Adam Scott on why driving is no longer a skill in pro golf

[LICC]

> @Krt22 said:

> Lot's of correlation, not all causation. Again, no one is saying the equipment isnt helping, we are saying it's not just the equipment. A few cherry picked stats doesnt change that

 

Cherry picked? It’s the most important stats directly on point. You have given nothing factual or reasonable to support otherwise.

[Soloman1]

> @Krt22 said:

> Lot's of correlation, not all causation. Again, no one is saying the equipment isnt helping, we are saying it's not just the equipment. A few cherry picked stats doesnt change that

If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.

[jmck]

> @Krt22 said:

> Lot's of correlation, not all causation. Again, no one is saying the equipment isnt helping, we are saying it's not just the equipment. A few cherry picked stats doesnt change that

 

What cherry picked stats? Driving distance by year since 1980? Please refer to the chart above. Did everyone get more fit in 1997-98 and then again in 2002-03?

 

Here's another one for you. This guy:

 


 

Is a better golfer than this guy:

 


 

Yet they hit the ball the same distance. It's almost like fitness has absolutely nothing at all to do with it.

[musclefront]

> @Krt22 said:

> Lot's of correlation, not all causation. Again, no one is saying the equipment isnt helping, we are saying it's not just the equipment. A few cherry picked stats doesnt change that

 

Equipment is by far the biggest factor. It’s not even close. Mostly the ball

[jmck]

Or if you'd prefer, this guy:

 


 

Is better at golf than this guy:

 


 

[bscinstnct]

> @jmck said:

> Or if you'd prefer, this guy:

>

> 

>

> Is better at golf than this guy:

>

> 

>

 

 

Lol, jmck, hows is all going? Hope alls good.

 

I see what you mean.

 

But ball, equipment, all factored

 

Even if it’s not fitness

 

There’s just more and more guys swinging over 120 mph than ever who can also play and score.

 

And there will be more and more coming down the pike year after year.

 

[gvogel]

> @jmck said:

> So yeah, this athlete here (and 100+ other guys!):

> 

> Are all 10-40 yards longer than this schlub ever was:

> 

>

 

Good stuff. Kiradech is the man.

[gvogel]

> @musclefront said:

> > @Krt22 said:

> > Lot's of correlation, not all causation. Again, no one is saying the equipment isnt helping, we are saying it's not just the equipment. A few cherry picked stats doesnt change that

>

> Equipment is by far the biggest factor. It’s not even close. Mostly the ball

 

Half ball, half large, hot face driver.

 

[gvogel]

> @jmck said:

> Or if you'd prefer, this guy:

>

> 

>

> Is better at golf than this guy:

>

> 

>

 

 

that skinny kid could hit the cr$p out of the ball. From the time of Ted Ray, or even before, long drivers are born, not trained.

[Man_O_War]

we read this every generation. should have stopped at the percha ball and hickory shafts

[Need4spd]

> @HoosierMizuno said:

> > @JD3 said:

> > It's beyond the driver why course length is less a factor these days ....the ball and other equipment is so good, 7 iron is the stock shot from 195 for better stronger players. So overall I agree with what he's saying...length in and of itself isn't much of a factor in making a course harder.

>

> golfwrx just interviewed JT...

> his stock 4 iron carry is 230, 7i 185, 57 is 112.

>

>

 

And what exactly is the problem with that? I’m a scratch handicap, 36 years old, 5’6” and about 150 pounds. I work five days a week, don’t practice, and my numbers are as follows: 4i = 210, 7i = 170, and 54 = 105. I expect the BEST PLAYERS IN THE EFFING WORLD to hit it further than me, and do so more accurately. I relucted from commenting in this thread any further because my earlier points(s) seemed to be missed, or maybe I just didn’t explain them well enough. At any rate, what on earth is wrong with technology evolving/improving, as well as the ability of the players utilizing said technology?

 

Good grief.

 

[Need4spd]

Guess what, folks... Things change. The way different sports are played CHANGES. In baseball it’s the long ball (that’s not even that new), and guys are routinely throwing it 100mph+ now. In basketball it’s the three pointer, centers are now practically obsolete (thanks Steph). In football it’s the passing game, now they play out of the gun instead of the I-Form.

