Dont change the ball- just pull the driver

[BlackDiamondPar5]

Years ago (probably at least 10 yrs) I thought I read somewhere that there was a standard distance test to approve a ball and or club. Is my recollection flawed or was this something real? If it was real, how did distance get so crazy?

[widow-maker]

Rory hit 5 drives in one round at the API that were in the 360 range. He's relegating 480 yd par 4's into driver/sand wedge. Lengthening golf courses is expensive. Or, you cut off the fairway at 300 yards with rough and force them to layup. Of course you've got to change it back for the members a week later. I don't want to see layup golf for 18 holes anyway.

 

In the 60's, Jack was hitting 7 iron about 150. Now they all hit 7 irons 200. Heck, 200 was a 1 iron shot for most pros in the 60's. How do golf course architects defend against the length? They dig big holes and fill them in with water, they move tees back 100 yds(if they have the room for it) for players who only play there 1% of the time, they put slope and speed into the greens and tilt them at weird angles. And all of that costs a lot of money to build and maintain. And green fees and membership fees get higher.

 

They need to figure out if they can afford to keep up with changing golf courses for the additional distances. It would seem to me that dialing back the golf ball for tour pros is the easiest solution. Rory and DJ will still hit the ball further and have the advantage over other golfers who don't have their swing speed. Augusta National has spent millions and millions of dollars for land acquisition to keep lengthening their golf course. They can afford it, but can everybody else?

[OutBackHack]

crazy talk. All you have to do is grow the rough and firm up the greens. Look at the 13' US Open at Merion. It played under 7000 yards and +1 won the tourney! Pros play on firm fairways with minimal rough and soft-ish greens. If they would soften up the fairways, grow the rough up and get the greens rock hard no one would be worried about ball distance.

 

Your kind of correct, except the fairways need to be as firm as they can get them. Soft fairways make it WAY easier for pros to score well.

And Merion was waterlogged the week of the Open.

[bscinstnct]

They should pull the driver, or any random club, on any given tounament.

 

But it will be a surprise!

 

"Ok, today, no 6 irons" "today, no putter"

 

Ratings bonanza.

[BrianMcG]

Then they will all start carrying 9* - 3 woods.

[Racerx63]

If you really want to go crazy to control the distance and level the playing field, do what they do in racing. In certain road racing series' when a car wins a certain amount of times they get a weight penalty to slow them down to equalize the field. You could have a different distance ball based on swing speed to bring their distance in to alignment with what ever the golf gods deem to be the "best" distance to make the course play as they think it should. You could have different golf balls for different courses.

 

I say let them play and not worry about the distances.

[HackerD]

OP I like your idea as more sensible than trying to engineer a different ball. Brilliant. So simple.

[Franzen]

Why not just ban the tee peg, and you have to drop the ball on the tee box to get it in play...? Doesn't even need to be for every tournament/course.

[TomLikesGolf]

Rory hit 5 drives in one round at the API that were in the 360 range. He's relegating 480 yd par 4's into driver/sand wedge. Lengthening golf courses is expensive. Or, you cut off the fairway at 300 yards with rough and force them to layup. Of course you've got to change it back for the members a week later. I don't want to see layup golf for 18 holes anyway.

 

In the 60's, Jack was hitting 7 iron about 150. Now they all hit 7 irons 200. Heck, 200 was a 1 iron shot for most pros in the 60's. How do golf course architects defend against the length? They dig big holes and fill them in with water, they move tees back 100 yds(if they have the room for it) for players who only play there 1% of the time, they put slope and speed into the greens and tilt them at weird angles. And all of that costs a lot of money to build and maintain. And green fees and membership fees get higher.

 

They need to figure out if they can afford to keep up with changing golf courses for the additional distances. It would seem to me that dialing back the golf ball for tour pros is the easiest solution. Rory and DJ will still hit the ball further and have the advantage over other golfers who don't have their swing speed. Augusta National has spent millions and millions of dollars for land acquisition to keep lengthening their golf course. They can afford it, but can everybody else?

