Age Old Question: The Archer or the Arrow?

For me it's the Archer 100 times out of a 100. Curious to hear others opinions on the topic.

Based on modern equipment, I would put the equation at 70% Archer and 30% Arrow. The archer still has to make a good swing for the equipment to help, but there's NO help equipment wise, that will turn a bad swing into a good shot. Granted, it will be a far better shot than days of old, using blades with a sweet spot the size of a dime, but none the less, still a bad shot.

OP yeah thats true but only a great player can get the best out of superior equipment! A great violinist can make a cheap violin sound amazing but only a great violinist can show you what an expensive Stradivarius is all about...

But it also makes sense if a great violinist prefers a cheap violin over a Stradivarius because its so personal but only a great player can judge the intricacies of different equipment. If a 30 cap says PXG sucks and not worth it everyone would roll their eyes lol...

yes.

The 'archers' who played the game to a respectable level years ago, had to have much better skills than the majority of people who swing a club nowadays. Go back to the clubs from the 70s and 80s, and bring back balata balls and watch people quit this game in droves.

Many tour players can't even putt nowadays. Left hand low, claw, bracing the putter against your forearm. Really?

The technology of today allows people who bear little resemblance to the golfers of 30 or 40 years ago to go play the game. Is this a good thing? Depends on who you ask.

The 'archers' who played the game to a respectable level years ago, had to have much better skills than the majority of people who swing a club nowadays. Go back to the clubs from the 70s and 80s, and bring back balata balls and watch people quit this game in droves.

 

Many tour players can't even putt nowadays. Left hand low, claw, bracing the putter against your forearm. Really?

 

The technology of today allows people who bear little resemblance to the golfers of 30 or 40 years ago to go play the game. Is this a good thing? Depends on who you ask.

I would find that hard to believe. Jordan Spieth was labeled by Tiger one of the best putters to ever putt. Everyone goes through slumps but when did trying a different grip style make someone a bad putter? The technology of "today" has been the same for the last 20 years. The only thing that has changed is how people approach the game with working out and practice. Blows my mind that people still think that 30-40 years ago people had it harder playing golf. Probably when most golf courses were private and labeled only to the wealthy to be able to play the game which limits the viable competition.

Golf has never been in a better spot then it is now and it has very little to do with the equipment we have. The degree on a club and length of a club is all still the same. You can change it however you want and think your hitting it further with "todays" technology but your not. I've been playing for 18 years now and I have not gained distance in any one of those years. I might have gained a little more forgiveness but its barely noticeable.

The archer will always be whats in control of the arrow unless we get clubs to swing for us.

The archer but I can't think of any level of player who would be worse off with clubs fitted for them.

The technology of "today" has been the same for the last 20 years. The only thing that has changed is how people approach the game with working out and practice. Blows my mind that people still think that 30-40 years ago people had it harder playing golf. Probably when most golf courses were private and labeled only to the wealthy to be able to play the game which limits the viable competition.

 

Golf has never been in a better spot then it is now and it has very little to do with the equipment we have. The degree on a club and length of a club is all still the same. You can change it however you want and think your hitting it further with "todays" technology but your not. I've been playing for 18 years now and I have not gained distance in any one of those years. I might have gained a little more forgiveness but its barely noticeable.

 

The archer will always be whats in control of the arrow unless we get clubs to swing for us.

... A balata ball spun off a driver just as much as todays balls spin off a wedge. Hitting a balata ball with a solid persimmon driver smaller than todays fairway woods, that was also 43" and had a heavy steel shaft btw was infinitely more difficult than hitting a ProV1 with an Epic driver. People did not play because it was extremely difficult to play well and nobody, and I mean NOBODY could hit a straight ball as it always curved. And by curved I mean some viscous hooks and slices by really good players. One of the reasons the great players of past years played a draw or a fade. And when you mishit a balata ball, you put a small or big crease in the ball and it was ruined.

in 1980 the 20th ranked driver on tour averaged 269yds

in 2017 the 20th ranked driver n tour averaged 309yds

... I am not saying the best players in the world were better or even had it harder in 1980 vs today, as the best on the planet play a game utilizing todays equipment and are just as talented as they were in 1980, if not more so for a myriad of reasons. But the average guy can play todays equipment with reasonable success and that same guy would really, really struggle with the equipment in 1980.

High handicapper here. Archer, buutttt…. clubs fit to a particular swing flaw can be better for a particular player. By this I mean appropriate shaft flex or lie angle or loft for the swing. Played Ping K15 driver last 2 years and saw improvement. Picked up a G400 Max this season and see a little more distance and definitely more accuracy. Can't make a silk purse out of bad swing with equipment. Doesn't make me stop looking at different clubs on ebay.

Yeah, let's get into a debate about what era was the hardest.

No doubt equipment has made the game easier over the years.

