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

[acemandrake]

Firm & fast will raise scores. The firmer the better.

[Mfitzrealestate]

These guys are just flat out great. Equipment helps, of course and always has. The development of the steel shaft changed the game dramatically bc people could practice. But for average joe there still aren’t a bunch of guys who can even consistently break 80! Now, Tiger made it cool and the money is amazing so guess what they start younger and the better physical athletes stay in golf rather than football or baseball.

 

PGA golf is a competition so give up on par, they already manipulate it on most us opens to 70 from 72 just to give the course a head start in a way. They didn’t do that either last week. 5 would absolutely be a par 4 in a major, that’s four shots to par right there. There is still a mix of courses that are for bombers and a few for control guys. Kuchar is no bomber. I count 11 guys in the 30 who aren’t bombers by today’s standards.

 

Nature is the only deterrent imo. Wind and dry hard courses. It was perfectly wet and still in chicago last week. Nature changed the tournament from a 12 under win to 25 under. Enjoy the best in the world.

[LICC]

@"Darth Putter" @Tony_Ireland @johnny biarritz, @Krt22 this is a more appropriate place for the discussion. DJ can put up a 310 carry any time he needs it. So can probably a fifteen or more Tour players. And in the right conditions, which don't need to be extreme, 330+

[RacineBoxer]

I wouldn't overreact to one tournament where the course was shredded. I don't feel like this has been the consensus all year.

 

I don't like the idea of rolling back the equipment. At least not for everyone. I'm a single digit handicap and the game is freaken hard enough. When I go on golf trips with my friends, some of the courses that are difficult are damn near too difficult (forced carries off th tee, hitting a perfect drive and still having 220 to an uphill par 4 with a breeze in your face, etc...). I checked out Billy Horschel's twitter based on a recommendation earlier in the thread "tight fairways, small greens, firm conditions. Can be 6,700 yards". Might be a slight exaggeration but I agree with the logic that courses should just be setup really tough for the tour pros. Narrow the fairways big time. If they're so accurate with the driver because it's so darn forgiving, make it harder to hit a fairway. Make the rough difficult. Someone else mentioned this too, if the tour pros are hitting the ball over the trees (for example dogleg left and JT hits a 3 wood over the trees, over the corner, and fades it back to the middle of the fairway), put the tee boxes CLOSER to the trees. You can't hit it over the trees if you don't have the room to elevate your shot. Tuck the tee to the left next to the trees and voila, the pro's are forced to play the dog leg conservatively (i.e. straight or out to the right) or hit a friggen draw.

 

Pro's have been blitzing course to more than -20 for decades. I wouldn't overreact too much to this event.

 

[carrier street]

His observation that the driver is the most forgiving club in the bag is spot on. I've never considered that before, but it's absolutely true.

If you are concerned with the score to par, make the facets of course meant to be penal actually that. A ton of people have said grow the rough, but bunkers are part of the problem too. The lies are so consistently perfect that players strategically aim for green side bunkers. It would be pretty easy, either through sand composition or the type of rake used, to make more balls sit down in the bunker.

[iutodd]

> @playar32 said:

> "Casual fans"

>

> If you look at every sport, or news outlet (pretty much everything on TV), they are trying to capture as many casual fans and viewing eyes as they can, to boost ratings, to get more money. Best way to do that is to simply the product. The NFL basically unlocked the system, and now everyone follows that plan. Think about the NFL, is it harder to explain to someone that a 9-6 game was great because the defenses play a good scheme or explain how a run play was good because all 11 people worked together. No, its easier for someone to pick up if its the QB throwing a 60 pass.

>

> Same with golf. Think about when you play, most don't come into the clubhouse talking about the "skillful round they put together to shoot 82" (which is good), they talk about the one big drive they hit on 13 on the way to a 105. Whats more exciting to someone who doesn't watch a lot of golf, listening to a 3 minute description of how a 260 yard drive was good because he played a draw off the tee to set to the pin location, or watching some guy pound it 300. Also, they always set it up; you'll hear about the 220 yard 5 irons, but not the 160 yard 5 iron with the wind in the face.

 

You're forgetting that TV is a visual medium. The addition of Protracer on basically every shot changes everything.

 

Because what is more visually interesting than watching a Tiger stinger with protracer? Didn't we all ooh and ahh over his stinger on 18 at the Players? Or what about...Ollie Schniederjans ridiculous stinger on 18 at the Wyndham? Or basically every single Bubba Watson shot? Or that Tony Finau gif when it didn't have pro tracer but he hit some ridiculous slice out of the trees and you could see the ball flight.

