When Equipment Has Gone Too Far

[TollBros]

For the vast majority of the golfing public, they need every advantage they can get, and still won't or barely break 100. For competitive ams, the same guys who were winning 10-12 years ago are still winning in the area I grew up in, so it seems skill still matters. Now with professional tournament players, blame the actual golf course for the low scores. Everything is perfect. Perfect lies in the fairway, perfect bunkers with perfectly consistent sand, perfect greens that roll true and smooth, etc. The conditions themselves are so perfect and immaculate that unless you really hit one wide, every lie is as good as it gets. Once you become accustomed to the speed of the greens, a good player will make three times as many putts over 15 feet as he would on a $40 dog track that most play on.

[sdandrea]

TV money will affect the issue more than anything else. If golf became less entertaining due to distance loss, it won't attract the ratings, and down we go.

 

Personally I'm on the side of the mowers and course design. Bomb and gouge is tougher if the rough is longer. Swing away, fellas, just pray you can find it.

[bladehunter]

Depends on your view. I think It became less entertaining when distance went over 340 regularly. Cutting fairways with a gang mower and letting the rough grow would help. But how exciting is seeing a bunch of punch outs?

[Bye]

Depends on your view. I think It became less entertaining when distance went over 340 regularly. Cutting fairways with a gang mower and letting the rough grow would help. But how exciting is seeing a bunch of punch outs?

 

And more guys pumping 2 iron off the tee.

[North Butte]

Depends on your view. I think It became less entertaining when distance went over 340 regularly. Cutting fairways with a gang mower and letting the rough grow would help. But how exciting is seeing a bunch of punch outs?

 

And more guys pumping 2 iron off the tee.

 

So Tiger at Hoylake was a total snooze for you then?

[Kmac]

My equipment never goes too far.

[new2g0lf]

totally agree with you... was waiting for someone to bring this point up...Thats the Beauty of Bifurcation..... In 10 years time everyone will swap over to "what the pros play" and wont even know the difference... Thats why i asked earlier if the 99% would still stick together or would they start to buy what the 1% play?

 

 

 

(disclaimer......im only arguing this as a point of interest of mine..i have no real delusion that the USGA will do anything that requires this much work)

 

While that may be true, I feel like the steps needed to get the game where people seem to want it to be would be too drastic. An amateur would wig out if every new driver they tried was 20 yards shorter than what they have.

 

I have no issue with further restrictions to limit future gains. My problem comes when they deem already legal equipment as no longer conforming. Especially when these rules are being made with pros in mind. They are a piece of the pie, but the amateur golfer is the heart of this game. Without them, the game dies.

 

 

 

i agree again... some would wig out.. but i dont know a single person who would actually stop playing... and as you said when the time came...go to the shop and buy new... I dont know if it should be done...But it could be done... Ive heard others argue that it would kill the game... or kill new club sales... I just dont believe that .... people buy what the stars play... and if anything it would increase sales for a time...

 

It would kill new club sales, no one would willingly spend money on clubs that are shorter than their current club. It would also create all sorts of problems with club and amateur tournaments regarding what equipment was permitted. Will be fun to watch pro tournaments where the pro's can't out drive the best local amateurs, what a joke.

 

 

just dont think so.... people buy blades, 4 wedges, certain shafts, low spin driver heads , etc everyday to the detriment of their game... why ? to play what they think they see on TV... most players dont even know how far they hit a driver....

 

why would it cause an issue with club tournaments? youd have the choice of driver and ball you play now for say a 10 year period ( similar to groove rule) so either way would be legal...

 

as for pros being out driven by best local amateurs...1st... the BEST local amateurs would likely be playing the pro equipment.... 2nd... i thought the pros on TV would be "bombing it" regardless of the ball or driver size.... what with 300 yard 3 woods and all.... so i doubt that this would be the case even if the Best local ams played the hotter equipment.

 

The consumer mentality is the pro's use the best equipment that provides the longest distances. People blindly follow what the pro's do because they think ultimately it will improve their game If the USGA announces they are rolling back equipment (to result in a 10% reduction in distance) consumer view of new equipment would change, they would view it as inferior. Only the real aspiring pro's will give up 10% distance in their money games to use the same inferior gear as the pro's would be forced to.

 

Unless required, local amateurs, colleges and high schools would not make the switch, what's the advantage unless they are forced to? I can imagine new driver demo days where guys bring their current driver and willingly drop $500 on a new driver that is 25 - 30 yards shorter than their current one.

 

You can't have it both ways, either the rollback will reduce distance 10% or it won't, if it won't then why are we wasting out time discussing it in this thread?

[North Butte]

I can’t see a 10% rollback shutting these guys up for long. Their dreams require more like 25-30%

[Bye]

Depends on your view. I think It became less entertaining when distance went over 340 regularly. Cutting fairways with a gang mower and letting the rough grow would help. But how exciting is seeing a bunch of punch outs?

 

And more guys pumping 2 iron off the tee.

 

So Tiger at Hoylake was a total snooze for you then?

 

I didn't watch it. But I am sure everyone loved that he didn't hit driver for 3 days.

 

I can’t see a 10% rollback shutting these guys up for long. Their dreams require more like 25-30%

 

Sounds like project fear!