 

Newsflash.

[mosesgolf]

There were no DB esque athletes playing golf back in the day. :smiley:

[grm24]

> @gvogel said:

> > @musclefront said:

> > > @Krt22 said:

> > > Lot's of correlation, not all causation. Again, no one is saying the equipment isnt helping, we are saying it's not just the equipment. A few cherry picked stats doesnt change that

> >

> > Equipment is by far the biggest factor. It’s not even close. Mostly the ball

>

> Half ball, half large, hot face driver.

>

Tigers first tee shot as a professional in 1996 was 336 yards with a wound ball (Titleist Professional) and a small headed Cobra driver that was around 200cc with a heavy X-100 steel shaft. What caused that tee shot? A hot ball or hot driver?

[lowheel]

> @Shilgy said:

> > @lowheel said:

> > > @Krt22 said:

> > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > Lol. I’m glad I can give you guys something to chew on this evening.

> > > >

> > > > It still amazes me how many claim that equipment makes zero difference. And yet those same Guys will fight against any change tooth and nail. If it doesn’t matter , then why does it matter ?

> > >

> > > I've never said it makes zero difference, I'm just saying it's not the only difference and not nearly as significant as some like to think. The entire game has changed, not just the clubs, but the players, their conditioning, their approach, and how they utilize tech to perform at the highest level and get the ball in the hole in the fewest possible strokes. COR has been maxed for years, yet scores still are dropping and this debate gets rehashed over and over. The groves in wedges changed, yet the pros can still zip them back like crazy. People say the ball doesnt spin enough, yet the best pros are the one's who who can control their spin and ball flight

> > >

> > > Golfwrx posters-No need for a new driver, they are all the same, COR has been the limit for years, I still hit my 910D2 as long as anything new!

> > >

> > > Also

> > >

> > > Golfwrx posters-The clubs and ball are too dang long, no skill needed!

> >

> > the answer to your questions is ... Trackman. fitting on tour is the real game changer. over 100 tour players are carrying their own trackman on tour every week. that should tell you all you need to know.

>

> I take it you don't think they are dialing in wedge distance?

> Why do you believe they all use Trackman while warming up for a tournament round?

 

they're dialing in everything not just wedges. Ive worked events and seen it. thats why tour trucks leave after the first round pre tourney they mess with grinds and bounces and different driver heads etc... a player can go for hitting draws with drivers to fades in 5 minutes with a equipment change. Im not knocking it, im explaining how much that affects everything.

[musclefront]

> @grm24 said:

> > @gvogel said:

> > > @musclefront said:

> > > > @Krt22 said:

> > > > Lot's of correlation, not all causation. Again, no one is saying the equipment isnt helping, we are saying it's not just the equipment. A few cherry picked stats doesnt change that

> > >

> > > Equipment is by far the biggest factor. It’s not even close. Mostly the ball

> >

> > Half ball, half large, hot face driver.

> >

> Tigers first tee shot as a professional in 1996 was 336 yards with a wound ball (Titleist Professional) and a small headed Cobra driver that was around 200cc with a heavy X-100 steel shaft. What caused that tee shot? A hot ball or hot driver?

 

Back then he was the ONLY one maybe Daly too that could do that. Now, most of the field can. The equipment undoubtedly brought the masses to him. Make sense?

[84425]

> @bscinstnct said:

> Even if it’s not fitness

>

> There’s just more and more guys swinging over 120 mph than ever who can also play and score.

>

> And there will be more and more coming down the pike year after year.

>

There are more players swinging over 120mph on tour, because that kind of game is what allows success nowadays. In the past you would have short hitters that were great ball strikers and short game experts that could compete with the players that hit their drives 50 yards past them. Nowadays apparently these players don't stand a chance anymore because their skill (keeping the tee shot in the fairway and hitting greens) used to have effect in the past because the longer drivers would hit one or two drives offline per round and it would cost them strokes. That disadvantage for long hitters apparently no longer exists (and looking at fir stats of today, vs. 20 years ago, the better players today are not hitting more fairways than 20 years ago).