 

Watching dead straight drivers carry 315+ with protracer isn't all that visually interesting - or at least it's very much equal in terms of visual interest with the above shots. I personally would say the above stinger shots are a lot more interesting because we see them less.

 

Golfers talk about the shots they don't hit that often or CAN'T hit. The above gifs resonated because basically no one on earth can hit those shots like that except those two dudes (or other dudes on tour).

 

It's also why 60 yard touchdown passes resonate - basically nobody else can do it AND they are just plain fun to watch. "did you SEE THAT!"

 

Hell you could argue the single most exciting golf moment in history was Tiger's chip in on 16 at Augusta back in 2005. But you aren't gonna get that every week (or even every year/decade).

 

If golf wants to be like football and appeal to casual fans with the SPECTACLE of golf...make pro golfers hit shots that no one else can hit because that is what resonates and it's VISUAL now. I want to see big drives for sure - but I also want to see draws and fades and stingers and everything else and I think, because of Protracer - everyone else would want to see the same thing.

[Pepperturbo]

I agree 100% with Adam Scott. Tour golf has gotten out of hand, even boring. Tour stop courses need to be designed or set up in such a manner, ALL touring pros are forced to challenge themselves off the tee and from the rough, instead, the PGA coddles tour players by making them feel invincible, and make decisions to satisfy sponsors. The media mouths were more excited than many of us watching yesterday. I love golf but didn't watch most of the BMW because it was nearly boring. Not much in the way of actual shot-making, like Tiger, used to show us.

 

Yesterday, I had to laugh watching tour guys use 4 and 5 iron to hit moon-shots on that 248-yard Par 3, and reaching 600+ yard Par 5 in two and the second club was an iron or 3 wood. The PGA tour leadership is slowing making the professional aspect of the game look silly. These days the only people that remain fascinated by pros going 22 under and hitting 300+ drives on a 7700-yard course are people that don't understand the lengths to which the tour goes to create "these guys are good."

[dlygrisse]

> @c7015 said:

> Just change Par , problem solved

 

But that's not really the gist of this thread, score in relation to par is relative anyway. This thread is about how the skill has been taken out of driving.

1. you don't need to shape the ball any longer, and if you do you can just generally play one shot around the course.

2. you don't need to worry about taking spin off the drive into the wind. Into the wind? just bust it.

3. you don't need to worry about hitting fairways, bomb and gouge baby!

4. you dont need to decide if you are playing a ball that gives you more off the tee or more around the green

 

Adams point is that he feels he used to be a skilled driver, and it gave him an advantage. Now everyone just tees it up and kills it with no thought to shaping shots high/low/left/right, or hitting fairways.

 

[cardoustie]

The tour wants birdies, there lies the crux of the problem

Johnny Miller started this in the mid 1970's ... the world didn't end

[c7015]

> @dlygrisse said:

> > @c7015 said:

> > Just change Par , problem solved

>

> But that's not really the gist of this thread, score in relation to par is relative anyway. This thread is about how the skill has been taken out of driving.

> 1. you don't need to shape the ball any longer, and if you do you can just generally play one shot around the course.

> 2. you don't need to worry about taking spin off the drive into the wind. Into the wind? just bust it.

> 3. you don't need to worry about hitting fairways, bomb and gouge baby!

> 4. you dont need to decide if you are playing a ball that gives you more off the tee or more around the green

>

> Adams point is that he feels he used to be a skilled driver, and it gave him an advantage. Now everyone just tees it up and kills it with no thought to shaping shots high/low/left/right, or hitting fairways.

>

 

that is the gist

 

"Adam Scott says the art of driving will vanish from the PGA Tour and **scores will continue to blow out** unless officials do away with weak golf courses."

 

ok so all the par 5's at from last week are par 4's now. Was it a blowout score still? not enough driveable par 4's are now just long par 3's since these guys expect to make bird anyway. You can make all these mechanical changes to the game but the easiest & most affordable one is just changing what the expectation is for them.

 

“I’m not (surprised to see low scores at Medinah); if a golf course is soft we are just going to tear it apart,” Scott said."

 

Ok so if we know you are going to tear it apart we make the expectation of par lower when courses are soft.