[pinestreetgolf]

People blindly follow what the pro's do because they think ultimately it will improve their game

 

Is there any data at all to support that this is actually true? The best player in the world hits Taylormade, but the Epic outsold TM handily. I don't "blindly follow what the pro's do because I think it will improve my game". I don't think anyone else in this thread does either. None of my playing partners do.

 

You've said this a couple times as if its fact. What is your basis for this statement?

 

In the top 10 in the world, there is one cobra, three titleist, one srixon, three TM and one callaway (Stenson, at 9, who doesn't even play an Epic usually). Garcia doesn't count, he signed after the epic. Even if we move past the top 10, we see virtually zero Epic players.

 

We have to go all the way to Sweeden's Alex Norren at #17 (surely a household name in the United States) to find an Epic in the bag.

 

And yet, the Epic is by far the best selling driver in the USA. How do you square that up with your statement?

[bladehunter]

New2golf-

 

Just don’t see any evidence to support that. The only evidence we have is the groove rule. And 99% have swapped out their soon to be illegal irons and wedges for conforming equipment. Even though it performs less

[bladehunter]

Depends on your view. I think It became less entertaining when distance went over 340 regularly. Cutting fairways with a gang mower and letting the rough grow would help. But how exciting is seeing a bunch of punch outs?

 

And more guys pumping 2 iron off the tee.

 

So Tiger at Hoylake was a total snooze for you then?

 

 

That brings up the bunching of the fields the modern Driver has caused. One guy ruling a course with 2 iron is exciting. Seing 45 of them laying up with one to a full wedge is boring. Same with Driver for every guy. There is just something missing from today’s game. Maybe it is tiger. Lol.

[radiman]

New2golf-

 

Just don't see any evidence to support that. The only evidence we have is the groove rule. And 99% have swapped out their soon to be illegal irons and wedges for conforming equipment. Even though it performs less

 

I wouldn't make the assumption that people aren't aware of the rule. Even if I wanted to play old style grooves on new equipment, where could you even get it? Maybe from an infomercial? If equipment gets restricted again, and the OEM's make the same decision to make all of their equipment conforming, then there really is no choice. After a few years and people start having to buy new equipment and find that it is less forgiving and even harder to hit straight, it will be detrimental to their ego's as well as the game overall. Even if the rule only affects those with higher speed, it will still hurt. If I lose 2-3 clubs on my drives, it would suck. I am sure I would continue to play, but I guarantee that my passion for the game would be diminished. Then there are those that take the game less seriously, who already find it time consuming, or expensive. Throw in another hurdle to make the game harder, and they may just quit all together. All this just to make the game resemble the version of itself from years long gone by. Seems ridiculous. I've mentioned it before. Further restrictions should keep performance where it is now, not roll back.

[rawdog]

New2golf-

 

Just don't see any evidence to support that. The only evidence we have is the groove rule. And 99% have swapped out their soon to be illegal irons and wedges for conforming equipment. Even though it performs less

 

I wouldn't make the assumption that people aren't aware of the rule. Even if I wanted to play old style grooves on new equipment, where could you even get it? Maybe from an infomercial? If equipment gets restricted again, and the OEM's make the same decision to make all of their equipment conforming, then there really is no choice. After a few years and people start having to buy new equipment and find that it is less forgiving and even harder to hit straight, it will be detrimental to their ego's as well as the game overall. Even if the rule only affects those with higher speed, it will still hurt. If I lose 2-3 clubs on my drives, it would suck. I am sure I would continue to play, but I guarantee that my passion for the game would be diminished. Then there are those that take the game less seriously, who already find it time consuming, or expensive. Throw in another hurdle to make the game harder, and they may just quit all together. All this just to make the game resemble the version of itself from years long gone by. Seems ridiculous. I've mentioned it before. Further restrictions should keep performance where it is now, not roll back.

 

Agreed with bold. I'm not an ambassador of the game, and don't buy into the responsibility to grow the game, but I'd like it to be more than a niche sport.

 

I would think it's a total turn off to potential golfers or fringe golfers if they saw people want to see the sport regress.

 

The pros mentioned previously sound like the old NBA guys who loathe how the game is played today. It really is not a good look.

 

I'm 29, level-headed, and can keep an open-minded conversation. I dislike the NBA and I think the old stars bashing the game today sound ridiculous. I can only imagine how golf outsiders would read comments from the greats.

 

Now, if you don't care about how you look or sound to other people, no worries. Carry on. But some self-awareness goes a long way.

[bladehunter]

New2golf-

 

Just don't see any evidence to support that. The only evidence we have is the groove rule. And 99% have swapped out their soon to be illegal irons and wedges for conforming equipment. Even though it performs less

 

I wouldn't make the assumption that people aren't aware of the rule. Even if I wanted to play old style grooves on new equipment, where could you even get it? Maybe from an infomercial? If equipment gets restricted again, and the OEM's make the same decision to make all of their equipment conforming, then there really is no choice. After a few years and people start having to buy new equipment and find that it is less forgiving and even harder to hit straight, it will be detrimental to their ego's as well as the game overall. Even if the rule only affects those with higher speed, it will still hurt. If I lose 2-3 clubs on my drives, it would suck. I am sure I would continue to play, but I guarantee that my passion for the game would be diminished. Then there are those that take the game less seriously, who already find it time consuming, or expensive. Throw in another hurdle to make the game harder, and they may just quit all together. All this just to make the game resemble the version of itself from years long gone by. Seems ridiculous. I've mentioned it before. Further restrictions should keep performance where it is now, not roll back.

