GIVEAWAY: Vokey SM8 60* Wedge- ENTER HERE.

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

1356719
19

Comments

  • Man_O_WarMan_O_War Members  3706WRX Points: 703Posts: 3,706 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #62
    gvogel wrote:
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    not just reach a par 4 of 420 but have a wedge for the second shot...
    Posted:
    SIM 10.5 Ozik F6M2/EVO III FUJI
    Cobra LTD PRO Ozik TP6HD

    Cobra F9 Avalanche 3/4 Atmos 7
    Cobra F9 Avalanche 5/6 Atmos 7
    TM Mid_Rescue TP 22*
    Ping iBlade 3-pw DG XP S300/Original Nike Blades 3-PW s300
    RTX 3.0 50, 54, 58 Modus 120
    TM Spider DJ Sightline Black Tour Spider 

  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • BIG STUBIG STU Members  13156WRX Points: 4,229Handicap: 5.0Posts: 13,156 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #63
    SnakeP. wrote:
    <br />
    They are going to hurt a lot of people if they roll the ball back. There is no way there is going to be a separate ball for Pros and Ams, everyone will go back to the tour ball. The longest drivers were still smashing the ball 20 years ago, technology has allowed the pack to keep up, I don't really see this as a bad thing.<br />
    <br />
    This is a complete non issue for 99% of the golfing world. At the courses I play, on any given day you could probably count the players that can hit a ball over 300 on your fingers. The majority of these golfers don't hit their drivers 220. Lots of women and seniors are laying up on par 3s with their driver. I could really care less that the classic courses that I'll never set foot on can't host their majors. I do not give half a **** that Augusta has had to do some renovating to stay relevant. I care about playing golf a lot more than watching golf.<br />
    <br />
    At this point, I'd normally write something sarcastic and disparaging, but I don't want to undermine my own argument. Seriously, you're going to hurt millions of golfers catering to a couple hundred tour players.<br />
    I have stated this before-- The Ball companies will loose money on the new "limited" ball for the general masses. I dare say 90% of the people playing the game now play for fun and do not play stipulated rounds even at league level. Seniors (I am one BTW) are not going to buy a new high priced ball that goes less distance. there are too many balls out here of all brands that are conforming to today's standards. I am retired from stipulated comp and play mostly for fun and could care less what the USGA R&A or the PGA want to do. All 3 of them can pound sand as far as I am concerned
    Posted:

    Driver--- Honma G1-X Stock R shaft
    FW Adams Tight Lies 16* Mitsu Diamana
    FW 7 woodTM V- Steel 21* Stock TM R
    Irons 3 thru PW 1980 Macgregor VIP Hogan #2 Apex Shafts
    SW- Clevaland 588 56* Sensicore S-400
    LW Cleveland 588 60* Sensicore S-400
    Putter 1997 Cameron Santa FE rusty as heck Bulls Eye Satin fluted shaft
    Bags- Old School Burton mini staff non logo or Jones Classic

