Johnny laughs at 63

[tbowles411]

 

I'm fairly certain I had a suit like that with my afro!

 

Now *that* would be avatar material ; )

LOL! I miss my hair... :cheesy:

[WilCox]

I'm fairly certain I had a suit like that with my afro!

 

Now *that* would be avatar material ; )

LOL! I miss my hair... :cheesy:

 

I'm fairly certain that white belts also came into fashion with those polyester leisure suits. Who woulda thunk people would be wearing those to play golf today? Oops, getting too far off topic now.... time to get back to Johnny vs Justin.

[farmer]

The best thing about those huge collars was you could pop them and it was like opening an umbrella. Never had a leisure suit, I had forgotten how god-awful ugly they were. Today's top players endorse Rolex, Netjets, RBS, high end clothes, Johnny was stuck with Sears Menswear. No Amana cap, though, there was a cool fifty bucks a week he passed up.

[bscinstnct]

Love to see Johnny, in his prime, shoot 63 on this course today ; )

[mosesgolf]

Johnny is right.

Johnny shot a 63 when the average score was way over par and that 63 won him the tournie.

 

 

[cardoustie]

I think even the Wrx young guys realize (deep down) that some of our old US Open champs would annihilate Erin Hills with modern equipment

 

Miller and Nicklaus (and dare I say Hogan) included

 

Unless you have played persimmon and balata in tournament golf events ... it's hard to understand ... and Miller and Jack had to test balls for roundness ... I think 1/3 max were playable from MacGregor

[mjen43]

I think even the Wrx young guys realize (deep down) that some of our old US Open champs would annihilate Erin Hills with modern equipment

 

Miller and Nicklaus (and dare I say Hogan) included

 

Unless you have played persimmon and balata in tournament golf events ... it's hard to understand ... and Miller and Jack had to test balls for roundness ... I think 1/3 max were playable from MacGregor

 

Old Tom Morris would annihilate the course, too. Everyone knows human evolution works in reverse in sports.

[youdamantiger]

I think even the Wrx young guys realize (deep down) that some of our old US Open champs would annihilate Erin Hills with modern equipment

 

Miller and Nicklaus (and dare I say Hogan) included

 

Unless you have played persimmon and balata in tournament golf events ... it's hard to understand ... and Miller and Jack had to test balls for roundness ... I think 1/3 max were playable from MacGregor

 

I read somewhere that Jack won all his majors in the 60s using the MacGregor Tourney ball, widely regarded as the biggest POS since the Edsel. Jack was asked once why he didn't switch and he said something to the effect that, of the major ball manufacturers, MacGregor would pay you the most money to play their ball because they knew it was utter garbage.

[youdamantiger]

I think even the Wrx young guys realize (deep down) that some of our old US Open champs would annihilate Erin Hills with modern equipment

 

Miller and Nicklaus (and dare I say Hogan) included

 

Unless you have played persimmon and balata in tournament golf events ... it's hard to understand ... and Miller and Jack had to test balls for roundness ... I think 1/3 max were playable from MacGregor

 

Old Tom Morris would annihilate the course, too. Everyone knows human evolution works in reverse in sports.

 

Does human evolution present itself over 150 years? And here I thought evolution took millions of years.

[mjen43]

I think even the Wrx young guys realize (deep down) that some of our old US Open champs would annihilate Erin Hills with modern equipment

 

Miller and Nicklaus (and dare I say Hogan) included

 

Unless you have played persimmon and balata in tournament golf events ... it's hard to understand ... and Miller and Jack had to test balls for roundness ... I think 1/3 max were playable from MacGregor

 

Old Tom Morris would annihilate the course, too. Everyone knows human evolution works in reverse in sports.

 

Does human evolution present itself over 150 years? And here I thought evolution took millions of years.

 

Athletic evolution then. Call it whatever you want.

[youdamantiger]

I think even the Wrx young guys realize (deep down) that some of our old US Open champs would annihilate Erin Hills with modern equipment

 

Miller and Nicklaus (and dare I say Hogan) included

 

Unless you have played persimmon and balata in tournament golf events ... it's hard to understand ... and Miller and Jack had to test balls for roundness ... I think 1/3 max were playable from MacGregor

 

Old Tom Morris would annihilate the course, too. Everyone knows human evolution works in reverse in sports.