 

 

[LICC]

> @Krt22 said:

> > @"Johnny Biarritz" said:

> > Go look at the longest drives on Tour for this season. The huge majority are from 3 courses...Kapalua (wind and downhill), Mexico City (over a mile of elevation), and the Safeway at Silverado in the 4th round on 4 different holes that all play the same direction on a day when winds were gusting up to 36mph out of the north. A few from Pebble on the 2nd hole (downhill and with the prevailing wind). Best I can tell, only 14 guys have hit drives that carried more than 330 yards this season using Trackman. That doesn't take into consideration downhill as far as I know, but (should) take into consideration elevation. Sorry, I'll have to take my boot off to count that high...I'd said I could count in on two hands.

>

> Yep, easy to cherry pick stats and rabble rabble rabble. I have some legit 340+ drives but they are always down wind/down hill.

 

If you don't think the long hitters are blasting drives 330+ then I don't think you are watching very closely. Anything under 600 yards and these guys are going for the green in two.

[Johnny Biarritz]

I never said they're not hitting drives that have a total distance over 330 yards. That's been going on for years. The original comment was about guys carrying the ball 330 yards and that's a complete different thing. When you take away extremely high wind days, significant downhill holes, and altitude, the number of drives that have a total distance of 330, much less carry 330, is relatively low. Somewhat common, but not exactly regular.

[smashdn]

Direct correlation to driving distance and money list.

 

If you were thinking of it in terms of six sigma, driving distance would be the first X and weighted most heavily to the outcome (Y). https://www.projectmanager.com/blog/yfx-six-sigma-formula

 

The question is, is the weighting of driving distance appropriate in relation to the other golf skills? How much more important should it be than say, putting or scrambling or accuracy or ability to move the ball?

 

This is just my opinion but I feel like we have to be mindful that we are talking about two sides of the same coin in a sense. What is good for the PGA Tour is not necessarily what is good for the "game of golf." The PGA Tour is in the entertainment business. They strive to give the consumer what they want so they can get eyes on their product which in turn translates to advertising dollars. If the consumer wants bombed drives and birdie fests that is what the Tour will give them.

 

Preserving the integrity of the game and keeping its founding ideals in place is not really what the aim of the Tour is. Who decided what those original principles and ideals are are long since dead. What the game means to me is not necessarily what it means to someone else. How I derive enjoyment is not the same as how you do. Some people chase a score. Others play matches and twosomes. Still others just want an excuse to go for a walk in nature. Some need an excuse to consume copious amounts of alcohol or something to wager on.

[Krt22]

> @LICC said:

> > @Krt22 said:

> > > @"Johnny Biarritz" said:

> > > Go look at the longest drives on Tour for this season. The huge majority are from 3 courses...Kapalua (wind and downhill), Mexico City (over a mile of elevation), and the Safeway at Silverado in the 4th round on 4 different holes that all play the same direction on a day when winds were gusting up to 36mph out of the north. A few from Pebble on the 2nd hole (downhill and with the prevailing wind). Best I can tell, only 14 guys have hit drives that carried more than 330 yards this season using Trackman. That doesn't take into consideration downhill as far as I know, but (should) take into consideration elevation. Sorry, I'll have to take my boot off to count that high...I'd said I could count in on two hands.

> >

> > Yep, easy to cherry pick stats and rabble rabble rabble. I have some legit 340+ drives but they are always down wind/down hill.

>

> If you don't think the long hitters are blasting drives 330+ then I don't think you are watching very closely. Anything under 600 yards and these guys are going for the green in two.

 

Carrying it 330 and having big drives due to conditions are two different things, at this point you are moving the goal posts to prove a non-existent point. I do watch and I fail to see what the issue is

 

Either way, who cares? Lowest score wins, why does it matter what that score is in relation to par? Roll back the ball, make the course tighter, grow the rough longer, the longer guys will still have an advantage.

[playar32]

> @iutodd said:

> > @playar32 said:

> > "Casual fans"

> >

> > If you look at every sport, or news outlet (pretty much everything on TV), they are trying to capture as many casual fans and viewing eyes as they can, to boost ratings, to get more money. Best way to do that is to simply the product. The NFL basically unlocked the system, and now everyone follows that plan. Think about the NFL, is it harder to explain to someone that a 9-6 game was great because the defenses play a good scheme or explain how a run play was good because all 11 people worked together. No, its easier for someone to pick up if its the QB throwing a 60 pass.