And equipment is more easily and economically customized than ever.

Ordered a used demo driver the other day and it came with the wrong shaft - extremely tip stiff. Could not turn it over right-left. New shaft came, I can turn it over no problem.

Should I have changed my swing to make the club work? No, I change the equipment to fit my swing. Proper equipment is important.

To other points above, you don't have to be "good" (whatever that means) to get max performance out of a club. That's nonsense.

Any idiot can accidentally replicate ideal impact conditions and flush a shot. It just may not happen all that often, but you're getting peak performance.

The 'archers' who played the game to a respectable level years ago, had to have much better skills than the majority of people who swing a club nowadays. Go back to the clubs from the 70s and 80s, and bring back balata balls and watch people quit this game in droves.

 

Many tour players can't even putt nowadays. Left hand low, claw, bracing the putter against your forearm. Really?

 

The technology of today allows people who bear little resemblance to the golfers of 30 or 40 years ago to go play the game. Is this a good thing? Depends on who you ask.

Yeah, I'd like to see those guys take on 8000 yard Erin Hills. No chance.

Snead and Hogan both tried some insane putting approaches out of sheer frustration. Putting has always been hard for some and easy for others. Nothing has changed about that. Snead tried to putt like a croquet mallet and you're complaining about the claw!?!

The only thing missing from this post is "i hate those damn kids skateboarding on my sidewalks".

Whats really stupid about this post is that it assumes the players of today would be the same if they had *Grown up* playing balata balls. That's why the old players were so good at it - they did it all the time. If you got in a time machine and gave 3 year old Rory a persimmion driver he could probably hit it pretty good by now. Comparing guys who played one way all their lives to guys who have never played that way is dumb. Its like saying Sampras is worse than some guy because Sampras can't play with a wooden racquet. Well guess what genius if he'd have had a wooden racquet his whole life he'd probably be good with it.

The guys today would *annihilate* the guys of yesteryear based on athletic ability alone. The guys in the past weren't more skilled. They just played with worse equipment their entire lives. If you gave a Brooks Koepka style athlete the training from birth with that equipment he'd dominate (just like Kevin Durant would, or any athlete with access to modern nutrition).

Its 100% the archer, to answer the OP, because unless I'm missing something, the archer chooses the arrow. So how could it possibly be the arrow when the archer chooses?

... "good" players today rarely slice or hook a ball off the golf course. Sure it can happen but it is rare. With persimmon woods and balata balls "good" players sliced and hooked balls off the course all the time. And by "good" player I mean anyone with an index of 8.5 or lower. ;)

... "good" players today rarely slice or hook a ball off the golf course. Sure it can happen but it is rare. With persimmon woods and balata balls "good" players sliced and hooked balls off the course all the time. And by "good" player I mean anyone with an index of 8.5 or lower. ;)

Right, because good players of today *have never played with balata balls*. If I had grown up hitting balata balls, I'd probably be better at hitting them.

The technology of "today" has been the same for the last 20 years. The only thing that has changed is how people approach the game with working out and practice. Blows my mind that people still think that 30-40 years ago people had it harder playing golf. Probably when most golf courses were private and labeled only to the wealthy to be able to play the game which limits the viable competition.

 

Golf has never been in a better spot then it is now and it has very little to do with the equipment we have. The degree on a club and length of a club is all still the same. You can change it however you want and think your hitting it further with "todays" technology but your not. I've been playing for 18 years now and I have not gained distance in any one of those years. I might have gained a little more forgiveness but its barely noticeable.

 

The archer will always be whats in control of the arrow unless we get clubs to swing for us.

 

 

... A balata ball spun off a driver just as much as todays balls spin off a wedge. Hitting a balata ball with a solid persimmon driver smaller than todays fairway woods, that was also 43" and had a heavy steel shaft btw was infinitely more difficult than hitting a ProV1 with an Epic driver. People did not play because it was extremely difficult to play well and nobody, and I mean NOBODY could hit a straight ball as it always curved. And by curved I mean some viscous hooks and slices by really good players. One of the reasons the great players of past years played a draw or a fade. And when you mishit a balata ball, you put a small or big crease in the ball and it was ruined.

 

in 1980 the 20th ranked driver on tour averaged 269yds

in 2017 the 20th ranked driver n tour averaged 309yds

 

... I am not saying the best players in the world were better or even had it harder in 1980 vs today, as the best on the planet play a game utilizing todays equipment and are just as talented as they were in 1980, if not more so for a myriad of reasons. But the average guy can play todays equipment with reasonable success and that same guy would really, really struggle with the equipment in 1980.

lol, I cant...….

like what Pinestreet golf has posted. It blows my mind how people think back in the "day" they had it so much harder then what it is now. Every topic related to a post like that just makes me laugh so hard.