  • UhitUhit Members  861WRX Points: 0Posts: 861
    Joined:  #64
    Man_O_War wrote:
    <br />
    gvogel wrote:
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    not just reach a par 4 of 420 but have a wedge for the second shot...<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    Imagine how hard it is to reach a par 4 with the second shot, after the first went only 170?<br />
    <br />
    If it were that easy to drive 300 yards on a regular base into the right direction, the scores would have dropped, but that is simply not the case.<br />
    <br />
    You need more skill to drive it fast, long and accurate, than to drive it fast, short and accurate - simple as that!
    Posted:
  • bladehunterbladehunter south carolinaMembers  30917WRX Points: 7,193Handicap: NONEPosts: 30,917 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #65
    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 ?
    Posted:
  • gvogelgvogel Members  8489WRX Points: 1,409Posts: 8,489 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #66
    farmer wrote:
    <br />
    gvogel wrote:
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    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.<br />
    You were playing steel shafted wood and balata. Likely on a course that by modern agronomical standards was a goat track. You might as well compare the car you drive today to the car you drove in that era.<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    It hosted a Canadian Open.
    Posted:
    Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing-glove.  P.G. Wodehouse
  • vernonvernon Rock Chalk! Members  1307WRX Points: 209Posts: 1,307 Platinum Tees
    Joined:  #67
    gvogel wrote:
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    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.<br />
    And with nothing more than a 9 iron or else something is "tricked up".
    Posted:
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • ByeBye EnglandMembers  1366WRX Points: 125Handicap: 0.9Posts: 1,366 Platinum Tees
    Joined:  #68
    <br />
    <br />
    Why is Titleist responding to an argument nobody is having? Who has said the absolute longest players are winning at the highest clip? Isn't the argument (regardless of your opinion) that the relative length of the field has changed the way the game is played thus making skills such as long and mid-iron play, and shot making less relevant than they used to be (as well as some classic golf courses)?<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    That's part of the argument. I think what Titleist is saying is all of the things that led to more distance have stabilized over the past decade and with controls in place are quite likely to remain that way. <br />
    <br />
    And what I am saying is that distance is highly overrated on the Tour. It still takes all of the other skills to win and the statistics support this fact.<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    Titleist are trying to blame everything else for the distance gains, but all they have done is highlighted that the introduction of the pro v1 is what has made the biggest difference. All thy are doing is trying to protect their golden goose,<br />
    <br />
    Just look at the players that have won this year, you won't find many short to medium hitting players. <br />
    <br />
    Posted:
    Taylormade M3 9.5 - Aldila Rogue Silver 60X
    Callaway Rogue 3 Wood - Aldila Rogue Silver 70X
    Titleist 816 H2 20 degrees - Aldila Rogue Black 85X
    Titleist 716CB 4-9 - X100
    Vokey SM7 46.10, 50.08, 54M, 59M - S400
    Scotty Cameron Studio Stainless Newport 2.5
    Titleist Pro V1
  • EKELLYEKELLY Members  2594WRX Points: 27Handicap: +2Posts: 2,594 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #69
    raynorfan1 wrote:
    <br />
    What I have a hard time with on the "roll it back" campaign is understanding the problem they're trying to solve. Even if we all can agree that guys hit the ball farther today than they did 30 years ago, we still haven't established why that's a problem.<br />
    <br />
    The best I can tell is that Jack Nicklaus et. al. wants everybody to believe that he was the best golfer ever, and can't accept that any one of the guys in current Top 10 would handily beat in-his-prime Jack. Athletes get better over time. Games evolve. Get over it.<br />