> >

> > Same with golf. Think about when you play, most don't come into the clubhouse talking about the "skillful round they put together to shoot 82" (which is good), they talk about the one big drive they hit on 13 on the way to a 105. Whats more exciting to someone who doesn't watch a lot of golf, listening to a 3 minute description of how a 260 yard drive was good because he played a draw off the tee to set to the pin location, or watching some guy pound it 300. Also, they always set it up; you'll hear about the 220 yard 5 irons, but not the 160 yard 5 iron with the wind in the face.

>

> You're forgetting that TV is a visual medium. The addition of Protracer on basically every shot changes everything.

>

> Because what is more visually interesting than watching a Tiger stinger with protracer? Didn't we all ooh and ahh over his stinger on 18 at the Players? Or what about...Ollie Schniederjans ridiculous stinger on 18 at the Wyndham? Or basically every single Bubba Watson shot? Or that Tony Finau gif when it didn't have pro tracer but he hit some ridiculous slice out of the trees and you could see the ball flight.

>

> Watching dead straight drivers carry 315+ with protracer isn't all that visually interesting - or at least it's very much equal in terms of visual interest with the above shots. I personally would say the above stinger shots are a lot more interesting because we see them less.

>

> Golfers talk about the shots they don't hit that often or CAN'T hit. The above gifs resonated because basically no one on earth can hit those shots like that except those two dudes (or other dudes on tour).

>

> It's also why 60 yard touchdown passes resonate - basically nobody else can do it AND they are just plain fun to watch. "did you SEE THAT!"

>

> **** you could argue the single most exciting golf moment in history was Tiger's chip in on 16 at Augusta back in 2005. But you aren't gonna get that every week (or even every year/decade).

>

> If golf wants to be like football and appeal to casual fans with the SPECTACLE of golf...make pro golfers hit shots that no one else can hit because that is what resonates and it's VISUAL now. I want to see big drives for sure - but I also want to see draws and fades and stingers and everything else and I think, because of Protracer - everyone else would want to see the same thing.

 

As a self-described hardcore golf fan, I absolutely enjoy the protracer and shot descriptions.

 

What I'm saying is, the more technical things get, the less people want to get involved in them. When I say football as an example, the game now is way different than when it first started, and it has been changing through the years, basically to get more eyeballs. It use to be more of a running game, defense was more of a part of the game, and you rarely threw the ball. They found out what fans liked, what they didn't, and worked it in from there (that's why QBs continually break the passing record). Imagine if you took someone who never saw a football game into one, think its easier to caught to "this guy throws it, this guy catches it, that's a score" or "this 3 yard run was good because the guard did a great job pulling, the center got a good block on the linebacker and the TE got a good hook on the DE." Think of how many people just go to a game to tailgate and drink. (Same basically with politics, and why they never talk candidates take on taxes).

 

Same with golf. They figured out that fans like Tiger and the long ball, you can't really make another Tiger, but you replicate the long ball. They want, this guy ripped a 4 iron into this 248 par 3, not a bunch of lay ups shots. For example, I remember in high school a guy on my team was trying to teach his girlfriend how to putt with break, and she couldn't get past why you just didn't hit it directly at the hole (he let her try one, she hit it way hard dead straight and it went in). Its just easier to understand, this guy is hitting it as hard and as far as he can, versus, his playing a draw off the tee, because the pins back right, so he wants to come in from that angle. I don't agree with effectively dumbing it down, but I understand the purpose.

 

 

[bscinstnct]

> @HoosierMizuno said:

> > @bscinstnct said:

> > Not sure why he is complaining. His accuracy has been ok to crappy over the years.

> >

> > And even then it’s his driving that makes him competitive considering he is pretty much always negative strokes gained putting.

>

> wouldn't adam scott's driving and ball striking ability be exactly why he's complaining. ball strikers aren't getting the advantage they feel they should have because the equipment of today has the ability to hide mishits better than ever. guys who can work the ball both ways and stripe their irons are being beat by guys who just bomb it off the tee and putt well.

 

Yes, but in Scott's case, his accuracy off the tee has been very poor.

 

2018-88th, 62%

2017-144th, 56%

2016-153rd, 55%

 

Koepka's driving accuracy is even worse, but in his case, he can putt.

 

AS still maintains great SG on approaches so his ball striking is being rewarded.

 

It's the *putting that's the difference between these two.

