The Ball Goes Too Far

[North Butte]

Harbour Town would be considered short by today's standards, yet it still presents quite a challenge for the professional golfer. Other under 7,000 yard courses include, Pebble, the Traveler's, and the CIMB Classic. The Farmers is just a hair over 7000 (north course). There are other examples as well. Courses don't need to be made longer. You can also take a "bomb and gouge" course and make it so the "gouging" isn't very pleasant.

While there is truth to this, when was Harbor Town built? 1967. What equipment was in play when Harbor Town was created? Did the developers of Harbor Town envision today's equipment being used on it? Harbor Town would not be built today...

 

Now you're figuring it out.

 

There are short courses that make GREAT venues for the best players in the world. Yet nobody will build courses that length today. Why?

 

Because people with the money to build golf courses have egos that demand their course be longer, bigger and tougher than anyone else's. It has ZERO to do with the golf ball.

 

[Shilgy]

I'm not saying there haven't been improvements to the ball because there obviously have. But what you are talking about are a combination of not only improvements in the ball but also club technology and modern agronomy. Those fairways are like freshly oiled bowling lanes.

 

I agree. I read somewhere that tournament officials will have the fairways cut and rolled so the ball gets maximum bounce and roll (apparently this is good for TV). According to Trackman, the average carry distance on Tour is 275 yards.

 

I remember watching a rain soaked event earlier this year, and most of the drives were in the 270 to 285 yard range.

The average carry appears to be 280. The average drive is 291.7. I am thinking that's not the roll to blame.

http://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.02409.html

http://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.101.html

That's the average, but we see 330 yard drives every other group on some courses. And remember it's average length of tee shot, not driver length. Some of those averages are based on long irons.

And watching the tracer the 330 yard drives generally carried over 3 bills. Would folks not expect a ball hit with 175mph ball speed to roll further than a shot with 140mph ball speed? Imo some see the occasional long rolling driver and make that the norm. It's clearly not.

Your 330 yard driver every other group does happen just about every week though. On the downhill downwind holes. We play with out buds and think we cranked one under those conditions. Then we complain on wrx about the pros doing the same.

[jslane57]

Harbour Town would be considered short by today's standards, yet it still presents quite a challenge for the professional golfer. Other under 7,000 yard courses include, Pebble, the Traveler's, and the CIMB Classic. The Farmers is just a hair over 7000 (north course). There are other examples as well. Courses don't need to be made longer. You can also take a "bomb and gouge" course and make it so the "gouging" isn't very pleasant.

While there is truth to this, when was Harbor Town built? 1967. What equipment was in play when Harbor Town was created? Did the developers of Harbor Town envision today's equipment being used on it? Harbor Town would not be built today...

 

Now you're figuring it out.

 

There are short courses that make GREAT venues for the best players in the world. Yet nobody will build courses that length today. Why?

 

Because people with the money to build golf courses have egos that demand their course be longer, bigger and tougher than anyone else's. It has ZERO to do with the golf ball.

Maybe. It is possible that Harbor Town was longer, bigger, and tougher than anyone else's in the year 1967. And now it's not...

[North Butte]

Owning a bigger course than the other guy's is all relative to other courses, it is not determined by how far the ball flies. Courses have never shrunk, they have been getting bigger and longer over time for as long as courses have been being built. Not because of a one time jump in golf ball performance 15 years ago.

[North Butte]

But the heck with what length $300 green fee course Mike Keiser builds next. Again I ask exactly how my club with its puny, obsolete 6,900 yard course is supposed to realize these great savings due to a ball roll back. Build tiny little patio homes on 18 repurposed back tee boxes?

[jslane57]

But the heck with what length $300 green fee course Mike Keiser builds next. Again I ask exactly how my club with its puny, obsolete 6,900 yard course is supposed to realize these great savings due to a ball roll back. Build tiny little patio homes on 18 repurposed back tee boxes?