    The MAIN difference is the guys that know how to CLOSE. That's why Tiger is the only stud we'll see in our lifetime......No Watson's, Trevino's, Faldo's, Phil's, on the horizon. Maybe Spieth, and Rory may not be done yet..... There is a reason why the Rose's, Johnson's, Day's, will only win 1-2 majors........They aren't Closers!......
    Posted:
  • GolfrnutGolfrnut Members  7645WRX Points: 458Posts: 7,645 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #70
    <br />
    Uhit wrote:
    <br />
    Shot making becomes more difficult, the farther the ball travels - no matter which number is written on the golf club...<br />
    <br />
    ...the evidence can be found in the numbers the OP mentioned.<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    This is true. A 1 degree error on a 200 yard shot is the same regardless of the club used.<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    <br />
    Depends on what "error" we are talking about. Are we talking ball start direction or face to path differences in the swing?
    Posted:
    TM M3 440 w/ Speeder Evo II 6.1 TS
    TM M4 13.5 "Small Version"  w/ BB S+ 70
    Taylormade P790 2 UDI w/ DG 105R or M3 19* 5W w/ BB S+ 70
    Taylormade P790 3 Iron w/ DG AMT White R300
    4-PW Nike VR Pro MBs w/ DG AMT White R300
    Callaway MD3 52* & 58* PM grind
    Odyssey MXM 1W
  • cxxcxx Members  3271WRX Points: 246Posts: 3,271 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #71
    Titleist has everything to lose. They are the dominant golf ball maker and their marketing is about how many tour players use their ball. A spec ball strips any pretense of superior technology away. If I were any other ball manufacturer, I'd be all for it. Shake it all up and lets see what happens.<br />
    <br />
    I remember when the hardest track was the most desirable. This lead to real idiocy in golf course design. Everyone wanted the hardest track and they got it. Fairways turned into moguls, save a target landing area. Carry distances grew. Greens were funny shapes and protected from all sides. It was bad news. I was so happy when they started making more traditional designs again.<br />
    <br />
    The biggest problem is that the number of golfers has decreased. There was a bubble that started in the 80's and 90's which kind of popped in '08. There is still an imbalance in the economics of golf. So far, nothing has been done by the golf industry or ruling bodies to get to a more healthy financial standing. I'm a bit concerned that there is a lot more fallout before it gets better. I'm not sure that the spec ball is the answer.
    Posted:
  • raynorfan1raynorfan1 Members  3867WRX Points: 396Posts: 3,867 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #72
    <br />
    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 ?<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    What problem are you solving for?<br />
    <br />
    I’d rather have them roll back the driver size/COR and wedge groove rules.
    Posted:
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • coopscoops Members  1308WRX Points: 228Posts: 1,308 Platinum Tees
    Joined:  #73
    cxx wrote:
    <br />
    Titleist has everything to lose. They are the dominant golf ball maker and their marketing is about how many tour players use their ball. A spec ball strips any pretense of superior technology away. <br />
    <br />
    <br />
    Doesn't need to be a 'spec' ball...<br />
    <br />
    back in the 1960's... a long, long time ago ;-) ... get a copy of "The Perfect Golf Swing" by Cochran & Stubbs - even then there's some discussion about 'does the ball go too far?'.<br />
    <br />
    One option they give is limiting the ball weight from 1.62 ounces down to about 1.3 ounces - easily checked, because at that weight a golf ball will float in fresh water.<br />
    <br />
    They computed some results and also checked against some balls supplied by Dunlop to verify their estimates which matched nicely... the longer the drive the greater the reduction. One issue would be more susceptible to wind ( and so the manufacturer's skill in aerodynamics would still give advantages and differences).<br />
    <br />
    Or reduce the current Tour fairway stimp readings, which don't match any course I play on except that time in a heatwave in the Scottish Borders where the fairways were concrete and the rough was thigh high hay.
    Posted:

    Adams 9015d +DiamanaZF, Mizuno MP-650 15deg FW+Diamana Thump, Epon 901 19deg, 301 4-PW, 210KGX 50deg, TM ATVforged 56 & 64deg, Cameron Futura 2003

  • bladehunterbladehunter south carolinaMembers  30917WRX Points: 7,193Handicap: NONEPosts: 30,917 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #74
    <br />
    bscinstnct wrote:
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    The top 10 owgr,<br />
    <br />
    DJ 315<br />
    JS 295<br />
    JT 309<br />
    Rahm 305<br />
    HM 303<br />
    Rose 301<br />
    Rickie 300<br />
    Brooks 311<br />
    Stenson 292 (think he uses 3w alot]<br />
    Rory 317
    <br />
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    Now show me that correlation again.<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    Won't work to use it that way. Take Spieth. He's so far down in the driving list because he misses fairways. Not from distance. Just proves that being longer in the rough is better than short in the fairway.
    Posted:
  • TsarBombaTsarBomba Members  698WRX Points: 0Handicap: 9Posts: 698
    Joined:  #75
    starsail85 wrote:
    <br />
    The average player on tour is a higher and higher clubhead speed as time goes by , because the course design and tour rota doesn’t allow 100mph good players to compete . <br />
    <br />
    There were guys with 100mph driver swings on tour in the 80s and 90s but the lengthening courses phased them out <br />
    <br />
    Stop making it a requirement to hit it so far<br />
    <br />
    There are humans capable of 400 carry , and that’s the way it will end up if the courses keep getting longer<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    Some would argue golf is a sport. And in sports, it is pretty normal for those with physical gifts and ability to have an advantage over those who do not. Trying to find a way to take away the advantage is silly. <br />
    <br />
    Right now there already is a rule in place limiting the ball. For most golfers the courses are plenty long and challenging. For the elite few it's easier due to thier length - and thats how it should be.<br />
    <br />
    Those who understand the technology, know that the plateau has already been reached with optimized launch/spin, superior aerodynamics. The mfgrs are right at the limits now. The 400 yard guys that also have touch - if/when these unicorns come along, they would have an advantage regardless of how we choose to ruin the golf ball.<br />
    <br />
    Posted:
  • bladehunterbladehunter south carolinaMembers  30917WRX Points: 7,193Handicap: NONEPosts: 30,917 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #76
    raynorfan1 wrote:
    <br />
    <br />
    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 ?<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    What problem are you solving for?<br />
    <br />
    I’d rather have them roll back the driver size/COR and wedge groove rules.<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    And I get that. You'd rather hit a straight ball yes? <br />
    <br />
    I'm saying that the true issue isn't total distance . It's the ease at which it's achieved. <br />
    <br />
    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.
    Posted:
  • tannyhobantannyhoban Members  2113WRX Points: 402Posts: 2,113 Platinum Tees
    Joined:  #77
    My admiration for Niclaus has completely devolved. He has 17 designs that will be played on tours worldwide. Seems he's butt hurt the kids play them better. <br />
    <br />
    Bash Titleist for pointing out the obvious if you will, but don't discount Jack's agenda.
    Posted:
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • bladehunterbladehunter south carolinaMembers  30917WRX Points: 7,193Handicap: NONEPosts: 30,917 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #78
    TsarBomba wrote:
    <br />
    starsail85 wrote:
    <br />
    The average player on tour is a higher and higher clubhead speed as time goes by , because the course design and tour rota doesn’t allow 100mph good players to compete . <br />
    <br />
    There were guys with 100mph driver swings on tour in the 80s and 90s but the lengthening courses phased them out <br />
    <br />
    Stop making it a requirement to hit it so far<br />
    <br />
    There are humans capable of 400 carry , and that’s the way it will end up if the courses keep getting longer<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    Some would argue golf is a sport. And in sports, it is pretty normal for those with physical gifts and ability to have an advantage over those who do not. Trying to find a way to take away the advantage is silly. <br />
    <br />
    Right now there already is a rule in place limiting the ball. For most golfers the courses are plenty long and challenging. For the elite few it's easier due to thier length - and thats how it should be.<br />
    <br />
    Those who understand the technology, know that the plateau has already been reached with optimized launch/spin, superior aerodynamics. The mfgrs are right at the limits now. The 400 yard guys that also have touch - if/when these unicorns come along, they would have an advantage regardless of how we choose to ruin the golf ball.<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    Don't think that's true. We haven't had a golf ball yet come out that's at the limit. At some point one will be released that is advertised as " pushing the limit " . Hasn't happened yet. But it will.
    Posted:
  • Hawkeye77Hawkeye77 IowaClubWRX  21665WRX Points: 5,667Posts: 21,665 ClubWRX
    Joined:  #79
    It is NOT a study.<br />
    <br />