 

 

[LICC]

> @"Johnny Biarritz" said:

> I never said they're not hitting drives that have a total distance over 330 yards. That's been going on for years. The original comment was about guys carrying the ball 330 yards and that's a complete different thing. When you take away extremely high wind days, significant downhill holes, and altitude, the number of drives that have a total distance of 330, much less carry 330, is relatively low. Somewhat common, but not exactly regular.

 

First, you can't just eliminate downhill holes and wind, etc. These are the conditions they play in. Second, even in still, flat conditions, the longest hitters can get it out there pretty close. Third, the statement was about whether holes under 600 yards should be considered par-5s. They shouldn't as these guys play them to reach the greens in two almost every time.

[2over]

Again, good on you Adam Scott for speaking truth to power (if you'd just get rid of the broom stick you would be my forever golfing hero). Many good points on this thread. The two that I think have the most promise are 1) Steel head drivers under 200cc max length 43" (a modern 3 wood) which still goes along ways and can be very forgiving so it needs to be combined with 2) A new ball that spins like an old balata. It can still be urethane still have the current speed, but make sure it spins off the driver and irons like the old Titleist Tour Balata and I think we will all have more fun. The great old courses will be back in business. I think Scott's idea too with more doglegs and longer rough at the corners where the long hitters miss it and then the game is right where it needs to be to truly let the cream (skill-wise) rise to the top every week.

[dlygrisse]

> @c7015 said:

> > @dlygrisse said:

> > > @c7015 said:

> > > Just change Par , problem solved

> >

> > But that's not really the gist of this thread, score in relation to par is relative anyway. This thread is about how the skill has been taken out of driving.

> > 1. you don't need to shape the ball any longer, and if you do you can just generally play one shot around the course.

> > 2. you don't need to worry about taking spin off the drive into the wind. Into the wind? just bust it.

> > 3. you don't need to worry about hitting fairways, bomb and gouge baby!

> > 4. you dont need to decide if you are playing a ball that gives you more off the tee or more around the green

> >

> > Adams point is that he feels he used to be a skilled driver, and it gave him an advantage. Now everyone just tees it up and kills it with no thought to shaping shots high/low/left/right, or hitting fairways.

> >

>

> that is the gist

>

> "Adam Scott says the art of driving will vanish from the PGA Tour and **scores will continue to blow out** unless officials do away with weak golf courses."

>

> ok so all the par 5's at from last week are par 4's now. Was it a blowout score still? not enough driveable par 4's are now just long par 3's since these guys expect to make bird anyway. You can make all these mechanical changes to the game but the easiest & most affordable one is just changing what the expectation is for them.

>

> “I’m not (surprised to see low scores at Medinah); if a golf course is soft we are just going to tear it apart,” Scott said."

>

> Ok so if we know you are going to tear it apart we make the expectation of par lower when courses are soft.

>

>

 

Par is relative though. Whether you shoot 62 on a par 68 or a 62 on a par 72 you still shot a 62.

[Johnny Biarritz]

600 is a bit high for a par 4...but not much too high. Probably 570 or so.

[gvogel]

> @playar32 said:

> > @iutodd said:

> > > @playar32 said:

> > > "Casual fans"

> > >

> > > If you look at every sport, or news outlet (pretty much everything on TV), they are trying to capture as many casual fans and viewing eyes as they can, to boost ratings, to get more money. Best way to do that is to simply the product. The NFL basically unlocked the system, and now everyone follows that plan. Think about the NFL, is it harder to explain to someone that a 9-6 game was great because the defenses play a good scheme or explain how a run play was good because all 11 people worked together. No, its easier for someone to pick up if its the QB throwing a 60 pass.

> > >

> > > Same with golf. Think about when you play, most don't come into the clubhouse talking about the "skillful round they put together to shoot 82" (which is good), they talk about the one big drive they hit on 13 on the way to a 105. Whats more exciting to someone who doesn't watch a lot of golf, listening to a 3 minute description of how a 260 yard drive was good because he played a draw off the tee to set to the pin location, or watching some guy pound it 300. Also, they always set it up; you'll hear about the 220 yard 5 irons, but not the 160 yard 5 iron with the wind in the face.

> >

> > You're forgetting that TV is a visual medium. The addition of Protracer on basically every shot changes everything.

> >

> > Because what is more visually interesting than watching a Tiger stinger with protracer? Didn't we all ooh and ahh over his stinger on 18 at the Players? Or what about...Ollie Schniederjans ridiculous stinger on 18 at the Wyndham? Or basically every single Bubba Watson shot? Or that Tony Finau gif when it didn't have pro tracer but he hit some ridiculous slice out of the trees and you could see the ball flight.