LOL. They probably would do just that wouldn't they? Of course they will. But the realized benefit to you while golfing on your course will be fewer balls hit OB. Less time searching for golf balls. Folks not waiting for greens to clear from 300 yards out. These things seem very inconsequential, especially if not directly impacting your group, but when trying to shave 20 minutes off a regular round of golf, it all adds up...

[gvogel]

Harbour Town would be considered short by today's standards, yet it still presents quite a challenge for the professional golfer. Other under 7,000 yard courses include, Pebble, the Traveler's, and the CIMB Classic. The Farmers is just a hair over 7000 (north course). There are other examples as well. Courses don't need to be made longer. You can also take a "bomb and gouge" course and make it so the "gouging" isn't very pleasant.

While there is truth to this, when was Harbor Town built? 1967. What equipment was in play when Harbor Town was created? Did the developers of Harbor Town envision today's equipment being used on it? Harbor Town would not be built today...

 

Now you're figuring it out.

 

There are short courses that make GREAT venues for the best players in the world. Yet nobody will build courses that length today. Why?

 

Because people with the money to build golf courses have egos that demand their course be longer, bigger and tougher than anyone else's. It has ZERO to do with the golf ball.

 

The fact of the matter is that the really good long players pass up playing Harbor Town because they don't have an advantage against the popcorn hitters. Jack never played Harbor Town. Rory doesn't play there, Dustin doesn't play there, Adam Scott doesn't play there. The field is weak at Harbor Town because it is too short.

 

Courses like Harbor Town and Colonial are too short for the modern game. They get weak fields. But if the equipment were changed, they would play longer and maybe the better players would get back to playing these courses.

[ThunderBuzzworth]

- The golf ball does not go to far.

- PGA tour players are more athletic than they ever were = faster = longer.

- The courses are setup so firm in most cases that drives in the fairway will be 30-50 yards longer than one hit in the rough.

 

Maybe the pros should play waterlogged fairways like the majority of us do their balls stop within 2 feet of their pitch mark on tee shots with fairway grass so long they get a flier every other shot. Would that be better to watch?

[MtlJeff]

- The golf ball does not go to far.

- PGA tour players are more athletic than they ever were = faster = longer.

- The courses are setup so firm in most cases that drives in the fairway will be 30-50 yards longer than one hit in the rough.

 

Maybe the pros should play waterlogged fairways like the majority of us do their balls stop within 2 feet of their pitch mark on tee shots with fairway grass so long they get a flier every other shot. Would that be better to watch?

 

This thread is only about distance, and while i agree with your post completely, if they did that the scores would probably even be lower. As some knowledgeable guys have posted in the past in these threads, less tightly cut fairways would certainly hurt total distance, but it would also increase fairway hit percentage, which would probably lower scores overall.

 

One issue i have with a lot of the narrative, is that some guys (not necessarily even here, i mean in the world at large) seem to feel that golf is the one sport where its just impossible that people could've actually gotten better. There's this narrative that it peaked with Jack, and anything after that must be the equipment. No doubt equipment has helped, and helped a lot. But athletes get better, especially at a sport like golf where there's literally zero defense. It's a sport that is frankly, beatable. If you hit it long and straight, or if the game is deep enough that someone will hit it long and straight any given week, it's a beatable game. Because there's no Kawhi Leonard or Draymond Green who can guard you and stop you from doing these things. I just think eventually we'll have to throw our hands up and just say "these guys are amazing, let me enjoy the -22 winning score"

 

Anyway, but yeah, soft fairways would placate the "they hit it too far crowd" but only incite the "the game is too easy" crowd.

[gvogel]

It's not just the ball. It's the clubheads. The shafts. The agronomy. I do agree that the ancient fine art of golfers strategically maneuvering their ball around a golf course has been replaced with the non-intellectual practice of "Bomb and Gouge". Kind of like F1 vs. Indy racing. Would you prefer unlimited tech F1 or governed tech Indy? I like F1 and if future golfers can drive par 4's ..... so be it.