 

 

I too would be absolutely on board if tech were stopped at today. But I don’t think that’s where we are. It will get longer and easier.

 

 

[Bad9]

New2golf-

 

Just don't see any evidence to support that. The only evidence we have is the groove rule. And 99% have swapped out their soon to be illegal irons and wedges for conforming equipment. Even though it performs less

 

I wouldn't make the assumption that people aren't aware of the rule. Even if I wanted to play old style grooves on new equipment, where could you even get it? Maybe from an infomercial? If equipment gets restricted again, and the OEM's make the same decision to make all of their equipment conforming, then there really is no choice. After a few years and people start having to buy new equipment and find that it is less forgiving and even harder to hit straight, it will be detrimental to their ego's as well as the game overall. Even if the rule only affects those with higher speed, it will still hurt. If I lose 2-3 clubs on my drives, it would suck. I am sure I would continue to play, but I guarantee that my passion for the game would be diminished. Then there are those that take the game less seriously, who already find it time consuming, or expensive. Throw in another hurdle to make the game harder, and they may just quit all together. All this just to make the game resemble the version of itself from years long gone by. Seems ridiculous. I've mentioned it before. Further restrictions should keep performance where it is now, not roll back.

 

 

I too would be absolutely on board if tech were stopped at today. But I don't think that's where we are. It will get longer and easier.

 

The tech has been "stopped" for about 10yrs, manufacturers claims not withstanding.

[pinestreetgolf]

New2golf-

 

Just don't see any evidence to support that. The only evidence we have is the groove rule. And 99% have swapped out their soon to be illegal irons and wedges for conforming equipment. Even though it performs less

 

I wouldn't make the assumption that people aren't aware of the rule. Even if I wanted to play old style grooves on new equipment, where could you even get it? Maybe from an infomercial? If equipment gets restricted again, and the OEM's make the same decision to make all of their equipment conforming, then there really is no choice. After a few years and people start having to buy new equipment and find that it is less forgiving and even harder to hit straight, it will be detrimental to their ego's as well as the game overall. Even if the rule only affects those with higher speed, it will still hurt. If I lose 2-3 clubs on my drives, it would suck. I am sure I would continue to play, but I guarantee that my passion for the game would be diminished. Then there are those that take the game less seriously, who already find it time consuming, or expensive. Throw in another hurdle to make the game harder, and they may just quit all together. All this just to make the game resemble the version of itself from years long gone by. Seems ridiculous. I've mentioned it before. Further restrictions should keep performance where it is now, not roll back.

 

 

I too would be absolutely on board if tech were stopped at today. But I don't think that's where we are. It will get longer and easier.

 

The tech has been "stopped" for about 10yrs, manufacturers claims not withstanding.

 

In 2013, Charlie Hoffman thought he was "awful" from 30-50 yards and always laid up to 110 yards. He was near last in scoring when he laid up, so he hired a consultant to analyze his game and make recommendations. Using shotlink and trackman, he realized he is better from 30-50 and worse from 110, and that he was hitting his wedges at too little effective loft (from Jamie sideckmans book). The next year he was 13th, not close to last on those shots.

 

Do you consider that "tech" ?

 

It would have been impossible without shotlink and trackman.

[Bad9]

New2golf-

 

Just don't see any evidence to support that. The only evidence we have is the groove rule. And 99% have swapped out their soon to be illegal irons and wedges for conforming equipment. Even though it performs less

 

I wouldn't make the assumption that people aren't aware of the rule. Even if I wanted to play old style grooves on new equipment, where could you even get it? Maybe from an infomercial? If equipment gets restricted again, and the OEM's make the same decision to make all of their equipment conforming, then there really is no choice. After a few years and people start having to buy new equipment and find that it is less forgiving and even harder to hit straight, it will be detrimental to their ego's as well as the game overall. Even if the rule only affects those with higher speed, it will still hurt. If I lose 2-3 clubs on my drives, it would suck. I am sure I would continue to play, but I guarantee that my passion for the game would be diminished. Then there are those that take the game less seriously, who already find it time consuming, or expensive. Throw in another hurdle to make the game harder, and they may just quit all together. All this just to make the game resemble the version of itself from years long gone by. Seems ridiculous. I've mentioned it before. Further restrictions should keep performance where it is now, not roll back.

 

 

I too would be absolutely on board if tech were stopped at today. But I don't think that's where we are. It will get longer and easier.

 

The tech has been "stopped" for about 10yrs, manufacturers claims not withstanding.

 

In 2013, Charlie Hoffman thought he was "awful" from 30-50 yards and always laid up to 110 yards. He was near last in scoring when he laid up, so he hired a consultant to analyze his game and make recommendations. Using shotlink and trackman, he realized he is better from 30-50 and worse from 110, and that he was hitting his wedges at too little effective loft (from Jamie sideckmans book). The next year he was 13th, not close to last on those shots.

 

Do you consider that "tech" ?

 

It would have been impossible without shotlink and trackman.

 

If you look I am on your side on this issue. I was responding top bh saying that he would be ok if tech was stopped at the level of today when it has been stopped at this level for a decade. I believe most distance incrase over the last 10-15yrs can be attributed to better athletes, being better trained. The idea in some of these threads that todays pros hit it all over the face and only keep it playable because of tech is laughable. You can't hit it that far without delivering the sweetspot squarely into the ball. Same as always.