 

Does human evolution present itself over 150 years? And here I thought evolution took millions of years.

 

Athletic evolution then. Call it whatever you want.

 

I don't think JB Holmes is more of an athlete than Arnold Palmer was. Or Justin Thomas more of an athlete than Jack Nicklaus. The insane distances modern players hit it is 100% equipment.

[mjen43]

I think even the Wrx young guys realize (deep down) that some of our old US Open champs would annihilate Erin Hills with modern equipment

 

Miller and Nicklaus (and dare I say Hogan) included

 

Unless you have played persimmon and balata in tournament golf events ... it's hard to understand ... and Miller and Jack had to test balls for roundness ... I think 1/3 max were playable from MacGregor

 

Old Tom Morris would annihilate the course, too. Everyone knows human evolution works in reverse in sports.

 

Does human evolution present itself over 150 years? And here I thought evolution took millions of years.

 

Athletic evolution then. Call it whatever you want.

 

I don't think JB Holmes is more of an athlete than Arnold Palmer was. Or Justin Thomas more of an athlete than Jack Nicklaus. The insane distances modern players hit it is 100% equipment.

 

I guess I don't really disagree with you, I just don't really think there is any problem. There is a lot of information out there that modern players take advantage of that players didn't have in the past. Trackman revolutionized the way players play the game. We now know exactly how to launch a ball for maximum distance/accuracy with all clubs and for all shot types. There are PHDs who have studied the swing and have determined what forces the golfer must apply to the club increase swing speed. Trainers have a greater understanding of how to train the muscles that apply those forces. Shotlink has led to the creation of strokes gained, which has taught us the factors that contribute most to scoring (which is mostly distance related, not hard to guess). This is all information players in the past did not have, and it is information that is not going to disappear. People in the future will have even more information and knowledge of how to play the game best than players today and players in the past would do it today's way if they had the opportunity to. There are already rules/limits as it relates to equipment that have been in place for a while now. I believe advancements within these reasonable limits should be celebrated, for they show how far we have come. It's in our human nature to want to hit balls far. It is fun. Do we really want to make things less fun?

[WilCox]

I think even the Wrx young guys realize (deep down) that some of our old US Open champs would annihilate Erin Hills with modern equipment

 

Here's some food for thought... if modern equipment had been available to the fields of the past, some of "our old US Open champs" may not have won. Throughout the history of the game every pro on tour has used the best gear available to him, but the key is "available." Availability and access in the past is nowhere near what it is today.

[dlygrisse]

I think even the Wrx young guys realize (deep down) that some of our old US Open champs would annihilate Erin Hills with modern equipment

 

Here's some food for thought... if modern equipment had been available to the fields of the past, some of "our old US Open champs" may not have won. Throughout the history of the game every pro on tour has used the best gear available to him, but the key is "available." Availability and access in the past is nowhere near what it is today.

 

Trying to understand your logic here.......?

[HoganApexBlades]

I think even the Wrx young guys realize (deep down) that some of our old US Open champs would annihilate Erin Hills with modern equipment

 

Here's some food for thought... if modern equipment had been available to the fields of the past, some of "our old US Open champs" may not have won. Throughout the history of the game every pro on tour has used the best gear available to him, but the key is "available." Availability and access in the past is nowhere near what it is today.

 

As a reminder, Miller shot his 63 at Oakmont NOT using available, modern clubs as of 1973. The only current irons he used were his 8, 9 & PW (10 iron) which were MacGregor "Tourney Custom" 985 forged blades. His '49 MacGregor Tommy Armour 915T 2-7 irons were almost 25 years old at the time. He used a '58 WS Dyna-Powered sand wedge and a '52 Bullseye putter. His woods were from the '50s and '40s. So, tell me again about using the most current, available clubs???

[HoganApexBlades]

It's the "INDIAN", NOT the "ARROWS"...

[WilCox]

It's the "INDIAN", NOT the "ARROWS"...

 

No argument here. However, reading through this thread it seems to me that the accomplishments of today's "INDIANS" are being discounted due to the improvements in their "ARROWS."

[youraway2]

Who cares what Miller thinks about JT's excellent round.