 

 

 

 

http://www.golfwrx.com/380190/usga-and-ra-publish-research-on-driving-distance-gains-on-pga-tour/

[TomLikesGolf]

http://golftips.golfweek.com/average-yards-per-club-pro-golfer-20585.html

[jslane57]

The distance is not even the best thing about the modern tour ball. It is the spin and the stability. Married to the modern equipment, one can just take a rip at it without fear. Yes, the driver is huge and could use some dialing back. But the ball is the main culprit IMO. The ball could be made so it would spin more off the woods if one desires spin off the wedges. If you want less spin with the woods, you should give up something on the wedges. Personally, I'd like to see it toned back, but more so, be limited to two pieces of constant density materials...

[tannyhoban]

I say let's up the club limit to at least 16, and leave the rest alone.

[PowderedToastMan]

Most viewers love watching the pros hammer driver. Television networks, the tour, sponsors, etc, don't want to lose viewership, which is exactly what would happen if players were forced to hit the ball shorter. Not to mention, distance isn't killing the game. The "monster" hitter Dustin Johnson has won one major. The game still rewards players like Jordan Spieth more. As previously stated, golf courses can be made tougher by methods other than length.

 

I'm in favour of making the driver limit smaller though (360 cc max for tournament play), but tolerances would still be the same, so solid strikes would still be rewarded with the same distance.

[Outlier]

Someone tell me why exactly we need to dial back distance? I've watched a decent amount of golf in my time and seen guys make bogey from pretty much anywhere and everywhere.

 

It makes old courses obsolete to play and it makes new designs do goofy things. Then the rest of golf course industry follows suit and you see rounds take longer, courses that are more expensive to maintain and less people golfing.

 

I don't think we need to dial back the distance, we just need to make sure we don't allow technology to hit the ball any further than we are now.

 

 

 

 

RH

 

 

I find the entire argument about "distance" to be a disingenuous red herring where the real issue is the ego's of Judge Smails and his ilk at Bushwood. (Of important note: could be wrong, but I DO NOT RECALL ARNIE ever being up in arms like Jack about this topic.)

 

# 1 BS statement- ."because they hit it so far, we need too much land, bad for the environment, too much water, too much fertilizer, too expense..."

 

my view of reality- well if you want to "make golf great again" like in the 60's.....then just stop with the insane level of manicuring, cutting, irrigating, fertilizing every inch of the grass. let the greens roll like they did in 1967.

 

#2 BS statement- "because they hit it so far, classic courses are no longer viable".....

 

my view of reality- olympic tracks used to be mashed cinder, now they are rubberized tacky jetways; athletes are bigger, stronger, with scientific training and techniques and records are obliterated- we celebrate it!

- golf has let a reverence for the likes of Jack Nicklaus beget a misguided view that somehow bigger, stronger with scientific training and techniques and records obliterated- should be met with scorn!

- sorry- I know this is blasphemy to some, but I really just view this whole debate as Jack's sour grapes. Play the damn 7100 yd course till the cows come home, either make a par 68 or let 'em shoot 24 under to win, either way I have never been bored watching "Bomb it, pitch it putt it"......Phil, Tiger, Ernie, Dustin, Rory are the deal for me. Occasionally Zack Johnson or Jim Furyk win too.

 

Oh and Bubba "plays shots", Phil "plays shots", Jim Furyk "Plays shots".......

 

Just cut it out and go watch some black and whites of "Shells Wonderful World of Golf" if that's your pleasure. The rest of us can't wait to see Rory, Dustin launch that mofo!

[Sean2]

All they need to do is narrow the fairways, raise the rough, etc. No need to make any equipment changes. Merion is considered a short course, as is Harbortown. They seem to defend themselves pretty well.

 

ps: Most venues cut and roll the fairways, which is why you see mammoth drives as the players get a tremendous amount of roll. It's for TV...audiences love their long drives.