> >

> > Watching dead straight drivers carry 315+ with protracer isn't all that visually interesting - or at least it's very much equal in terms of visual interest with the above shots. I personally would say the above stinger shots are a lot more interesting because we see them less.

> >

> > Golfers talk about the shots they don't hit that often or CAN'T hit. The above gifs resonated because basically no one on earth can hit those shots like that except those two dudes (or other dudes on tour).

> >

> > It's also why 60 yard touchdown passes resonate - basically nobody else can do it AND they are just plain fun to watch. "did you SEE THAT!"

> >

> > **** you could argue the single most exciting golf moment in history was Tiger's chip in on 16 at Augusta back in 2005. But you aren't gonna get that every week (or even every year/decade).

> >

> > If golf wants to be like football and appeal to casual fans with the SPECTACLE of golf...make pro golfers hit shots that no one else can hit because that is what resonates and it's VISUAL now. I want to see big drives for sure - but I also want to see draws and fades and stingers and everything else and I think, because of Protracer - everyone else would want to see the same thing.

>

> As a self-described hardcore golf fan, I absolutely enjoy the protracer and shot descriptions.

>

> What I'm saying is, the more technical things get, the less people want to get involved in them. When I say football as an example, the game now is way different than when it first started, and it has been changing through the years, basically to get more eyeballs. It use to be more of a running game, defense was more of a part of the game, and you rarely threw the ball. They found out what fans liked, what they didn't, and worked it in from there (that's why QBs continually break the passing record). Imagine if you took someone who never saw a football game into one, think its easier to caught to "this guy throws it, this guy catches it, that's a score" or "this 3 yard run was good because the guard did a great job pulling, the center got a good block on the linebacker and the TE got a good hook on the DE." Think of how many people just go to a game to tailgate and drink. (Same basically with politics, and why they never talk candidates take on taxes).

>

> Same with golf. **They figured out that fans like Tiger and the long ball,** you can't really make another Tiger, but you replicate the long ball. They want, this guy ripped a 4 iron into this 248 par 3, not a bunch of lay ups shots. For example, I remember in high school a guy on my team was trying to teach his girlfriend how to putt with break, and she couldn't get past why you just didn't hit it directly at the hole (he let her try one, she hit it way hard dead straight and it went in). Its just easier to understand, this guy is hitting it as hard and as far as he can, versus, his playing a draw off the tee, because the pins back right, so he wants to come in from that angle. I don't agree with effectively dumbing it down, but I understand the purpose.

>

>

I don't think that fans had anything to do with it. Most all golfers want to hit the ball a long way, because it helps us to score better. Golf equipment companies are in business to make a profit. Throw a whole bunch of aerospace engineers, who were looking for new jobs, into the mix, and golf equipment companies came out with products to help us hit the ball longer and straighter. Better golf balls, longer hitting drivers.

 

Well, funny thing. At the elite level, the game has been de-skilled. Some of us would like to see the pros tested more often on getting the ball into the fairway, and hitting longer irons into greens. Some of us miss the times that a pro, with a tournament on the line, might hit a truly bad shot. (I remember seeing Jay Haas hit a pop up 100 yards into the rough at a Ryder Cup in Rochester, with his driver. Nerves.)

 

I think it's time to let the masses play with modern equipment, and have a more challenging set of equipment specs for elite players.

[lowheel]

> @"carrier street" said:

> His observation that the driver is the most forgiving club in the bag is spot on. I've never considered that before, but it's absolutely true.

> If you are concerned with the score to par, make the facets of course meant to be penal actually that. A ton of people have said grow the rough, but bunkers are part of the problem too. The lies are so consistently perfect that players strategically aim for green side bunkers. It would be pretty easy, either through sand composition or the type of rake used, to make more balls sit down in the bunker.

 

when youre fitted properly at that level you have one way misses which makes the game even on your bad days infinitely easier. stenson dominated both tours using a 3 wood 80% of the time off the tee because hes an elite iron player. many ways to skin cat but bomb and gauge is here to stay especially now that 3 woods are going 275+ off the tee easily

[gvogel]

> @smashdn said:

> Direct correlation to driving distance and money list.

>

> If you were thinking of it in terms of six sigma, driving distance would be the first X and weighted most heavily to the outcome (Y). https://www.projectmanager.com/blog/yfx-six-sigma-formula

>

> The question is, is the weighting of driving distance appropriate in relation to the other golf skills? How much more important should it be than say, putting or scrambling or accuracy or ability to move the ball?