[chisag]

... We are accustomed to seeing the Pros playing on the weekend when they are in a groove and they hit everything solid. But go to a tourney on a Friday and watch the guys missing the cut and you will see some pretty bad shots and they are most definitely using all the forgiveness their clubs offer. Some are kind of phoning it in but many are really trying but struggling just like us, albiet to a different degree. There is a reason many Pros switch to the newest clubs and it is not marketing. I have spoken to quite a few Player Reps and the last thing they want is a Pro playing their clubs poorly so they never insist players on staff use the newest stuff (unless they are under contract for a specific club). VERY easy to just put a new M4 head cover on a 2016 M2 as well as showing the M4 or some P770's in an ad for a TaylorMade player that just won but really used older MC's. All they have to say is "X Player used TaylorMade irons to win this week" and add a picture of the P770's and a M4 when the player uses neither club.

 

... So yea, I agree for the most part they are peppering a dime sized sweet spot but they can miss just like the rest of us on any given week and certainly any given shot, so they appreciate forgiveness just as much as we do. They just don't need it anywhere as often.

[bladehunter]

When I say tech. I mean everything. Shaft , ball launch monitors , Driver sweet spot size ( its growing) and long irons that are higher launching and twice as forgiving. These guys are continuing to hit things longer. Whether we recite “ Cor is maxed “ or not. 10 years ago the sweetspot on a driver where max cor could be used was tiny. It isn’t today. Epic has shown the world how high ball speeds can be on the toe side of the head. Common miss area for best players. Sldr was a Driver that loved high towards the crease of the crown strikes. They are taking all that data and figuring out how to make a Driver hot over a large area. Hand that to a guy who swings on tour at 115 and when he figures out that he can swing out of his shoes and use more of the Head he will hit it at 120. And distance goes up. Maybe small amounts over time ? But still tech hasn’t been stopped.

 

 

[TomWishon]

 

Tom, great points as usual. One thing I would say regarding the ball is that when I started playing in the early 1980s, the Pros didn’t play the same balls as most recreational players. The pros and top amateurs played balata because they were skilled ballstrikers (and they got them for free!) and we all played cheaper, surlyn covered balls that went further, spun less all round, lasted longer and were affordable. With balata there was a trade off - they were a lot easier to control around the green, but a lot harder to control off the tee. The modern ball, comparatively, is having your cake and eating it.

 

I do think that some of the top pros nowadays do not have to be as skilled at striking the ball with the longer clubs as there is a larger margin for error with both the clubs and ball - Short game not so much because that is much more about feel anyway.

 

That's why in my original post I made a point I was addressing the OP's concern about CLUBS and not the ball. There is no question that at the tour player level, the switch from wound to multi layer has made a change. It's not nearly that way with everyone else but then too that's understandable because so many of the equipment changes over the years are such that the more consistent the player's swing, the more chance they have of noticing a performance difference.

[rawdog]

When I say tech. I mean everything. Shaft , ball launch monitors , Driver sweet spot size ( its growing) and long irons that are higher launching and twice as forgiving. These guys are continuing to hit things longer. Whether we recite " Cor is maxed " or not. 10 years ago the sweetspot on a driver where max cor could be used was tiny. It isn't today. Epic has shown the world how high ball speeds can be on the toe side of the head. Common miss area for best players. Sldr was a Driver that loved high towards the crease of the crown strikes. They are taking all that data and figuring out how to make a Driver hot over a large area. Hand that to a guy who swings on tour at 115 and when he figures out that he can swing out of his shoes and use more of the Head he will hit it at 120. And distance goes up. Maybe small amounts over time ? But still tech hasn't been stopped.

 

To be fair, Tom's 770CFE irons produced in 2004 were high-COR and shots 1" from center resulted in just a 2.5% drop in ball speed.

 

That same year, his 515GRT fairway woods were the first woods to have a max COR at the .830 limit. This led to ball speeds of 4mph higher than the leading woods at the time.

 

All this info can be found on his website. This tech has been around 14 years. It isn't new. Though maybe it did take a while for others to catch up to Tom :)

[TomWishon]

 

 

Thanks mr Tom .. as always a great explanatiOn. If I'm following correctly youre explaining what I've been saying I'm seeing . That if they wanted to pull anything back for high level players it would be the Driver size and/or designs and not really the ball.

 

But I know this would accordion into other things. Like. 290 yard driving irons. At some level it would all run together at the top.

 

With that being said do you see drives continuing to grow in length ? Will we see regular 400 plus yard drives soon ?

 

No, I do not mean to say anything to the effect that the size of the driver should be pulled back. When I was talking about pros benefitting from heads with better off center hit forgiveness I should have said it more clearly that first on the list are the irons. Not the driver. Yes, all the drivers today have far better off center shot forgiveness than 12-15 yrs and longer ago. No question of that being very significant. But keep in mind, the pros just do not hit the driver that far off center to be able to benefit that much from modern off center hit driver performance.

 

It's us, we mortals who can hit the driver a full inch and more off center who really gain the benefit from the higher MOI that goes with the 460cc volume heads and very much so the benefit of a well engineered variable thickness face on the driver. A bad off center hit for a tour pro might be 1/2", if that. And at that much of an off center hit, a pro is getting some benefit from the variable thickness driver face and high driver MOI, but not that much.