[dciccoritti]

Someone tell me why exactly we need to dial back distance? I've watched a decent amount of golf in my time and seen guys make bogey from pretty much anywhere and everywhere.

 

It makes old courses obsolete to play and it makes new designs do goofy things. Then the rest of golf course industry follows suit and you see rounds take longer, courses that are more expensive to maintain and less people golfing.

 

I don't think we need to dial back the distance, we just need to make sure we don't allow technology to hit the ball any further than we are now.

 

 

 

 

RH

 

 

I find the entire argument about "distance" to be a disingenuous red herring where the real issue is the ego's of Judge Smails and his ilk at Bushwood. (Of important note: could be wrong, but I DO NOT RECALL ARNIE ever being up in arms like Jack about this topic.)

 

# 1 BS statement- ."because they hit it so far, we need too much land, bad for the environment, too much water, too much fertilizer, too expense..."

 

my view of reality- well if you want to "make golf great again" like in the 60's.....then just stop with the insane level of manicuring, cutting, irrigating, fertilizing every inch of the grass. let the greens roll like they did in 1967.

 

#2 BS statement- "because they hit it so far, classic courses are no longer viable".....

 

my view of reality- olympic tracks used to be mashed cinder, now they are rubberized tacky jetways; athletes are bigger, stronger, with scientific training and techniques and records are obliterated- we celebrate it!

- golf has let a reverence for the likes of Jack Nicklaus beget a misguided view that somehow bigger, stronger with scientific training and techniques and records obliterated- should be met with scorn!

- sorry- I know this is blasphemy to some, but I really just view this whole debate as Jack's sour grapes. Play the damn 7100 yd course till the cows come home, either make a par 68 or let 'em shoot 24 under to win, either way I have never been bored watching "Bomb it, pitch it putt it"......Phil, Tiger, Ernie, Dustin, Rory are the deal for me. Occasionally Zack Johnson or Jim Furyk win too.

 

Oh and Bubba "plays shots", Phil "plays shots", Jim Furyk "Plays shots".......

 

Just cut it out and go watch some black and whites of "Shells Wonderful World of Golf" if that's your pleasure. The rest of us can't wait to see Rory, Dustin launch that mofo!

 

^^^ That s*** doesn't last more than 8 minutes on my TV. Just goes to show.

 

I have a personal belief that "the course" should beat the field half the time. Crazy notion, but that's what excites me.

 

I like both the "take away the driver" idea on certain courses and the "grow the rough and make some real bunkers" idea. I'd rather see a +2 on an extremely difficult course than a -28 on a green carpet course. I guess that's why some US Opens and British Opens excite me the most.

 

And it's not that I want to see Tour Pros struggle. Quite the contrary, I want to see them rise up to the challenge and overcome the odds. I have no problem watching a 2-0 baseball game because I can appreciate insane pitching. Not big on batting practice.

 

Just some thoughts from the minority :-)

[Justmuckit]

Someone tell me why exactly we need to dial back distance? I've watched a decent amount of golf in my time and seen guys make bogey from pretty much anywhere and everywhere.

 

Can't remember the exact hole, but Rory damn near drove a 4-par green at Bay Hill last Sunday and walked away with 5.

[Outlier]

Someone tell me why exactly we need to dial back distance? I've watched a decent amount of golf in my time and seen guys make bogey from pretty much anywhere and everywhere.

 

It makes old courses obsolete to play and it makes new designs do goofy things. Then the rest of golf course industry follows suit and you see rounds take longer, courses that are more expensive to maintain and less people golfing.

 

I don't think we need to dial back the distance, we just need to make sure we don't allow technology to hit the ball any further than we are now.

 

 

 

 

RH

 

 

I find the entire argument about "distance" to be a disingenuous red herring where the real issue is the ego's of Judge Smails and his ilk at Bushwood. (Of important note: could be wrong, but I DO NOT RECALL ARNIE ever being up in arms like Jack about this topic.)