    It is a Papal Bull from golf ball world's Vatican.<br />
    <br />
    Nothing in there that is new or hasn't been discussed ad nauseam on here or anywhere else before. Just good and (although sounding a little shrill at this point) proactive marketing.<br />
    <br />
    And again, I like my ProV1s and Chrome Softs very much, thank you and golf balls for the average golfer aren't going to get dialed back, and likely not for the pros either (and if they did for pros, who cares).
    Posted:
  • bladehunterbladehunter south carolinaMembers  30917WRX Points: 7,193Handicap: NONEPosts: 30,917 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #80
    <br />
    <br />
    <br />
    bscinstnct wrote:
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    The top 10 owgr,<br />
    <br />
    DJ 315<br />
    JS 295<br />
    JT 309<br />
    Rahm 305<br />
    HM 303<br />
    Rose 301<br />
    Rickie 300<br />
    Brooks 311<br />
    Stenson 292 (think he uses 3w alot]<br />
    Rory 317
    <br />
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    Now show me that correlation again.<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    Won't work to use it that way. Take Spieth. He's so far down in the driving list because he misses fairways. Not from distance. Just proves that being longer in the rough is better than short in the fairway.<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    My stats are driving DISTANCE. Spieth is 75th in DISTANCE.<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    My apologies. I failed to see where it said distance anywhere. ( still don't see it ). Admittedly I have a mental block at times that for whatever reason doesn't let me see the obvious script. Have this trouble at restaurants with the menu etc. <br />
    <br />
    Posted:
  • bscinstnctbscinstnct Members  29248WRX Points: 6,086Posts: 29,248 Titanium Tees
    Joined:  #81
    <br />
    bscinstnct wrote:
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    The top 10 owgr,<br />
    <br />
    DJ 315<br />
    JS 295<br />
    JT 309<br />
    Rahm 305<br />
    HM 303<br />
    Rose 301<br />
    Rickie 300<br />
    Brooks 311<br />
    Stenson 292 (think he uses 3w alot]<br />
    Rory 317
    <br />
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    Now show me that correlation again.<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    Look at the web.com tour<br />
    <br />
    30 guys *average* 310 or more<br />
    <br />
    87 guys average 300 or more<br />
    <br />
    Distance off the tee correlates directly with success in golf.<br />
    <br />
    Proof...<br />
    <br />
    2 best golfers of all time<br />
    <br />
    Jack<br />
    <br />
    Tiger<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    Posted:
  • Hawkeye77Hawkeye77 IowaClubWRX  21665WRX Points: 5,667Posts: 21,665 ClubWRX
    Joined:  #82
    <br />
    <br />
    <br />
    <br />
    bscinstnct wrote:
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    The top 10 owgr,<br />
    <br />
    DJ 315<br />
    JS 295<br />
    JT 309<br />
    Rahm 305<br />
    HM 303<br />
    Rose 301<br />
    Rickie 300<br />
    Brooks 311<br />
    Stenson 292 (think he uses 3w alot]<br />
    Rory 317
    <br />
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    Now show me that correlation again.<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    Won't work to use it that way. Take Spieth. He's so far down in the driving list because he misses fairways. Not from distance. Just proves that being longer in the rough is better than short in the fairway.<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    My stats are driving DISTANCE. Spieth is 75th in DISTANCE.<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    My apologies. I failed to see where it said distance anywhere. ( still don't see it ). Admittedly I have a mental block at times that for whatever reason doesn't let me see the obvious script. Have this trouble at restaurants with the menu etc. <br />
    <br />
    <br />
    From time to time, I'm told I have this problem with speed limit signs.<br /><br />
    bscinstnct wrote:
    <br />
    <br />
    bscinstnct wrote:
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    The top 10 owgr,<br />
    <br />
    DJ 315<br />
    JS 295<br />
    JT 309<br />
    Rahm 305<br />
    HM 303<br />
    Rose 301<br />
    Rickie 300<br />
    Brooks 311<br />
    Stenson 292 (think he uses 3w alot]<br />
    Rory 317
    <br />
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    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.<br />
    <br />
    Now show me that correlation again.<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    Look at the web.com tour<br />
    <br />
    30 guys *average* 310 or more<br />
    <br />
    87 guys average 300 or more<br />
    <br />
    Distance off the tee correlates directly with success in golf.<br />
    <br />
    Proof...<br />
    <br />
    2 best golfers of all time<br />
    <br />
    Jack<br />
    <br />
    Tiger<br />
    <br />
    <br />
    Now those are relevant facts!
    Posted:
19

Leave a Comment

Rich Text Editor. To edit a paragraph's style, hit tab to get to the paragraph menu. From there you will be able to pick one style. Nothing defaults to paragraph. An inline formatting menu will show up when you select text. Hit tab to get into that menu. Some elements, such as rich link embeds, images, loading indicators, and error messages may get inserted into the editor. You may navigate to these using the arrow keys inside of the editor and delete them with the delete or backspace key.