 

Why I mean it is a bigger deal in the irons is because of the difference between muscleback blades and cavity backs for a 1/2" off center hit. You see, with the driver, ALL of the pros are playing driver heads that are high up there in MOI and most with variable thickness faces. So there is no such thing as a pro playing an unforgiving driver. Not that way with the irons because you have half the guys out there using blades which are HORRIBLE for off center hit performance when compared to even a moderately deep cavity back. So for the pros who can find a cavity back they like the looks of, those guys really are getting a measurable equipment advantage over those who still want to play the blade.

 

I think the statistics of the PGA Tour pretty much bear out the fact that over the past 5-6 yrs or more, there really has not been much of any increase in driving distance on tour. And that makes sense because, the driver heads have been at the limit for distance for at least that long. And all the tour players do get hand picked driver heads which most certainly are as close to the limit for CT/COR as can be. There is nothing that any company can do to improve ON center distance. There are only a few little things left to do that can have a small incremental effect on some off center hits and there are things that are being done to change impact FEEL, from which some people are fooled to think it is affecting distance. But new driver head technology as far as improving ON center distance is over and done with. When the USGA wanted to lock that down 20 yrs ago, they chose the right thing to handcuff when they put a limit on COR.

 

There was some years ago a face design technology that really and truly could have produced a driver in which the off center areas within 1/2" to 1" from the center of the face could actually have a higher COR than the center of the face. But when reviewing this technology in prototype form for the engineering firm that had created it, the USGA saw this as a loophole they did not wish to let go. So that is why about 5 yrs ago the USGA broadened the COR/CT limit to include all areas of the face beyond the center. But that technology never saw the light of day in driver sales because they never got any of the big OEMs to buy their patents and the company that invented it never wanted to form their own golf company to release it.

 

You will of course see some players as we go forward who do have phenomenally high clubhead speeds. These guys will be to golf what LeBron is to basketball - a physical freak of nature who just has an anatomical and physiological advantage over the other players. Guys like Tony Finau or the Spanish player on the Euro Tour, Alvaro Quiros. Such guys will be at the high 120s to 130s for clubhead speed so you will see some 400+ yd drives and 200 yard 7-irons when all the conditions allow it.

 

But overall, any more wholesale distance increases on tour are not likely to happen unless it comes from fairway conditions being conducive to more roll after landing.

[TomWishon]

 

 

When you have several players on tour carrying steel 3-woods that are under 200cc over 300 yards, do you really think that a reduction in max driver size will make a difference? Not to mention the environmental impact of deeming just about every driver produced in the past 15 years illegal? I don't see the USGA's stance on bifurcation changing (even though they introduced a 14 year temporary bifurcation with the groove rollback), so any rollback will be across the board. The demand for non-conforming equipment is incredibly low (to echo Tom's sentiment, most people want to play as close to the same game as the pros regardless of how unrealistic that is), so the major OEMs would fall in line with producing new product under the new regulation. Any rollback of clubs or balls would likely have a much greater negative impact on the amateur game as well as the environment than it would the elite and all due to the misguided perception that equipment is the only reason for distance gains.

 

I am not saying there should ever be a reel back on driver size. And as I just said in a follow up post to the other poster's comment about driver size, I never meant my statement in my original post to mean I felt that driver size should be changed or other wise reeled back. What I meant by tour players getting more advantage from higher MOI heads was with respect to IRONS - not drivers.

 

Let me explain. With the driver, pretty much ALL titanium drivers played on tour are quite similar in terms of MOI and off center hit forgiveness because most all the drivers these guys play are 450-460cc and have some form of a variable thickness face. The performance differences are not enough to write home about. So it is not like some players are using far less forgiving driver heads than others. Besides, if you ever chart how far off center a tour player typically misses a driver shot, it's rarely ever more than 1/2". Off center hit forgiveness is not worth a dime until you actually hit it far enough off center so the MOI + variable thickness face kick in to reduce the ball speed loss. And at 1/2" off center with today's TI drivers, you are not getting a huge benefit. For us mortals who hit the driver +1" or more off center, yessir, we are getting a big improvement in forgiveness.

 

Where I mean the MOI is a real POTENTIAL advantage is between the tour players still using muscleback blades and those using cavity backs for their irons. An equivalent in the driver would be if you had half the tour players using persimmon or a 200cc stainless steel driver head vs half using a 450cc Ti driver with a variable thickness face. For tour players who hit a 5 iron 1/2" off center once in a blue moon, those with the blade really get hammered for carry distance while those with the cavity back get the ball on the green. If you have hazards hugging the front of a green, the difference between a blade and CB for a slight off center hit is the difference between a potential birdie/par and a potential bogey or worse.

 

But then too, at the end of the day, how many tour players hit how many iron shots as much as 1/2" off center? It happens, but not all that often. But it is a big difference when you talk blade vs cavity back. Not so much in the driver.

[bladehunter]

 

 

Thanks mr Tom .. as always a great explanatiOn. If I'm following correctly youre explaining what I've been saying I'm seeing . That if they wanted to pull anything back for high level players it would be the Driver size and/or designs and not really the ball.

 

But I know this would accordion into other things. Like. 290 yard driving irons. At some level it would all run together at the top.

 

With that being said do you see drives continuing to grow in length ? Will we see regular 400 plus yard drives soon ?