>

> This is just my opinion but I feel like we have to be mindful that we are talking about two sides of the same coin in a sense. What is good for the PGA Tour is not necessarily what is good for the "game of golf." The PGA Tour is in the entertainment business. They strive to give the consumer what they want so they can get eyes on their product which in turn translates to advertising dollars. If the consumer wants bombed drives and birdie fests that is what the Tour will give them.

>

> **Preserving the integrity of the game and keeping its founding ideals in place is not really what the aim of the Tour is. Who decided what those original principles and ideals are are long since dead.** What the game means to me is not necessarily what it means to someone else. How I derive enjoyment is not the same as how you do. Some people chase a score. Others play matches and twosomes. Still others just want an excuse to go for a walk in nature. Some need an excuse to consume copious amounts of alcohol or something to wager on.

 

No, there are people in the game who want to maintain playing values and principles. Fred Ridley, who runs Augusta National, has said as much. The club just bought a neighboring fairway from Augusta Country Club so that they can lengthen the 13th hole, if they have to. Because they realize that the 13th hole is playing no where near as difficult as it was designed to play, and as it played up until the modern equipment development. I'm pretty sure that Augusta National would like the USGA to change the equipment specs so that they can leave the 13th hole as is. But it the USGA doesn't act, I suspect that a "Masters ball" may be mandatory in a few years.

 

[bladehunter]

> @HoosierMizuno said:

> > @bscinstnct said:

> > Not sure why he is complaining. His accuracy has been ok to crappy over the years.

> >

> > And even then it’s his driving that makes him competitive considering he is pretty much always negative strokes gained putting.

>

> wouldn't adam scott's driving and ball striking ability be exactly why he's complaining. ball strikers aren't getting the advantage they feel they should have because the equipment of today has the ability to hide mishits better than ever. guys who can work the ball both ways and stripe their irons are being beat by guys who just bomb it off the tee and putt well.

 

BBbbbbbingo!

[Krt22]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @HoosierMizuno said:

> > > @bscinstnct said:

> > > Not sure why he is complaining. His accuracy has been ok to crappy over the years.

> > >

> > > And even then it’s his driving that makes him competitive considering he is pretty much always negative strokes gained putting.

> >

> > wouldn't adam scott's driving and ball striking ability be exactly why he's complaining. ball strikers aren't getting the advantage they feel they should have because the equipment of today has the ability to hide mishits better than ever. guys who can work the ball both ways and stripe their irons are being beat by guys who just bomb it off the tee and putt well.

>

> BBbbbbbingo!

 

Yep. Scott has not been in the winner's circle for some time because he can't putt worth a damn lol.

[smashdn]

> @gvogel said:

> > @smashdn said:

 

> > **Preserving the integrity of the game and keeping its founding ideals in place is not really what the aim of the Tour is. Who decided what those original principles and ideals are are long since dead.** What the game means to me is not necessarily what it means to someone else. How I derive enjoyment is not the same as how you do. Some people chase a score. Others play matches and twosomes. Still others just want an excuse to go for a walk in nature. Some need an excuse to consume copious amounts of alcohol or something to wager on.

>

> No, there are people in the game who want to maintain playing values and principles. Fred Ridley, who runs Augusta National, has said as much. The club just bought a neighboring fairway from Augusta Country Club so that they can lengthen the 13th hole, if they have to. Because they realize that the 13th hole is playing no where near as difficult as it was designed to play, and as it played up until the modern equipment development. I'm pretty sure that Augusta National would like the USGA to change the equipment specs so that they can leave the 13th hole as is. But it the USGA doesn't act, I suspect that a "Masters ball" may be mandatory in a few years.

>

 

I don't think you disagreed with what I was saying. The old Scots beating around a chunk of sheep poo with a hooked stick likely started this mess. They're dead. Maybe they would be all for perfectly manicured, uniform grass all around and laser leveled tee boxes or high performance sheep poo pellets. Their offspring put a piece of gutter pipe in the ground and then a flag to make it easier to see the target. Then they started crafting balls that flew further. In fact, the more I think about it, maybe we are heading right in the direction they intended. Screw it and let those guys go 50 under if they can. Par is made up anyway. Total score across four rounds and let score to par be what it is.