 

So, the average distance hit by PGA tour players has also increased because hitting it long has become a bigger asset than it used to be.

[jmck]

> @grm24 said:

> > @gvogel said:

> > > @musclefront said:

> > > > @Krt22 said:

> > > > Lot's of correlation, not all causation. Again, no one is saying the equipment isnt helping, we are saying it's not just the equipment. A few cherry picked stats doesnt change that

> > >

> > > Equipment is by far the biggest factor. It’s not even close. Mostly the ball

> >

> > Half ball, half large, hot face driver.

> >

> Tigers first tee shot as a professional in 1996 was 336 yards with a wound ball (Titleist Professional) and a small headed Cobra driver that was around 200cc with a heavy X-100 steel shaft. What caused that tee shot? A hot ball or hot driver?

 

That's Adam Scott's point. Tiger used to be one of two people on the planet with the skill to do that, now, because of equipment, almost everyone on tour can do that.

 

He didn't have enough rounds in '96 to make the stats. In '97 Tiger averaged 294.8 for the year. The only person longer than him was Daly. In 2019, 294.8 would rank 93rd on tour. That's 92 guys longer than 1997 Tiger, and that's because of equipment. Again, that's the point Adam Scott is making. In 1997 there were TWO guys with the skills needed to consistently move it out there 300+ and keep it in play. Thanks to equipment, there are now 100 guys on the big tour (and another 1,000+ coming up through the smaller tours and colleges and junior ranks) who have been _gifted_ that skill.

 

Reasonable people can disagree about whether or not that bothers them or negatively impacts the game or whatever, but to pretend it isn't because of equipment is just head-in-the-sand foolish.

[gvogel]

> @grm24 said:

> > @gvogel said:

> > > @musclefront said:

> > > > @Krt22 said:

> > > > Lot's of correlation, not all causation. Again, no one is saying the equipment isnt helping, we are saying it's not just the equipment. A few cherry picked stats doesnt change that

> > >

> > > Equipment is by far the biggest factor. It’s not even close. Mostly the ball

> >

> > Half ball, half large, hot face driver.

> >

> Tigers first tee shot as a professional in 1996 was 336 yards with a wound ball (Titleist Professional) and a small headed Cobra driver that was around 200cc with a heavy X-100 steel shaft. What caused that tee shot? A hot ball or hot driver?

 

Could have been down wind, slightly down hill. Who knows? Young Tiger was a long Tiger.

 

That's the problem with singling out specific shots. If you are looking at this as a problem you have to look at tour averages.

[Itsjustagame]

Their probably hitting it longer due to jacked lofts- golfs other scandal.

[bscinstnct]

> @84425 said:

> > @bscinstnct said:

> > Even if it’s not fitness

> >

> > There’s just more and more guys swinging over 120 mph than ever who can also play and score.

> >

> > And there will be more and more coming down the pike year after year.

> >

> There are more players swinging over 120mph on tour, because that kind of game is what allows success nowadays. In the past you would have short hitters that were great ball strikers and short game experts that could compete with the players that hit their drives 50 yards past them. Nowadays apparently these players don't stand a chance anymore because their skill (keeping the tee shot in the fairway and hitting greens) used to have effect in the past because the longer drivers would hit one or two drives offline per round and it would cost them strokes. That disadvantage for long hitters apparently no longer exists (and looking at fir stats of today, vs. 20 years ago, the better players today are not hitting more fairways than 20 years ago).

>

> So, the average distance hit by PGA tour players has also increased because hitting it long has become a bigger asset than it used to be.

 

You have good points.

 

As far as more guys swinging 120, I meant there's more guys who can swing 120 due to bigger talent pools.

 

The Korn Ferry tour has 18 guys who

 

Average over 315 yards! lol

 

And the top 100 guys all average over 300 yards, insane.