 

Bad analogy. F1 cars use 1.6 liter V6 Turbo engines and have a top speed of around 220, while Indy cars have 2.2 liter turbocharged engines with top speeds of 230. So Indy cars are bomb and gauge, while F1 cars are more particularly tuned, and can take turns at higher speeds - think shotmaking.

 

Dial back the ball, dial back the COR, dial back the cc's of the driver head size - and you start to get F1 style competition.

[jslane57]

- The golf ball does not go to far.

- PGA tour players are more athletic than they ever were = faster = longer.

- The courses are setup so firm in most cases that drives in the fairway will be 30-50 yards longer than one hit in the rough.

 

Maybe the pros should play waterlogged fairways like the majority of us do their balls stop within 2 feet of their pitch mark on tee shots with fairway grass so long they get a flier every other shot. Would that be better to watch?

 

This thread is only about distance, and while i agree with your post completely, if they did that the scores would probably even be lower. As some knowledgeable guys have posted in the past in these threads, less tightly cut fairways would certainly hurt total distance, but it would also increase fairway hit percentage, which would probably lower scores overall.

 

One issue i have with a lot of the narrative, is that some guys (not necessarily even here, i mean in the world at large) seem to feel that golf is the one sport where its just impossible that people could've actually gotten better. There's this narrative that it peaked with Jack, and anything after that must be the equipment. No doubt equipment has helped, and helped a lot. But athletes get better, especially at a sport like golf where there's literally zero defense. It's a sport that is frankly, beatable. If you hit it long and straight, or if the game is deep enough that someone will hit it long and straight any given week, it's a beatable game. Because there's no Kawhi Leonard or Draymond Green who can guard you and stop you from doing these things. I just think eventually we'll have to throw our hands up and just say "these guys are amazing, let me enjoy the -22 winning score"

 

Anyway, but yeah, soft fairways would placate the "they hit it too far crowd" but only incite the "the game is too easy" crowd.

Of course the golfers have gotten better. Bigger. More accurate. But then again, is Ricky bigger? Is Justin bigger? The equipment advancements are such that it is quite hard to tell how much better the players truly are...

[wobgon]

- The golf ball does not go to far.

- PGA tour players are more athletic than they ever were = faster = longer.

- The courses are setup so firm in most cases that drives in the fairway will be 30-50 yards longer than one hit in the rough.

 

Maybe the pros should play waterlogged fairways like the majority of us do their balls stop within 2 feet of their pitch mark on tee shots with fairway grass so long they get a flier every other shot. Would that be better to watch?

 

This thread is only about distance, and while i agree with your post completely, if they did that the scores would probably even be lower. As some knowledgeable guys have posted in the past in these threads, less tightly cut fairways would certainly hurt total distance, but it would also increase fairway hit percentage, which would probably lower scores overall.

 

One issue i have with a lot of the narrative, is that some guys (not necessarily even here, i mean in the world at large) seem to feel that golf is the one sport where its just impossible that people could've actually gotten better. There's this narrative that it peaked with Jack, and anything after that must be the equipment. No doubt equipment has helped, and helped a lot. But athletes get better, especially at a sport like golf where there's literally zero defense. It's a sport that is frankly, beatable. If you hit it long and straight, or if the game is deep enough that someone will hit it long and straight any given week, it's a beatable game. Because there's no Kawhi Leonard or Draymond Green who can guard you and stop you from doing these things. I just think eventually we'll have to throw our hands up and just say "these guys are amazing, let me enjoy the -22 winning score"

 

Anyway, but yeah, soft fairways would placate the "they hit it too far crowd" but only incite the "the game is too easy" crowd.