Miller has shown all again that he lacks character. Any, and I mean any, comment he makes should be ignored. His basis for everything seems to be based on his playing record. I, for one, can't remember his record except for one round, which has now been exceeded.

[King_Slender]

Johnny is right.

Johnny shot a 63 when the average score was way over par and that 63 won him the tournie.

 

Miller's 63 was 10 shots better than the field average. Thomas' was 9 shots better than the field.

[Man_O_War]

I think even the Wrx young guys realize (deep down) that some of our old US Open champs would annihilate Erin Hills with modern equipment

 

Miller and Nicklaus (and dare I say Hogan) included

 

Unless you have played persimmon and balata in tournament golf events ... it's hard to understand ... and Miller and Jack had to test balls for roundness ... I think 1/3 max were playable from MacGregor

 

also possible they were masters of the persimmon and balata with their swings.. but would suck with modern equipment or above all won't separate from the field

[imakaveli]

I don't particularly like MIller, but his 63 was in another league

[bermuda]

I don't particularly like MIller, but his 63 was in another league

Agree. A 63 in a US Open is a superlative round, but one is more superlative than the other.

[cardoustie]

Does anyone really think a young Nicklaus at 22 years old wouldn't be as long or longer than Koepka, DJ etc

 

If so, I find that hard to fathom

[bscinstnct]

Does anyone really think a young Nicklaus at 22 years old wouldn't be as long or longer than Koepka, DJ etc

 

If so, I find that hard to fathom

 

He'd be as long. But he'd have a bunch of guys hitting it as far as him and would be away as much as in front. Instead of his main challengers being 20+ yards back every day.

 

He may not have like that much ' )

[cinnepa]

Johnny is right.

Johnny shot a 63 when the average score was way over par and that 63 won him the tournie.

yup, truth hurts sometimes....and he loves stirring the pot.

[farmer]

I think even the Wrx young guys realize (deep down) that some of our old US Open champs would annihilate Erin Hills with modern equipment

 

Here's some food for thought... if modern equipment had been available to the fields of the past, some of "our old US Open champs" may not have won. Throughout the history of the game every pro on tour has used the best gear available to him, but the key is "available." Availability and access in the past is nowhere near what it is today.

 

As a reminder, Miller shot his 63 at Oakmont NOT using available, modern clubs as of 1973. The only current irons he used were his 8, 9 & PW (10 iron) which were MacGregor "Tourney Custom" 985 forged blades. His '49 MacGregor Tommy Armour 915T 2-7 irons were almost 25 years old at the time. He used a '58 WS Dyna-Powered sand wedge and a '52 Bullseye putter. His woods were from the '50s and '40s. So, tell me again about using the most current, available clubs???

There really wasn't any point in using brand new stuff. Technology had not changed all that much for 30 years, old persimmon was deemed to be better than new, irons were pretty much irons, and JM cut off part of the hosels on the irons to fit him better. Back in those days, if you found a really good driver, it was a part of the family, and cherished as such. Lou Graham broke his favorite driver and it took years to find one he liked as well.

[bermuda]

Does anyone really think a young Nicklaus at 22 years old wouldn't be as long or longer than Koepka, DJ etc

 

If so, I find that hard to fathom

 

He'd be as long. But he'd have a bunch of guys hitting it as far as him and would be away as much as in front. Instead of his main challengers being 20+ yards back every day.

 

He may not have like that much ' )

 

Nicklaus could outdrive anyone any time he wanted. And that's if he didn't want to tee off with a 1-iron.

[ex0dus]

Johnny is right.

Johnny shot a 63 when the average score was way over par and that 63 won him the tournie.

 

Miller's 63 was 10 shots better than the field average. Thomas' was 9 shots better than the field.

 

+1

 

It is a bit sad that Miller is so quick to throw shade on a 23 yr old.

[Ashley Schaeffer]

I think even the Wrx young guys realize (deep down) that some of our old US Open champs would annihilate Erin Hills with modern equipment

 

 

Kind of like the modern players just did?

[QMany]

I wish there was a better way to evaluate depth of field between eras. I have to believe the 50th, 200th, and 1000th best golfers right now are easily better than those in eras past. Unless golf is different than every other sport where athletes are getting more and more talented producing deeper and deeper fields.