Power on the PGA Tour......

[gvogel]

A day without comments in this thread - boring.

 

Glad someone brought it back to life. B)

[rangersgoalie]

LICC

You and I likely will not agree,

But in your opinion, what % of rollback, whether ball or equipment would you like to see for the Tour?

[LICC]

> @rangersgoalie said:

> LICC

> You and I likely will not agree,

> But in your opinion, what % of rollback, whether ball or equipment would you like to see for the Tour?

 

I’m not in the rollback camp. I think if they did it 20 years ago it would have worked, but the genie is out of the bottle by now. But if they did do a bifurcation or rollback, I would call for whatever amount makes a 300 yard drive impressive again. So that no more than 5 players or so average 300 or more.

[Shilgy]

> @Irishman1979 said:

> > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > I am convinced the tour vans juice up the clubs depending on what course they are playing for the week. If a course has really long par 3's that require carry you know for a fact they will turn a 6 iron into a 3 iron.

> >

> > Hahaha! The funny thing is I actually play with a few guys who say and believe things like that. "The pros' lofts are all jacked. Their 6-irons are more like my 4-iron." . . . as he pulls out his TM M5 6 iron. Yeah, Ted. You're right. It can't have anything to do with them turning their 6-irons into 4-irons at impact, and you turning your 4-iron into a 6-iron at impact.

>

> Sorry to break it to you but not all lofts are the same on each set out there that are being played. The tour vans can easily strengthen the lofts so they can hit it farther if needed from week to week.

>

> This isn't science fiction, its reality in todays game. Especially like the above poster stated that they continue to stretch out courses.

 

Why would any good player want their clubs going different yardages each week? A good player wants to KNOW how far each shot will go. Not hit it as far as possible.

[bladehunter]

> @Shilgy said:

> > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > > I am convinced the tour vans juice up the clubs depending on what course they are playing for the week. If a course has really long par 3's that require carry you know for a fact they will turn a 6 iron into a 3 iron.

> > >

> > > Hahaha! The funny thing is I actually play with a few guys who say and believe things like that. "The pros' lofts are all jacked. Their 6-irons are more like my 4-iron." . . . as he pulls out his TM M5 6 iron. Yeah, Ted. You're right. It can't have anything to do with them turning their 6-irons into 4-irons at impact, and you turning your 4-iron into a 6-iron at impact.

> >

> > Sorry to break it to you but not all lofts are the same on each set out there that are being played. The tour vans can easily strengthen the lofts so they can hit it farther if needed from week to week.

> >

> > This isn't science fiction, its reality in todays game. Especially like the above poster stated that they continue to stretch out courses.

>

> Why would any good player want their clubs going different yardages each week? A good player wants to KNOW how far each shot will go. Not hit it as far as possible.

 

Exactly.

 

Comments like those make me want to swap sides in this. Lol.

 

 

I’ll add a little tid bit. Taking your MB pitching wedge and bending it to 40 degrees won’t make it an 8 iron. Nor will it add 2 clubs distance. ( if it doesn’t break ). It’s not a 1to1 raise in performance. Contrary to popular belief. Shaft length and bounce ( turf interaction ) does mattter. And youd be lacking any performance gain in both. It’s much easier and more effective to just hit the 8 iron.

[smashdn]

> @Titleist99 said:

> > @smashdn said:

> > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > I was watching the Mayakoba tournament today and i saw something that is more rare than an albatross on the PGA Tour, it's called a high lip

> > > bunker. A high lip bunker is a bunker that is so high on the front side that if a player enter into it he/she can not reach the green on the next sht.

> > > How 'bout that for a novel idea.....won't see that on the tour for awhile! Imagine if you had a few of those out on the course at oh say ..300 yards......LOL!

> >

> > Didn't you say in the other thread you didn't want to make changes because it would inevitably trickle down to your game? How does a bunker designed to challenge the pros one week per year not fit into that category?

> >

> > That is the exact mindset that I am trying to avoid, making changes to the courses in order to "challenge the pros" when it would be much simpler and less invasive to everyone to change just their equipment.