I agree that players are getting better, but at my club, there are at least five players who were single digit when they were in their thirties and are about the same cap now but hit the ball distances now that they never saw thirty years ago when they were much stronger and more flexible. I'm not saying they should, nor do i think they will make the ball go shorter, i'm just saying that there are a bunch of super golf courses that now play way ,way easier than they were designed to play....That is just simply a fact and cannot be disputed........What can or should be done about it? Probably nothing.

[mbs_59]

I've played for 20 plus years now and hit it no further than I did in about 2002

 

It's the player

 

How about we stop facilitating big hitting and punish inaccuracy

 

JS won the open hitting 42% of fairways

 

All lengthening courses does is push the player requirement for power hitting . Guys are hitting t as hard as they can and training to hit it even further , because the course set up demands it

 

How about actually grow some rough and shorten the courses? Think the best players then are all going to be the power hitters ?

 

It won't be long before the PGA tour is more like the long drive circuit

 

Let's bring precision back into the game

 

Couldn't agree more with this. You're asking for it when every tour track is at a long course that doesn't penalize inaccuracy.

Maybe it's time courses like Augusta start growing the rough up and narrowing fairways instead of buying more land to extend holes...

[MtlJeff]

- The golf ball does not go to far.

- PGA tour players are more athletic than they ever were = faster = longer.

- The courses are setup so firm in most cases that drives in the fairway will be 30-50 yards longer than one hit in the rough.

 

Maybe the pros should play waterlogged fairways like the majority of us do their balls stop within 2 feet of their pitch mark on tee shots with fairway grass so long they get a flier every other shot. Would that be better to watch?

 

This thread is only about distance, and while i agree with your post completely, if they did that the scores would probably even be lower. As some knowledgeable guys have posted in the past in these threads, less tightly cut fairways would certainly hurt total distance, but it would also increase fairway hit percentage, which would probably lower scores overall.

 

One issue i have with a lot of the narrative, is that some guys (not necessarily even here, i mean in the world at large) seem to feel that golf is the one sport where its just impossible that people could've actually gotten better. There's this narrative that it peaked with Jack, and anything after that must be the equipment. No doubt equipment has helped, and helped a lot. But athletes get better, especially at a sport like golf where there's literally zero defense. It's a sport that is frankly, beatable. If you hit it long and straight, or if the game is deep enough that someone will hit it long and straight any given week, it's a beatable game. Because there's no Kawhi Leonard or Draymond Green who can guard you and stop you from doing these things. I just think eventually we'll have to throw our hands up and just say "these guys are amazing, let me enjoy the -22 winning score"

 

Anyway, but yeah, soft fairways would placate the "they hit it too far crowd" but only incite the "the game is too easy" crowd.

Of course the golfers have gotten better. Bigger. More accurate. But then again, is Ricky bigger? Is Justin bigger? The equipment advancements are such that it is quite hard to tell how much better the players truly are...

 

Right, equipment has definitely helped guys hit it further. But i look at golf like this. Right now there's no incentive for a dude to be able to make an extremely high percentage of halfcourt basketball shots, i mean you can impress people at games or something. But there's no one out there taking 1000 halfcourt shots a day working on this

 

But let's say starting next year some organization says, OK, we're going to give 25M dollars to whoever wins our season long halfcourt basketball shooting contest. My guess is that in 10-15 years guys will have gotten way, way better at hitting a high percentage of these shots. Because people are capable of extreme precision after years of sports training, data analysis looking at optimum trajectories and what-not

 

Golf is a precision sport where there're more money than ever at stake. Equipment helps, and guys are hitting it further because it benefits them to hit it further. But hitting longer and hitting it straighter was bound to happen naturally too.

 

That's why i made the comment that with no defense, eventually some guys are going to come along that just flat out "beat" golf. And what do we do then? Maybe golf is just really deep right now, and rather than panicking like we did when Tiger shot crazy scores in the late 90's , we should just appreciate it. Because who knows what happens if we start making massive changes. It's a solid argument that "Tiger-proofing" courses because of his dominance back then led to the distance boom we're seeing now

[Dr. Block]

I'm guessing the breakdown of opinions might go something like this (with obvious exceptions abounding):

 

Group 1: Low HCP, but was a scratch in the 70s and 80s = ball goes too far.