 

# 1 BS statement- ."because they hit it so far, we need too much land, bad for the environment, too much water, too much fertilizer, too expense..."

 

my view of reality- well if you want to "make golf great again" like in the 60's.....then just stop with the insane level of manicuring, cutting, irrigating, fertilizing every inch of the grass. let the greens roll like they did in 1967.

 

#2 BS statement- "because they hit it so far, classic courses are no longer viable".....

 

my view of reality- olympic tracks used to be mashed cinder, now they are rubberized tacky jetways; athletes are bigger, stronger, with scientific training and techniques and records are obliterated- we celebrate it!

- golf has let a reverence for the likes of Jack Nicklaus beget a misguided view that somehow bigger, stronger with scientific training and techniques and records obliterated- should be met with scorn!

- sorry- I know this is blasphemy to some, but I really just view this whole debate as Jack's sour grapes. Play the damn 7100 yd course till the cows come home, either make a par 68 or let 'em shoot 24 under to win, either way I have never been bored watching "Bomb it, pitch it putt it"......Phil, Tiger, Ernie, Dustin, Rory are the deal for me. Occasionally Zack Johnson or Jim Furyk win too.

 

Oh and Bubba "plays shots", Phil "plays shots", Jim Furyk "Plays shots".......

 

Just cut it out and go watch some black and whites of "Shells Wonderful World of Golf" if that's your pleasure. The rest of us can't wait to see Rory, Dustin launch that mofo!

 

^^^ That s*** doesn't last more than 8 minutes on my TV. Just goes to show.

 

I have a personal belief that "the course" should beat the field half the time. Crazy notion, but that's what excites me.

 

I like both the "take away the driver" idea on certain courses and the "grow the rough and make some real bunkers" idea. I'd rather see a +2 on an extremely difficult course than a -28 on a green carpet course. I guess that's why some US Opens and British Opens excite me the most.

 

And it's not that I want to see Tour Pros struggle. Quite the contrary, I want to see them rise up to the challenge and overcome the odds. I have no problem watching a 2-0 baseball game because I can appreciate insane pitching. Not big on batting practice.

 

Just some thoughts from the minority :-)

 

Also of note....why don't they try some of this roll back nonsense on the "Champions tour"? See how long Bernhard Langer hangs around if he has to hit anything more than a 7 iron into a green. People SAY they like to watch -3 win a tournament, except ratings say much to the contrary. The American audience digs the long ball, elsewhere your results may vary.

[TomLikesGolf]

Someone tell me why exactly we need to dial back distance? I've watched a decent amount of golf in my time and seen guys make bogey from pretty much anywhere and everywhere.

 

It makes old courses obsolete to play and it makes new designs do goofy things. Then the rest of golf course industry follows suit and you see rounds take longer, courses that are more expensive to maintain and less people golfing.

 

I don't think we need to dial back the distance, we just need to make sure we don't allow technology to hit the ball any further than we are now.

 

 

 

 

RH

 

 

I find the entire argument about "distance" to be a disingenuous red herring where the real issue is the ego's of Judge Smails and his ilk at Bushwood. (Of important note: could be wrong, but I DO NOT RECALL ARNIE ever being up in arms like Jack about this topic.)

 

# 1 BS statement- ."because they hit it so far, we need too much land, bad for the environment, too much water, too much fertilizer, too expense..."

 

my view of reality- well if you want to "make golf great again" like in the 60's.....then just stop with the insane level of manicuring, cutting, irrigating, fertilizing every inch of the grass. let the greens roll like they did in 1967.

 

#2 BS statement- "because they hit it so far, classic courses are no longer viable".....

 

my view of reality- olympic tracks used to be mashed cinder, now they are rubberized tacky jetways; athletes are bigger, stronger, with scientific training and techniques and records are obliterated- we celebrate it!

- golf has let a reverence for the likes of Jack Nicklaus beget a misguided view that somehow bigger, stronger with scientific training and techniques and records obliterated- should be met with scorn!