 

No, I do not mean to say anything to the effect that the size of the driver should be pulled back. When I was talking about pros benefitting from heads with better off center hit forgiveness I should have said it more clearly that first on the list are the irons. Not the driver. Yes, all the drivers today have far better off center shot forgiveness than 12-15 yrs and longer ago. No question of that being very significant. But keep in mind, the pros just do not hit the driver that far off center to be able to benefit that much from modern off center hit driver performance.

 

It's us, we mortals who can hit the driver a full inch and more off center who really gain the benefit from the higher MOI that goes with the 460cc volume heads and very much so the benefit of a well engineered variable thickness face on the driver. A bad off center hit for a tour pro might be 1/2", if that. And at that much of an off center hit, a pro is getting some benefit from the variable thickness driver face and high driver MOI, but not that much.

 

Why I mean it is a bigger deal in the irons is because of the difference between muscleback blades and cavity backs for a 1/2" off center hit. You see, with the driver, ALL of the pros are playing driver heads that are high up there in MOI and most with variable thickness faces. So there is no such thing as a pro playing an unforgiving driver. Not that way with the irons because you have half the guys out there using blades which are HORRIBLE for off center hit performance when compared to even a moderately deep cavity back. So for the pros who can find a cavity back they like the looks of, those guys really are getting a measurable equipment advantage over those who still want to play the blade.

 

I think the statistics of the PGA Tour pretty much bear out the fact that over the past 5-6 yrs or more, there really has not been much of any increase in driving distance on tour. And that makes sense because, the driver heads have been at the limit for distance for at least that long. And all the tour players do get hand picked driver heads which most certainly are as close to the limit for CT/COR as can be. There is nothing that any company can do to improve ON center distance. There are only a few little things left to do that can have a small incremental effect on some off center hits and there are things that are being done to change impact FEEL, from which some people are fooled to think it is affecting distance. But new driver head technology as far as improving ON center distance is over and done with. When the USGA wanted to lock that down 20 yrs ago, they chose the right thing to handcuff when they put a limit on COR.

 

There was some years ago a face design technology that really and truly could have produced a driver in which the off center areas within 1/2" to 1" from the center of the face could actually have a higher COR than the center of the face. But when reviewing this technology in prototype form for the engineering firm that had created it, the USGA saw this as a loophole they did not wish to let go. So that is why about 5 yrs ago the USGA broadened the COR/CT limit to include all areas of the face beyond the center. But that technology never saw the light of day in driver sales because they never got any of the big OEMs to buy their patents and the company that invented it never wanted to form their own golf company to release it.

 

You will of course see some players as we go forward who do have phenomenally high clubhead speeds. These guys will be to golf what LeBron is to basketball - a physical freak of nature who just has an anatomical and physiological advantage over the other players. Guys like Tony Finau or the Spanish player on the Euro Tour, Alvaro Quiros. Such guys will be at the high 120s to 130s for clubhead speed so you will see some 400+ yd drives and 200 yard 7-irons when all the conditions allow it.

 

But overall, any more wholesale distance increases on tour are not likely to happen unless it comes from fairway conditions being conducive to more roll after landing.

 

 

Thanks again tom.

 

 

I didn’t mean to suggest you wanted to see a Driver head shrinkage. I just meant that the pro player also saw a benefit to the forgiving heads that they play. So at least we are saying the same thing on the iron front. Especially from blade to cb.

 

On Driver. I agree with you mostly. And I maybe wrong for that. Lol. But here are my thoughts. If tour players never see a real benefit to forgiving Driver heads. Then why do they all play one ? Is it to promote sales? If so I guess I see that. But if not. I would think several would prefer a smaller head for same reasons so many players still play a blade. Workability. Looks and ease of squaring the face and possibly to add clubhead speed ...I recall Adam Scott claiming 4 mph using the 400cc 915d5 Head ..but later swapped back to d2 saying “ I’m just giving up too much dispersion wise with the smaller head “. ( paraphrasing from memory ).

 

All that is in question form even if I lack punctuation to show that at times. I’m only trying pick your brain. Not prove you wrong. Thats more so for others who seemed to take offense last time I replied to you.

[mahonie]

Depends on your view. I think It became less entertaining when distance went over 340 regularly. Cutting fairways with a gang mower and letting the rough grow would help. But how exciting is seeing a bunch of punch outs?

 

And more guys pumping 2 iron off the tee.

 

So Tiger at Hoylake was a total snooze for you then?

 

 

That brings up the bunching of the fields the modern Driver has caused. One guy ruling a course with 2 iron is exciting. Seing 45 of them laying up with one to a full wedge is boring. Same with Driver for every guy. There is just something missing from today’s game. Maybe it is tiger. Lol.

 

You may be right...watch what Tiger says at about 3:30:

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CNKx_am69dU

 

 

[TomWishon]

Several great posts from TOM.

 

I do however have a question regarding the swing speed increase. I completely agree with the top guys are athletes now but is it not easier to swing the new gear faster ? Have the newer more aerodynamic clubs contributed to swing speed at all ?

 

This is a great question I'd love to hear from Mr. Wishon on. My new Epic head let me go to a much lighter shaft with the same spin and I picked up 2 mph. Do Turbolators and Boeing-designed drivers matter at all?

 

Great post and great question.

 

Tagged him so he might see it.

