the tall player. Are you aware that in spite of having perhaps the best short game ever the biggest reason for Tiger's reign was his long game? He had more of a strokes gained advantage in the long game than the short. All of the top tour players are long. Yes, some are longer than others but there are no players on tour hitting it 240. Does not matter how good the short game is they need to have a fair amount of length. And all tour players have a good short game. Like in anything else some are better than others but all can chip and roll the rock.

    Too many on here imo are looking at the rankings in the charts above and making false assumptions. 290 off the tee is not short. And yet some here are trying to say that Brian Harman is a short hitter at 289.9 off the tee AVERAGE last year. Please don't mistake a pros average for the typical amateur. The amateur thinks that his longest is how far he can hit it but also seems to think the pros average is far as he can hit it. Nothing of the sort.




    It may not be short on the PGA Tour, but it's certainly short for the typical WRX'r

    Opinions are my own and are never to be taken seriously.
    and for God's sake, if you're going to whine about Jim Nantz, have the respect to spell his name correctly.
    WITTB:
    Driver: Callaway XHot Pro 9* Stiff
    3W: Tour Edge Exotics 13* Stiff
    3-4 HY: Callaway Rogue Stiff
    5-PW: Callaway Rogue Stiff steel, True Temper
    48* Titleist, 52* Callaway
    Putter: Nike Method
    Ball: ProV1 -- or whatever I find in the woods while looking for my ProV1

  • gvogelgvogel Members Posts: 7,150 ✭✭
    cxx wrote:






    Yeah Furyk is getting up there in years. Rory was long when he got to the tour. He wasn't working out then, but is now. Not much distance gained 310 in 2012, 317 in 2017.




    Rory couldn't work out in 2017 because of his rib injury. The 7 yard increase is probably due to a slightly better ball and slightly improved driver.
    On Sundays, I used to play hickory
  • golfer07840golfer07840 Smart ass from Northwest NJMembers Posts: 1,627 ClubWRX
    raynorfan1 wrote:

    Rapatt95 wrote:

    raynorfan1 wrote:
    Rapatt95 wrote:


    I was surprised at some of the names throwing up -23 and such




    I agree and I'm not quite sure how to interpret that.


    I think it just speaks to the talent level of many golfers now. Put a lot pretty good golfers in the same field with an aggressive go get it attitude and scoring can happen




    Except those same guys can't do it in a full field big event. Which leads me to hypothesize that these down-card PGA Tour events are played on courses that are set up too easy for them. If I think about the two events that are local to me - the Travelers and the Dell Championship - there is no doubt that the Travelers (where some super low scores have been shot by guys you never heard of) is on a dramatically easier course.




    The Travelers, TPC at River Highlands correct? That's where Furyk shot the 58 if I recall.. which would be to your point.

    Opinions are my own and are never to be taken seriously.
    and for God's sake, if you're going to whine about Jim Nantz, have the respect to spell his name correctly.
    WITTB:
    Driver: Callaway XHot Pro 9* Stiff
    3W: Tour Edge Exotics 13* Stiff
    3-4 HY: Callaway Rogue Stiff
    5-PW: Callaway Rogue Stiff steel, True Temper
    48* Titleist, 52* Callaway
    Putter: Nike Method
    Ball: ProV1 -- or whatever I find in the woods while looking for my ProV1

  • new2g0lfnew2g0lf Members Posts: 3,309 ClubWRX
    gvogel wrote:

    cxx wrote:


    Yeah Furyk is getting up there in years. Rory was long when he got to the tour. He wasn't working out then, but is now. Not much distance gained 310 in 2012, 317 in 2017.




    Rory couldn't work out in 2017 because of his rib injury. The 7 yard increase is probably due to a slightly better ball and slightly improved driver.