 

*But, how many of these guys will make it to the PGA Tour? Just because they hit the ball a mile (and can clearly play the other aspects of the game well enough to play on that tour), they won't make it to the PGA Tour unless they have the ability to hit the ball where they need to, when they need to, under pressure, and putt.

 

I just think that people who say that these guys are only capable of hitting it far and aren't accurate are incorrect.

 

I mean, are we saying that JT can do this but he can't hit a fairway if he wants to?>>>

 

 

 

[gvogel]

> @mosesgolf said:

> There were no DB esque athletes playing golf back in the day. :smiley:

 

Hale Irwin played defensive back at the Universtiy of Colorado.

[Soloman1]

Yeah, but they used balata shoulder pads and persimmon helmets back then...

[puttingmatt]

Adam Scott is right. The driver is the most forgiving club in the bag.

Makes a good argument for smarter course set ups , instead of just a longer set up.

[FairwaysToHeaven]

> @Need4spd said:

> > @HoosierMizuno said:

> > > @JD3 said:

> > > It's beyond the driver why course length is less a factor these days ....the ball and other equipment is so good, 7 iron is the stock shot from 195 for better stronger players. So overall I agree with what he's saying...length in and of itself isn't much of a factor in making a course harder.

> >

> > golfwrx just interviewed JT...

> > his stock 4 iron carry is 230, 7i 185, 57 is 112.

> >

> >

>

> And what exactly is the problem with that? I’m a scratch handicap, 36 years old, 5’6” and about 150 pounds. I work five days a week, don’t practice, and my numbers are as follows: 4i = 210, 7i = 170, and 54 = 105. I expect the BEST PLAYERS IN THE EFFING WORLD to hit it further than me, and do so more accurately. I relucted from commenting in this thread any further because my earlier points(s) seemed to be missed, or maybe I just didn’t explain them well enough. At any rate, what on earth is wrong with technology evolving/improving, as well as the ability of the players utilizing said technology?

>

> Good grief.

>

 

where did i say i had a problem with those yardages? good grief

[dmecca2]

> Back then he was the ONLY one maybe Daly too that could do that. Now, most of the field can. The equipment undoubtedly brought the masses to him. Make sense?

Or maybe the talent pool got bigger as more people became interested in the game and now the 50th ranked golfer today is worlds better than the 50th ranked golfer then.

 

[tobiasjd]

Drivers are a lot more forgiving but the biggest factor is the ball. You can swing out of your shoes today and keep it in the fairway. When I started golfing, I never used driver, EVER. The smallest mistake would spin that balata into the next county.

[wfrogge1]

It is more than the ball or the club. Johnny Miller said it best that back in his day you could hit a 7 iron 180 but they didn’t... golf back then was taught in a way where control and finesse were more important than power and speed. The newer generations are being taught to hit it as hard and fast as you can. You think there is a problem now? Wait until the current 16-19 year olds turn pro in a few years and are over 320 averages off the tee. They are hitting it this far with blade irons and three woods. You can find videos of Ricky Fowler hitting a balata ball and persimmon driver over 300 yards......

 

All this while the average amateur is hitting it no further and not scoring better with new equipment.....

 

Embrace the fact that the game has changed. It is what it is

[jmck]

> @dmecca2 said:

> > Back then he was the ONLY one maybe Daly too that could do that. Now, most of the field can. The equipment undoubtedly brought the masses to him. Make sense?

> Or maybe the talent pool got bigger as more people became interested in the game and now the 50th ranked golfer today is worlds better than the 50th ranked golfer then.

>

 

Citation needed. Participation numbers are up a little bit in Asia, but you wouldn't know that by looking at the tour. Meanwhile, in both the US and Europe, participation is down significantly since it peaked in '07-08 ish.

[dmecca2]

> Citation needed. Participation numbers are up a little bit in Asia, but you wouldn't know that by looking at the tour. Meanwhile, in both the US and Europe, participation is down significantly since it peaked in '07-08 ish.

Players are getting better. Just a quick look at scoring averages shows that the tour is deeper today than in say, 1996. In 2018, you dont see a scoring average of 71 until the 115th ranked golfer. In 1996, its the 67th ranked player.