 

 

OK, let's talk turb-o-lators or other such aerodynamic swoops and protrusions on heads. If you've seen any of the support video marketing for these things, one thing many of the companies do is to show the head in a wind tunnel. They make their point by showing how the protrusion elements make the air travel more smoothly over the head, causing less drag. Admittedly it is very easy to look at this and think that it could have a difference on the speed of the clubhead at impact.

 

Now let's think about how a clubhead travels through the air when being swung. Mainly ask yourself this question - for how long does the clubhead travel through the air with the club face going directly into the air toward the target ? The answer is about 0.15 secs, if that.

 

Think about it. As you make the backswing, your body rotates and so do your hands as they grip the club. The result is that the clubhead itself has rotated about 90* to get to its position at the top of the backswing. Now it has to come back down. During the downswing the clubhead now has to reverse this rotation to get back to impact with the face pointing at the target. some 80-90% of the time the clubhead is accelerating and gaining speed on the downswing, it is not the face that is leading the way through the air. It is the rounded back of the heel that is leading the way for the clubhead through the air.

 

And then finally, in the very last split second the face completes its rotation back around to finally travel the last 6" with the face plowing straight through the air. That's the only time the turbolator protrusions are positioned to have anything to do with air flowing over the head. In fact, you can make a point that during the first 3/4's of the downswing when the clubface is not even close to being pointed at the target, in this position the turbolator protrusions are IMPEDING the air flow because their streamlined shapes are angled away from the target which should DISRUPT the air flow.

 

PineStreet, any time a golfer gets a higher speed with a different club, you have to look at this like a scientist to come up with the reason(s). To do that requires listing every possible spec or feature that is different between the new and old driver that could possibly affect swing speed. What's the total weight difference? What's the asembled club MOI difference? What's the loft, really? What's the swingweight difference? What's the balance point difference? What's the bend profile difference in the shafts and does one better fit the golfer's swing characteristics and especially, better fit the golfer's FEEL preference(s)? Until you know that every single one of those things is identical, you cannot attribute a performance difference to something like a turbolator.

 

Besides, when you realize and think about what I just said in the explanation of the position of the clubhead during the swing, does it make sense to you that little protrusions which are but 18" tall which only align to the target for the split of a split second could possibly reduce drag enough to gain 2 mph? Very, very, very doubtful.

 

But hey, they look good, they look cool, and the smoke streaming over them in the wind tunnel sure looks compelling. But sorry, machts nichts.

 

Though I will tell you one component for which a raised type protrusion could have a little more of an effect. Shafts. Ever look at the antenna on cars today and see that it has spiraled protrusions sticking up off the shaft of the antenna? That is there to keep the antenna stable when the car is traveling down the road at 60-70-80 mph. Without them the antenna will vibrate and wobble all over the place because of the effect of the air flow at that speed over a smooth shaft.

 

Do that with a golf shaft and you can make a small difference in delivery of the clubhead to the ball. Problem is, the USGA figured this out too and does have a rule prohibiting this on shafts !! (A shaft shall be circular in cross section) And BTW that rule also nixes the even larger potential of an oval shaped shaft.

[TomWishon]

I see nothing in that paragraph that answers the question I asked. Unless you are assuming that distance is capped and tech will no longer evolve any further. If that's the case it isn't stated here.

 

Not to mention the other half of the equation. Speed. As in are we expecting sweet spot to increase to the point that 140 mph guys can exist on tour ?

 

Well then as a 31 yr clubhead designer, I will go ahead and tell you that distance is capped and tech will never evolve any further WITH RESPECT TO THE CLUBHEAD. What they end up doing with the ball, I can't speak of because I am not a ball expert by any means. A lot of ball experts feel the USGA screwed this up back in the early 2000s when they re did the overall distance standard. Several ball experts feel the new ODS opened the door for new ball construction to bring about improvements to better and elite players that should not have been allowed. Not being a ball guy, I am not the one to talk to about that.

 

Don't have the time now to elaborate point by point on this but I can surely do so. Probably kinda stupid for me as a club head designer to elaborate on that, don't you think? I mean, it is sort of like cutting my own throat to admit that, right? But it's true. We are at the limit for head technology, if you define head technology as a feature that works for EVERY golfer and not just a few depending on their swing.

 

 

On your second statement, I am sorry, but I am not sure what you mean when you question if a sweet spot increase (aka more off center hit forgiveness) can allow a 140mph player to exist on tour.

 

The main thing that prevents such a player from making it on tour is plain and simple the fact that at that high of a speed, the margin for error on accuracy is so much smaller than it is for a lower speed. A guy with a 140 mph speed would have to deliver the face more square to the ball to keep it in play than a guy with a 120mph speed. A clubface that is 1/2* open or closed at impact for a 140mph clubhead speed is going to hit the ball farther off line than a 1/2* open/closed face on a club swung at 120 mph.

 

Also a guy with a 140 mph clubhead speed is going to fight the effect of wind more than those with slower speeds. A shot hit with >200-210mph ball speed is going to fly higher and it's going to stay in the air longer than a shot hit with a 175-80mph ball speed. All shots decay in speed A LOT as they hang and fly. In fact, the landing ball speed of a shot hit at 200mph vs 175mph is only about 10mph difference due to the manner in which the ball's flight decays. So if the shot is in the air higher and longer, the wind is going to affect it more and make it more difficult for the player to control the ball.