    Well then Furyk better get that ball and driver cause he's lost 7 yards in the last 17 years.
    Driver - Ping G400 MAX 10.5*
    Woods - XXIO 10 3W
    Hybrids - XXIO 10 3H, 4H, 5H
    Irons - Home - PXG Gen 2 0311P 5-GW Away - Ping i500 5-AW
    Wedge - Vokey TVD 56* K Grind
    Putter - Seemore Nashville mFGP2 SS Mallet Black
    Ball - KSig, TM TP5X, Snell MTB
  • ShilgyShilgy Members Posts: 11,282 ✭✭
    gvogel wrote:

    cxx wrote:


    Yeah Furyk is getting up there in years. Rory was long when he got to the tour. He wasn't working out then, but is now. Not much distance gained 310 in 2012, 317 in 2017.




    Rory couldn't work out in 2017 because of his rib injury. The 7 yard increase is probably due to a slightly better ball and slightly improved driver.
    Better equipment fit yes. His answer after going from Callaway Epic Sub Zero To TM M2 is that it "helped him find the center of the face more often." So it's not really an issue of the equipment out of control for Rory. It is a better fitting.
    WITB
    Tools for the job!

    To paraphrase Dr Seuss: Don't cry because the round of golf is over-smile because it happened . :)

    Game is recovering from total ankle replacement. Getting there and glad to be pain free!
  • Roadking2003Roadking2003 AustinMembers Posts: 5,056 ✭✭
    SullGolf wrote:


    bscinstnct wrote:


    There is a direct correlation to distance off the tee and success. Per 2017 PGA Tour stats, nearly every top player averages 295, including Spieth, and most top ten average over 300.



    The top 10 owgr,



    DJ 315

    JS 295

    JT 309

    Rahm 305

    HM 303

    Rose 301

    Rickie 300

    Brooks 311

    Stenson 292 (think he uses 3w alot]

    Rory 317




    The debate isn't about who drives it 300 yards. It's about the correlation between distance and success. Let's look at the stats for the top 30 on the money list.



    Notice that only three on the top 30 money list are top 10 drivers. And the #2 money player is 75th in driving. And 15 of the top 30 money guys rank 50th or worse in driving.



    Now show me that correlation again.




    Here you go.




    Your graph shows minor or no correlation. Just like the Titleist report stated.
  • Darth PutterDarth Putter Members Posts: 4,566 ✭✭
    the real statement Titleist is making...



    spice.jpg





    NOTHING must be allowed to impede on their ability to sucker 23 handicappers who haven't hit a fairway since Reagan was in office into buying four dollar golf balls.
    swing is irrelevant, score is everything

    just say NO.... to practice swings
  • bscinstnctbscinstnct Members Posts: 26,087 ✭✭

    SullGolf wrote:


    bscinstnct wrote:


    There is a direct correlation to distance off the tee and success. Per 2017 PGA Tour stats, nearly every top player averages 295, including Spieth, and most top ten average over 300.



    The top 10 owgr,



    DJ 315

    JS 295

    JT 309

    Rahm 305

    HM 303

    Rose 301

    Rickie 300

    Brooks 311

    Stenson 292 (think he uses 3w alot]

    Rory 317




    The debate isn't about who drives it 300 yards. It's about the correlation between distance and success. Let's look at the stats for the top 30 on the money list.



    Notice that only three on the top 30 money list are top 10 drivers. And the #2 money player is 75th in driving. And 15 of the top 30 money guys rank 50th or worse in driving.



    Now show me that correlation again.




    Here you go.




    Your graph shows minor or no correlation. Just like the Titleist report stated.




    21 guys averaged over 305.



    5 averaged under 50k/event

    6 averaged 50-100k/event

    4 averaged 100-150k/event

    2 averaged 150-200k

    4 averaged 200-450k



    Of the bottom 21 in average distance



    18 averaged under 50k/event

    1 averaged over 100k

    0 averaged 150k or more.
  • knock it closeknock it close Members Posts: 7,945 ✭✭
    Breaking: Leading golf ball company does not want further regulation on golf balls. More at 11.
    M2, maybe
    915 FD
    913 HD
    712u 3
    714 AP2 4-p
    SM5 53, 59
    Circa62
145791019
Sign In or Register to comment.