- sorry- I know this is blasphemy to some, but I really just view this whole debate as Jack's sour grapes. Play the damn 7100 yd course till the cows come home, either make a par 68 or let 'em shoot 24 under to win, either way I have never been bored watching "Bomb it, pitch it putt it"......Phil, Tiger, Ernie, Dustin, Rory are the deal for me. Occasionally Zack Johnson or Jim Furyk win too.

 

Oh and Bubba "plays shots", Phil "plays shots", Jim Furyk "Plays shots".......

 

Just cut it out and go watch some black and whites of "Shells Wonderful World of Golf" if that's your pleasure. The rest of us can't wait to see Rory, Dustin launch that mofo!

 

 

Haha wow.

 

Ill bet 100,000 teenage boys across America can hit the ball 300 yards. Thats 30 yards further than Nicklaus' ball went in 1970. Are all these boys bigger hitters than Nicklaus? Are american boys just more fit and active than they were in the 70s? Hmmm.. I dont know pal.

 

What I do know is that Jack was clocked swinging 118 at the age of 58. I recon thats a 300 yard drive in todays equipment.

 

Ive been known to poke it out there 280-290 a couple of times myself. I have no delusions that I some sort of modern physical specimen superior to my grandfathers generation.

 

The ball goes further because of the equipment. Plain and simple. Anyone who thinks otherwise is full oth it. Go grab a persimmon and a belata and try to get it past 210.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/www.pga.com/amp/golf-instruction/golf-buzz/how-far-would-golfs-legends-drive-ball-using-modern-equipment

[lowheel]

This already happened 30 years ago. It was called the 1 club challenge. some of them are on youtube. Trevino against Seve. fun stuff

[bladehunter]

Two pro's voluntarily dropped the driver from their bags in the recent Hero Indian Open.

One was Eddie Pepperell, who led after two rounds and the other was Gavin Green, who finished second. This was on a long golf course too.

I think banning the driver would ultimately penalise the shorter hitters not the longer ones.

 

You are correct. Which is why any longer player should want this. It would bring back balance and allow length to be an actual advantage it once was. Today it's not as much. Everyone is long due to equipment. Being 340 long is sometimes useless as well. Today's long player hits less driver on anything but the longest wide open courses because driver goes too far.

[bladehunter]

Then they will all start carrying 9* - 3 woods.

 

Which is the true answer. Less forgiving drivers so they can't swing out of their shoes every time. A smaller head just will not hit the straight bombs Jason day hits. If these guys start having to see curves thing would change in their game plans.

[2bGood]

It is interesting to watch many sports deal with this.

 

Hockey rinks are now too small. Guys are just too big and cover distance way faster than they used to. In affect the rinks are smaller compared to the players. So do we accept the game is now different or to we try to dial it back in some way?

[Disco Dave]

And where does it stop? I'm 30 years old today. 50 years from now, if I'm still alive there will be some 19 years old kid with the space-age name like Zloofig who hits the ball 500 yards, partially because he is an amazing player, but also because the technology of his time allows him to do so.

 

So he's on in one on a par five at _____ legendary course.

 

Is that bs?

 

Also, I just realized I went from suggesting simply pulling the driver at certain courses to defending the idea of limiting distance 50 years from now...

 

Zloofig is a pretty cool sounding name. I'm stealing it.

[Outlier]

Someone tell me why exactly we need to dial back distance? I've watched a decent amount of golf in my time and seen guys make bogey from pretty much anywhere and everywhere.

 

It makes old courses obsolete to play and it makes new designs do goofy things. Then the rest of golf course industry follows suit and you see rounds take longer, courses that are more expensive to maintain and less people golfing.

 

I don't think we need to dial back the distance, we just need to make sure we don't allow technology to hit the ball any further than we are now.