"Kids these days have it so easy" Yes because student loans are easily paid off like it was in your "day" just like hitting a golf ball 300+ yards or however many yards more then what you say the distance gained was makes it so much easier to control and hit a fairway.

Distance gained on "tour" is often compared to what the average golfer has gained. But the average golfer is not in the weight room twice a day and not hitting golf balls everyday for 8 hours a day.

The further you hit it the harder it is to control. Idc what club you use that is straight geometry.

The whole back in my day argument in golf is what is actually holding golf back now.

The 'archers' who played the game to a respectable level years ago, had to have much better skills than the majority of people who swing a club nowadays. Go back to the clubs from the 70s and 80s, and bring back balata balls and watch people quit this game in droves.

 

Many tour players can't even putt nowadays. Left hand low, claw, bracing the putter against your forearm. Really?

 

The technology of today allows people who bear little resemblance to the golfers of 30 or 40 years ago to go play the game. Is this a good thing? Depends on who you ask.

Or maybe manufacturers and instructers are finally realizing that different grips and different swings work for different people.

Maybe the "textbook" putting grip was holding a lot of people back for years. I know instructers who still preach "textbook" grip and mechanics, and some that now try to find a persons natural motions and tweak those. I have no idea which philosophy is better for the masses, but for me I would lean more to the open minded instructor, because I do not have the time to put in to have robotic like precision. But when I do have a little time it is easier for me to practice what I know and can feel.

I started playing golf 4-5 years ago so I've never hit a ballata golf ball.

*Opens EBay App*

Yea. Try hitting a balata ball and see how much side spin you put on the thing. Those things could go 200 yds left or right if you couldn't put a good swing on it.

And the length of a course doesn't have squat to do with how good the newer players are. They have better balls and equipment. Lets see today's kids take on a 8000 yd course with persimmons, 40 year old irons, and balata balls. Should be fun to watch. Maybe.

You want to feel you're better than everyone else, cool. Have fun.

If you have never played with blades, with that minuscule sweet spot and balata balls, then there can be NO real comparison for debate, only conjecture.

If you have never played with blades, with that minuscule sweet spot and balata balls, then there can be NO real comparison for debate, only conjecture.

Learned with them. Got to a 2 handicap with Wilson Staff Tour blades, Staff persimmons, and Titleist black (higher compression) balata balls.

Now you can slap a ball close to your intended direction with pretty much any swing. But this is good, because I'm nowhere near as good as I was back then. :)

If you are reasonably well fit for your clubs, then it is the archer. Back in the day, if you found a good wood driver, it was like a member of the family, you did not fool around with different shafts and lofts. Guys played the same one for years. Now, people change out shafts and heads all the time-and they're all good. May not fit your swing, but it's a good club.

It’s the archer, having arrows that suit helps but a skilful player will find a way with what ever they have.

The difficulty with the balata ball was it ballooning.

Playing in a good wind now it’s only really the short irons where a player might want to flight the ball. With the balata you had to do it with every club.

I’m not saying that you can find clubs that make you better, but you can find ones that make you worse.....

The Archer or the Arrow?

 

didn't see this going into a "then vs now" argument lol but all interesting points.

my view on it is that shooting good scores starts with what's between your ears and not what's in your hands.

Definitely archer.

The difference between an average player with good, well-fitted equipment over an average golfer with bad equipment is much smaller than the difference between an average player and a good player.

I don't think the generational argument is completely relevant, but there are some important pieces that can be pulled from that discussion. Good players shot good scores with much worse equipment in the past, and today the average player with much better equipment is still a 15 handicap. The trends of distances going up and fewer sprayed shots, etc. can be attributed largely to equipment, but those changes haven't allowed average players to be as good as good players of the past. Archer all day.

... the arrows sure are forgiving these day, but still the archer.

I say both. Only a percentage of the game is physical. The mental side of the game is just as important.... some say more important. Using the “Indian or the arrow” comparison, if a Cherokee had a compound bow with laser sharpened diamond tip arrows there would have been a lot fewer cowboys around back in those days. Lol. Although true the golfer has to put a proper swing on the ball, and mentally work his or her self around the course. There is something to say for today’s technology. You can definitely be a better golfer with forgiving clubs and a proper fitted set.

When my transition gets too fast and I throw my hands and hit ball outside in I appreciate the forgiveness of my irons. When I am patient and grooving an inside out swing I love that my irons have a players look and I can work them either way. Blades aren't forgiving and SGI irons are trampolines that are difficult to work the ball with. That is why I like these new distance players irons like 900 forged with give the best of both worlds. HOWEVER, In the end the player decides because a good swing will hit a good shot with any club.

Just got back from the range, trying out my new (to me) Ping iBlades. Man, I'm hitting these things like I actually know what I'm doing. So easy to work the ball.

One two hour range session and they're going in the bag for tomorrow's round. Gotta love this new high-tech stuff. :D