Group 2: Low HCP, but started playing within the last 20 years = ball is fine.

Group 3: Any handicap, but thinks he is (or was) better than he is (or was) = ball goes too far.

Group 4: Any handicap, and realizes he plays a different game than the best in the world = ball is fine.

 

Significant overlap with 1 and 3; 2 and 4.

 

I started in the last 30 years, and I played the Titleist Professional during my competitive stretch. I remember my dad taking me to the Western Open at Dubsdread, and I remember watching the pro's suffer immensely from the rough when they missed the fairway. I also remember the cast of characters, their interesting swings, and their shot making skills back then. If the Titleist Professional was still available today in new and fresh form, that would be the ball I'd play. I loved the game during those years, much more about finesse and shot making. What group does that put me in? The weirdly antiquated group? or the understanding just how good golf used to be and could be again group?

 

Just a little side note: I keep a few ancient beat up Titleist professionals in my bag still, and I will throw them down for comparisons sake on those touch short iron/wedge shots that need to be flighted. And even being as old as they are, there is no comparison. They make for a different level of control over the golf ball that just doesnt exist anymore. Even the regular Pro V might as well be a DT Solo.

 

Not sure what group I'd put you in. Does the ball go too far?

 

I don't know really. It certainly goes further no matter how you hit it. but I think thats also a product of the impressive technology in driver heads. I've always been a club up and shot make kind of guy with the irons, but the drives go massively further. You had to hit it on the center of the clubface with the late 90's drivers, now you can pretty much hit it anywhere but the heel

[Dr. Block]

The ball is a problem and eventually the economics will catch up to the game.

 

The fastest growing thing in golf right now is a driving range that stops at about 220 yards.

 

Haha Top Golf! That place is a winter time haven in my neck of the woods. What a concept - those places print money

[granite45]

Greg Norman hit a 310 yard drive at Augusta in 1986, you can confirm this on the broadcast. Just throwing that out there...

[larrybud]

Pga tour distances have gone up about 2 yards in the last 15 years.

[farmer]

I think the 3 point shot ruined basketball. All they do is shoot treys or dunk. As a side note to Jeff, in Texas, all the high school championship games are held in AT&T stadium

[jslane57]

Greg Norman hit a 310 yard drive at Augusta in 1986, you can confirm this on the broadcast. Just throwing that out there...

Bubba Watson hit a 424 yard drive at Firestone CC in 2014. Just throwing that out there:)

[JD3]

I thought for a while there distance increases had plataued with limits placed on the driver. But recently I've noticed im hitting it longer and pros seem to be as well. I don't know if it's due to the clubs or ball (some combination thereof), but I think the ball of today is simply amazing

[granite45]

Greg Norman hit a 310 yard drive at Augusta in 1986, you can confirm this on the broadcast. Just throwing that out there...

Bubba Watson hit a 424 yard drive at Firestone CC in 2014. Just throwing that out there:)

 

Yes with a G30 and a 4 piece ball... your point being?

[jslane57]

Greg Norman hit a 310 yard drive at Augusta in 1986, you can confirm this on the broadcast. Just throwing that out there...

Bubba Watson hit a 424 yard drive at Firestone CC in 2014. Just throwing that out there:)

 

Yes with a G30 and a 4 piece ball... your point being?

That is my point. Thanks.

[granite45]

Greg Norman hit a 310 yard drive at Augusta in 1986, you can confirm this on the broadcast. Just throwing that out there...

Bubba Watson hit a 424 yard drive at Firestone CC in 2014. Just throwing that out there:)

 

Yes with a G30 and a 4 piece ball... your point being?

That is my point. Thanks.

 

Cool, then cheers.