[extrastiff]

> @2over said:

> Again, good on you Adam Scott for speaking truth to power (if you'd just get rid of the broom stick you would be my forever golfing hero). Many good points on this thread. The two that I think have the most promise are 1) Steel head drivers under 200cc max length 43" (a modern 3 wood) which still goes along ways and can be very forgiving so it needs to be combined with 2) A new ball that spins like an old balata. It can still be urethane still have the current speed, but make sure it spins off the driver and irons like the old Titleist Tour Balata and I think we will all have more fun. The great old courses will be back in business. I think Scott's idea too with more doglegs and longer rough at the corners where the long hitters miss it and then the game is right where it needs to be to truly let the cream (skill-wise) rise to the top every week

 

golf course records were meant to be broken. let technology happen, it will be ok. anyone with half a brain will know that JT probably would not be shooting 61's with balata and wood shafts. but who cares.

What are the stats on eagles/hole in ones over time? cause i personally could give two #$@%"s if the guys are hitting driver/GW on every hole.once every hole is a hole-in-one, then we can talk. that might get boring. otherwise, seeing a golf course get picked apart is way more fun then watching people hack out of ridiculous rough. I will not value sam or jack or tiger any less. Tour golfers are, at the end of the day, playing each other with similar tools. thats all that matters in fair competition.

[LICC]

> @"Johnny Biarritz" said:

> 600 is a bit high for a par 4...but not much too high. Probably 570 or so.

 

These guys hit 5-irons 230. They hit fairway woods 280-290. Anything under 600 yards, unless the hole somehow forces a lay-up, is a par-4 for these guys.

[Krt22]

> @LICC said:

> > @"Johnny Biarritz" said:

> > 600 is a bit high for a par 4...but not much too high. Probably 570 or so.

>

> These guys hit 5-irons 230. They hit fairway woods 280-290. Anything under 600 yards, unless the hole somehow forces a lay-up, is a par-4 for these guys.

 

I ask again, what is your point? Why does it matter? Does the player with the fewest strokes not win every time? You covert a few more par 5s to 4s and a few 4s to 3s, guess what, the longest guys are still likely to win week in and week out. And rolling back the ball/equipment will only make it harder for the short knockers

[ryanarneson]

> @gvogel said:

> > @smashdn said:

> > Direct correlation to driving distance and money list.

> >

> > If you were thinking of it in terms of six sigma, driving distance would be the first X and weighted most heavily to the outcome (Y). https://www.projectmanager.com/blog/yfx-six-sigma-formula

> >

> > The question is, is the weighting of driving distance appropriate in relation to the other golf skills? How much more important should it be than say, putting or scrambling or accuracy or ability to move the ball?

> >

> > This is just my opinion but I feel like we have to be mindful that we are talking about two sides of the same coin in a sense. What is good for the PGA Tour is not necessarily what is good for the "game of golf." The PGA Tour is in the entertainment business. They strive to give the consumer what they want so they can get eyes on their product which in turn translates to advertising dollars. If the consumer wants bombed drives and birdie fests that is what the Tour will give them.

> >

> > **Preserving the integrity of the game and keeping its founding ideals in place is not really what the aim of the Tour is. Who decided what those original principles and ideals are are long since dead.** What the game means to me is not necessarily what it means to someone else. How I derive enjoyment is not the same as how you do. Some people chase a score. Others play matches and twosomes. Still others just want an excuse to go for a walk in nature. Some need an excuse to consume copious amounts of alcohol or something to wager on.

>

> No, there are people in the game who want to maintain playing values and principles. Fred Ridley, who runs Augusta National, has said as much. The club just bought a neighboring fairway from Augusta Country Club so that they can lengthen the 13th hole, if they have to. Because they realize that the 13th hole is playing no where near as difficult as it was designed to play, and as it played up until the modern equipment development. I'm pretty sure that Augusta National would like the USGA to change the equipment specs so that they can leave the 13th hole as is. But it the USGA doesn't act, I suspect that a "Masters ball" may be mandatory in a few years.

>

 

And Adam Scott just said that lengthening the course isn't the answer. Not one bit.

 

Medinah has been lengthened multiple times over the years and the Pros just keep going lower.

 

1975 US Open - Less than 7000 yards, winning score +3

1990 US Open - 7195 yards, winning score -8.

1999 PGA - 7462 yards, winning score -11

2006 PGA - 7563 yards, winning score -18

2019 BMW - 7651 yards, multiple course records set, winning score -25.

 

Augusta is solving the wrong problem.