 

 

 

 

RH

 

 

I find the entire argument about "distance" to be a disingenuous red herring where the real issue is the ego's of Judge Smails and his ilk at Bushwood. (Of important note: could be wrong, but I DO NOT RECALL ARNIE ever being up in arms like Jack about this topic.)

 

# 1 BS statement- ."because they hit it so far, we need too much land, bad for the environment, too much water, too much fertilizer, too expense..."

 

my view of reality- well if you want to "make golf great again" like in the 60's.....then just stop with the insane level of manicuring, cutting, irrigating, fertilizing every inch of the grass. let the greens roll like they did in 1967.

 

#2 BS statement- "because they hit it so far, classic courses are no longer viable".....

 

my view of reality- olympic tracks used to be mashed cinder, now they are rubberized tacky jetways; athletes are bigger, stronger, with scientific training and techniques and records are obliterated- we celebrate it!

- golf has let a reverence for the likes of Jack Nicklaus beget a misguided view that somehow bigger, stronger with scientific training and techniques and records obliterated- should be met with scorn!

- sorry- I know this is blasphemy to some, but I really just view this whole debate as Jack's sour grapes. Play the damn 7100 yd course till the cows come home, either make a par 68 or let 'em shoot 24 under to win, either way I have never been bored watching "Bomb it, pitch it putt it"......Phil, Tiger, Ernie, Dustin, Rory are the deal for me. Occasionally Zack Johnson or Jim Furyk win too.

 

Oh and Bubba "plays shots", Phil "plays shots", Jim Furyk "Plays shots".......

 

Just cut it out and go watch some black and whites of "Shells Wonderful World of Golf" if that's your pleasure. The rest of us can't wait to see Rory, Dustin launch that mofo!

 

 

Haha wow.

 

Ill bet 100,000 teenage boys across America can hit the ball 300 yards. Thats 30 yards further than Nicklaus' ball went in 1970. Are all these boys bigger hitters than Nicklaus? Are american boys just more fit and active than they were in the 70s? Hmmm.. I dont know pal.

 

What I do know is that Jack was clocked swinging 118 at the age of 58. I recon thats a 300 yard drive in todays equipment.

 

Ive been known to poke it out there 280-290 a couple of times myself. I have no delusions that I some sort of modern physical specimen superior to my grandfathers generation.

 

The ball goes further because of the equipment. Plain and simple. Anyone who thinks otherwise is full oth it. Go grab a persimmon and a belata and try to get it past 210.

 

https://www.google.c...odern-equipment

 

 

No persimmon for me thanks.....I am present here in 2017. We play with Titanium, work out and hit ProVIx's thank you. I really don't care what Jack did at age 18, I know he was the best he played against and that is awesome.

 

Could Jesse Owens have run faster than Usain Bolt if he had similar training, equipment and a rubberized track? As for the "what would Jack do with modern equipment" crowd....Let's be real and let's be clear- Golden Bear no likey greenside bunkers.

[worldslasttwfan]

Game grew.

Now more than ever, Top players can differentiate themselves from rest of field with their speed, talents, and their dedication.

Finally we are starting to see the real gap between the guys like DJ, and rest of players.

I personally like to see those shots being hit and given advantage.

[Shilgy]

Geez, we've had the "sky is falling the ball goes too far" stories for over a century.

 

Why is it that golf is the only sport that the players do not get credit for human advancement? Posts saying that Jack, Lee and company would eat the lunch of these new players is ludicrous. Would the top players from the past still be competitive? Sure, some would and some would not. Most would be, at best, the Zach Johnson or Furyk type. The game AND the players have evolved. Because there is no defense in golf we see the massive advancement more clearly. Baseball's hitters are bigger and stronger but so are the pitchers, so it balances out. Football players are bigger stronger and faster on both sides of the ball so it balances out. Same with the NBA.

All of that said I too would rather see the ball rolled back 10-15%. But it would have to be for everyone. No bifurcation for me please.

 

PS to the post a few above. C'mon man. I was a short hitter and hit drives in the 230-240 range in the late 80's with persimmon and balata.