 

[jr99945]

this thread should be titled

 

The Ball Goes Too Far for 0.001% of golfers

 

I think basketball should raise the hoop to 12 feet because Lebron dunks too easily.

[playa]

Most people hate the idea of the game being made harder than it is and love hitting the ball further than their ability should allow. I suppose that's only natural. It's not the only sport where technology has resulted in power becoming more important than finesse.

 

I seem to remember that there was concern expressed many years ago about moving to the gutta percha ball, on the basis that the ball going further would mean rounds of golf taking longer. Obviously they hadn't got a clue what they were talking about...

 

The further the ball goes the more expensive the game gets, which isn't a good thing.

 

It's not going to happen, as the genie is out of the bottle, but rolling the ball back to one that spins more would be good for the game but not for some egos. Hitting the old balls flat out and keeping them in the fairway was quite an accomplishment.

 

I'm fairly certain Nicklaus was saying this in the late eighties or early nineties - I agreed with him then and he's still right in my opinion.

You remember concern about the gutta perch ball? How old are you?

[Shilgy]

Harbour Town would be considered short by today's standards, yet it still presents quite a challenge for the professional golfer. Other under 7,000 yard courses include, Pebble, the Traveler's, and the CIMB Classic. The Farmers is just a hair over 7000 (north course). There are other examples as well. Courses don't need to be made longer. You can also take a "bomb and gouge" course and make it so the "gouging" isn't very pleasant.

While there is truth to this, when was Harbor Town built? 1967. What equipment was in play when Harbor Town was created? Did the developers of Harbor Town envision today's equipment being used on it? Harbor Town would not be built today...

 

Now you're figuring it out.

 

There are short courses that make GREAT venues for the best players in the world. Yet nobody will build courses that length today. Why?

 

Because people with the money to build golf courses have egos that demand their course be longer, bigger and tougher than anyone else's. It has ZERO to do with the golf ball.

 

The fact of the matter is that the really good long players pass up playing Harbor Town because they don't have an advantage against the popcorn hitters. Jack never played Harbor Town. Rory doesn't play there, Dustin doesn't play there, Adam Scott doesn't play there. The field is weak at Harbor Town because it is too short.

 

Courses like Harbor Town and Colonial are too short for the modern game. They get weak fields. But if the equipment were changed, they would play longer and maybe the better players would get back to playing these courses.

Cool story. But Jack not only played at Hilton Head he won in 1975. The reason players don't play it is it's the week after the Masters. Many players skip Colonial for a similar reason. It's stuck in a short stretch on the schedule between the Players, the Memorial and the US Open.

And the courses are short. But I've never understood that logic. Lenghth is not just a driver advantage. The longer hitter can hit irons and three woods rather than driver at Hilton Head and still have less club in on the approach shots. So even the short course would suit them. By your logic Tiger proofing would have been making courses shorter, not longer.

[jslane57]

Harbour Town would be considered short by today's standards, yet it still presents quite a challenge for the professional golfer. Other under 7,000 yard courses include, Pebble, the Traveler's, and the CIMB Classic. The Farmers is just a hair over 7000 (north course). There are other examples as well. Courses don't need to be made longer. You can also take a "bomb and gouge" course and make it so the "gouging" isn't very pleasant.

While there is truth to this, when was Harbor Town built? 1967. What equipment was in play when Harbor Town was created? Did the developers of Harbor Town envision today's equipment being used on it? Harbor Town would not be built today...

 

Now you're figuring it out.

 

There are short courses that make GREAT venues for the best players in the world. Yet nobody will build courses that length today. Why?

 

Because people with the money to build golf courses have egos that demand their course be longer, bigger and tougher than anyone else's. It has ZERO to do with the golf ball.

 

The fact of the matter is that the really good long players pass up playing Harbor Town because they don't have an advantage against the popcorn hitters. Jack never played Harbor Town. Rory doesn't play there, Dustin doesn't play there, Adam Scott doesn't play there. The field is weak at Harbor Town because it is too short.