 

This is really why clubhead speed is somewhat of a limiting factor. Look at Bubba now. Look at Daly. Look at the guys over the past 10 yrs who are at the very top of the list for driving distance. Not many of them are at the top of the winning or money list. Once in a while you see a guy like Dustin Johnson who seems to have a better control over his path and face angle in his swing for his speed. But that's rare. In short it takes a lot more than clubhead speed to win out there.

 

And a larger sweet spot has nothing to do with giving the high speed players any real advantage with the driver. It can more with the irons, but not the driver.

[mahonie]

 

Tom, great points as usual. One thing I would say regarding the ball is that when I started playing in the early 1980s, the Pros didn’t play the same balls as most recreational players. The pros and top amateurs played balata because they were skilled ballstrikers (and they got them for free!) and we all played cheaper, surlyn covered balls that went further, spun less all round, lasted longer and were affordable. With balata there was a trade off - they were a lot easier to control around the green, but a lot harder to control off the tee. The modern ball, comparatively, is having your cake and eating it.

 

I do think that some of the top pros nowadays do not have to be as skilled at striking the ball with the longer clubs as there is a larger margin for error with both the clubs and ball - Short game not so much because that is much more about feel anyway.

 

That's why in my original post I made a point I was addressing the OP's concern about CLUBS and not the ball. There is no question that at the tour player level, the switch from wound to multi layer has made a change. It's not nearly that way with everyone else but then too that's understandable because so many of the equipment changes over the years are such that the more consistent the player's swing, the more chance they have of noticing a performance difference.

 

Tom, I suggested in an earlier post that perhaps balls could be made to have consistent spin profiles in that a ball that has high spin around the green would also then have to have high spin with the driver, same with low spin balls and then a mid-spin ball between the two. This would sort of rule out imposed bifurcation in that you could choose to play the same ball as anyone else, the only limit being your own skill level.

 

In my mind this would help to identify the outstanding ballstrikers as they would still be able to hit the high spin ball long but also straight. Any amount of side spin would cause the ball to curve offline with obviously the high spin balls deviating further. The low spin balls would still be long with less deviation but would lose a certain level of control around the green. Recreational players who ‘need’ distance in their games would not be penalised as they could choose the low spin ball, with the short game taking a slight hit in the feel stakes.

 

To me this approach would have the minimum impact on current clubs, would possibly identify the best pro golfers and would minimise the impact on recreational players with a possible outcome that overall driving distance averages come down. Obviously this would not work if all pro golfers hit the ball that well that they do not put significant amounts of side spin on the ball on long shots? Is this something that you have experience of and can comment on?

[radiman]

Tom, great points as usual. One thing I would say regarding the ball is that when I started playing in the early 1980s, the Pros didn’t play the same balls as most recreational players. The pros and top amateurs played balata because they were skilled ballstrikers (and they got them for free!) and we all played cheaper, surlyn covered balls that went further, spun less all round, lasted longer and were affordable. With balata there was a trade off - they were a lot easier to control around the green, but a lot harder to control off the tee. The modern ball, comparatively, is having your cake and eating it.

 

I do think that some of the top pros nowadays do not have to be as skilled at striking the ball with the longer clubs as there is a larger margin for error with both the clubs and ball - Short game not so much because that is much more about feel anyway.

 

That's why in my original post I made a point I was addressing the OP's concern about CLUBS and not the ball. There is no question that at the tour player level, the switch from wound to multi layer has made a change. It's not nearly that way with everyone else but then too that's understandable because so many of the equipment changes over the years are such that the more consistent the player's swing, the more chance they have of noticing a performance difference.

 

Tom, I suggested in an earlier post that perhaps balls could be made to have consistent spin profiles in that a ball that has high spin around the green would also then have to have high spin with the driver, same with low spin balls and then a mid-spin ball between the two. This would sort of rule out imposed bifurcation in that you could choose to play the same ball as anyone else, the only limit being your own skill level.

 

In my mind this would help to identify the outstanding ballstrikers as they would still be able to hit the high spin ball long but also straight. Any amount of side spin would cause the ball to curve offline with obviously the high spin balls deviating further. The low spin balls would still be long with less deviation but would lose a certain level of control around the green. Recreational players who ‘need’ distance in their games would not be penalised as they could choose the low spin ball, with the short game taking a slight hit in the feel stakes.

 

To me this approach would have the minimum impact on current clubs, would possibly identify the best pro golfers and would minimise the impact on recreational players with a possible outcome that overall driving distance averages come down. Obviously this would not work if all pro golfers hit the ball that well that they do not put significant amounts of side spin on the ball on long shots? Is this something that you have experience of and can comment on?

 

The world rankings and major championships already identify the best pro golfers. They are all playing the same game. Dustin Johnson pounds the ball. He is also very accurate off the tee, especially give how much ball speed he produces. He uses his God given talents to do so. He has worked hard over the years to be a deadly combination of athletic and accurate. He didn't climb the rankings like this until he dialed in his short game, which he is also very good at. Dumbing down the equipment so that someone with a 105 driver SS has a chance to beat him is silly. In other sports, they don't change the rules so slower/weaker players have a better chance. I think a lot of pros have the ability to step on it and pick up significant speed. But, to do that and expect to remain accurate is difficult. Punishing those that can is just silly.