 

Carry on....

[sumed]

Someone tell me why exactly we need to dial back distance? I've watched a decent amount of golf in my time and seen guys make bogey from pretty much anywhere and everywhere.

 

Can't remember the exact hole, but Rory damn near drove a 4-par green at Bay Hill last Sunday and walked away with 5.

 

Yep, those long drives don't mean shinola if you can't put it in the cup... accuracy is what's important...

[jslane57]

This whole, "we want to see the long ball" argument is of course true. But a total joke. We want to see the long ball in comparison to others. If no one in the history of golf ever hit a ball farther than 175 yards, then 200 yards would feel like a mile. It's not like a 20% reduction in flight would keep DJ from being the longest, but it would allow 7000 yard courses be more than pitch and putts...

[starsail85]

Someone tell me why exactly we need to dial back distance? I've watched a decent amount of golf in my time and seen guys make bogey from pretty much anywhere and everywhere.

 

It makes old courses obsolete to play and it makes new designs do goofy things. Then the rest of golf course industry follows suit and you see rounds take longer, courses that are more expensive to maintain and less people golfing.

 

I don't think we need to dial back the distance, we just need to make sure we don't allow technology to hit the ball any further than we are now.

 

 

 

 

RH

 

 

I find the entire argument about "distance" to be a disingenuous red herring where the real issue is the ego's of Judge Smails and his ilk at Bushwood. (Of important note: could be wrong, but I DO NOT RECALL ARNIE ever being up in arms like Jack about this topic.)

 

# 1 BS statement- ."because they hit it so far, we need too much land, bad for the environment, too much water, too much fertilizer, too expense..."

 

my view of reality- well if you want to "make golf great again" like in the 60's.....then just stop with the insane level of manicuring, cutting, irrigating, fertilizing every inch of the grass. let the greens roll like they did in 1967.

 

#2 BS statement- "because they hit it so far, classic courses are no longer viable".....

 

my view of reality- olympic tracks used to be mashed cinder, now they are rubberized tacky jetways; athletes are bigger, stronger, with scientific training and techniques and records are obliterated- we celebrate it!

- golf has let a reverence for the likes of Jack Nicklaus beget a misguided view that somehow bigger, stronger with scientific training and techniques and records obliterated- should be met with scorn!

- sorry- I know this is blasphemy to some, but I really just view this whole debate as Jack's sour grapes. Play the damn 7100 yd course till the cows come home, either make a par 68 or let 'em shoot 24 under to win, either way I have never been bored watching "Bomb it, pitch it putt it"......Phil, Tiger, Ernie, Dustin, Rory are the deal for me. Occasionally Zack Johnson or Jim Furyk win too.

 

Oh and Bubba "plays shots", Phil "plays shots", Jim Furyk "Plays shots".......

 

Just cut it out and go watch some black and whites of "Shells Wonderful World of Golf" if that's your pleasure. The rest of us can't wait to see Rory, Dustin launch that mofo!

 

 

Haha wow.

 

Ill bet 100,000 teenage boys across America can hit the ball 300 yards. Thats 30 yards further than Nicklaus' ball went in 1970. Are all these boys bigger hitters than Nicklaus? Are american boys just more fit and active than they were in the 70s? Hmmm.. I dont know pal.

 

What I do know is that Jack was clocked swinging 118 at the age of 58. I recon thats a 300 yard drive in todays equipment.

 

Ive been known to poke it out there 280-290 a couple of times myself. I have no delusions that I some sort of modern physical specimen superior to my grandfathers generation.

 

The ball goes further because of the equipment. Plain and simple. Anyone who thinks otherwise is full oth it. Go grab a persimmon and a belata and try to get it past 210.

 

https://www.google.com/amp/www.pga.com/amp/golf-instruction/golf-buzz/how-far-would-golfs-legends-drive-ball-using-modern-equipment

 

I've heard that 118 58 JN thing before , it's BS . He was flying t about 240 at the time