 

Courses like Harbor Town and Colonial are too short for the modern game. They get weak fields. But if the equipment were changed, they would play longer and maybe the better players would get back to playing these courses.

Cool story. But Jack not only played at Hilton Head he won in 1975. The reason players don't play it is it's the week after the Masters. Many players skip Colonial for a similar reason. It's stuck in a short stretch on the schedule between the Players, the Memorial and the US Open.

And the courses are short. But I've never understood that logic. Lenghth is not just a driver advantage. The longer hitter can hit irons and three woods rather than driver at Hilton Head and still have less club in on the approach shots. So even the short course would suit them. By your logic Tiger proofing would have been making courses shorter, not longer.

It always seemed to me that if they didn't want Tiger to win, shortening the courses would have given everyone else a fighting chance. I don't think Tiger proofing was really about wins, but Tiger proofing the record books. Shameful really...

[Ashley Schaeffer]

I'm guessing the breakdown of opinions might go something like this (with obvious exceptions abounding):

 

Group 1: Low HCP, but was a scratch in the 70s and 80s = ball goes too far.

Group 2: Low HCP, but started playing within the last 20 years = ball is fine.

Group 3: Any handicap, but thinks he is (or was) better than he is (or was) = ball goes too far.

Group 4: Any handicap, and realizes he plays a different game than the best in the world = ball is fine.

 

Significant overlap with 1 and 3; 2 and 4.

 

I started in the last 30 years, and I played the Titleist Professional during my competitive stretch. I remember my dad taking me to the Western Open at Dubsdread, and I remember watching the pro's suffer immensely from the rough when they missed the fairway. I also remember the cast of characters, their interesting swings, and their shot making skills back then. If the Titleist Professional was still available today in new and fresh form, that would be the ball I'd play. I loved the game during those years, much more about finesse and shot making. What group does that put me in? The weirdly antiquated group? or the understanding just how good golf used to be and could be again group?

 

Just a little side note: I keep a few ancient beat up Titleist professionals in my bag still, and I will throw them down for comparisons sake on those touch short iron/wedge shots that need to be flighted. And even being as old as they are, there is no comparison. They make for a different level of control over the golf ball that just doesnt exist anymore. Even the regular Pro V might as well be a DT Solo.

 

Not sure what group I'd put you in. Does the ball go too far?

 

I don't know really. It certainly goes further no matter how you hit it. but I think thats also a product of the impressive technology in driver heads. I've always been a club up and shot make kind of guy with the irons, but the drives go massively further. You had to hit it on the center of the clubface with the late 90's drivers, now you can pretty much hit it anywhere but the heel

 

Group 3.

[Spongerob]

How about this...ban the driver. Make the max club length 43" and minimum loft 14*. Essentially a 3 wood. What the heck, 3 woods now go about as far as a 1980's era driver did. My modern 13* 3 wood actually goes about 5 yards farther than my old Macgregor persimmon driver that I play a few times a year. This would never fly of course because the club manufacturers would sue the life out of the governing bodies ( #growthegame) but maybe they could do it as an experiment at one of the older courses that are now deemed obsolete for tournament play. Maybe in the off season.

 

It's definitely not so called superior athletes. Between the ball (which is now a top flight that spins only for irons and is optimized for a specific players launch conditions) and a frying pan faced graphite shafted 44" driver that does not punish the guys who try kill it, equipment accounts for all 30 yards the average pro gained in the past 20 years. And of course putting down-slopes at 290 yards and cutting the dried out fairways like greens makes things ridiculous. Just wait. This week all the long hitters will hit the power slot on 16 and get 100 yards of roll and the announcers will gush "owwww look at that! Drive and sand wedge to a 490 yard hole." Pro golf is getting clownish at times and it makes any comparison between players of different eras impossible. It's like if they lowered the basket a foot and then marveled about how the modern athletes are sure superior to those bums like Jordan and Magic Johnson.