>

> No I did not say that....point #1...What I said is that I did not want a rollback that would shorten the distance of the high handicaper because he suffers from a shortage as it is. Point #2..... a bunker at 300 will not affect me at all because I don't drive it that far..

> point #3....I was just pointing out another way to slow down the Tour boys by adding high lip bunkers. Point #4.....name me a great golf course that hasn't had a redesign or two,,,, Many redesigned by Jack Nicklaus.

>

> My position is well known...……..Just toughen up the golf courses......put up the water hoses, raise the mowers, make the bunkers penal.

> **The next time you attempt to quote me ....please get it right Sir. **

>

>

> Regards,

 

I wasn't quoting you or attempting to quote you. In fact I posed it as a question because I wasn't even sure if it was you who said it.

 

If a high handicapper, who isn't hitting it far anyway, is not getting the most from today's technology would they even really see a difference if there was a change?

 

A bunker at 300 yards from the tees that they would play a tour event would put it where exactly from a forward box? Are you saying that you would also play the tee boxes that they would play a tour event from?

 

I think I understand your point now. I am just pointing out the folly of saying in essence you don't want changes because it would effect high handicappers but then advocating for changes to the courses that would effect all players regardless of handicap level. Making these changes for a week event doesn't mean the changes only exist for that one week. It takes a tremendous amount of time, effort and cost to change mowing lines and grow rough. If say you had an event in June you would be messing with the mowing heights in probably March or April and then slowly bringing it back down until probably August. That assumes you actually have grasses varieties that are actively growing during those months and that you can cut it without stressing it to death. That also assumes that the weather cooperates.

 

A high lipped bunker, regardless of where it is on the course is subject to a high handicap player getting into it at any point. They may dribble their tee shot and then have that fairway bunker at 150 yards. The spectrum of abilities from the players at the lowest end of ability to the uppermost is so widely spread that I don't think any course can accommodate the lower end while holding the interest of the upper end. And vice versa a course that actually challenges the upper end would be unplayable for a high handicapper. < BUT courses that do this the best are typically the links courses of GB&I and subject to the vagaries of weather and wind.

 

Or you can adapt the equipment of that subset to provide the challenge.

[smashdn]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @Shilgy said:

> > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > > > I am convinced the tour vans juice up the clubs depending on what course they are playing for the week. If a course has really long par 3's that require carry you know for a fact they will turn a 6 iron into a 3 iron.

> > > >

> > > > Hahaha! The funny thing is I actually play with a few guys who say and believe things like that. "The pros' lofts are all jacked. Their 6-irons are more like my 4-iron." . . . as he pulls out his TM M5 6 iron. Yeah, Ted. You're right. It can't have anything to do with them turning their 6-irons into 4-irons at impact, and you turning your 4-iron into a 6-iron at impact.

> > >

> > > Sorry to break it to you but not all lofts are the same on each set out there that are being played. The tour vans can easily strengthen the lofts so they can hit it farther if needed from week to week.

> > >

> > > This isn't science fiction, its reality in todays game. Especially like the above poster stated that they continue to stretch out courses.

> >

> > Why would any good player want their clubs going different yardages each week? A good player wants to KNOW how far each shot will go. Not hit it as far as possible.

>

> Exactly.

>

> Comments like those make me want to swap sides in this. Lol.

>

>

> I’ll add a little tid bit. Taking your MB pitching wedge and bending it to 40 degrees won’t make it an 8 iron. Nor will it add 2 clubs distance. ( if it doesn’t break ). It’s not a 1to1 raise in performance. Contrary to popular belief. Shaft length and bounce ( turf interaction ) does mattter. And youd be lacking any performance gain in both. It’s much easier and more effective to just hit the 8 iron.

 

Supposedly Hogan's personal irons were not gapped evenly at all. Some were very close together and others very far apart. He played by feel and what he felt and how he actually hit the club was more important than what measured loft was.

 

Just a tidbit of info.

[bladehunter]

> @smashdn said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @Shilgy said:

> > > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > > > @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> > > > > > @Irishman1979 said:

> > > > > > I am convinced the tour vans juice up the clubs depending on what course they are playing for the week. If a course has really long par 3's that require carry you know for a fact they will turn a 6 iron into a 3 iron.

> > > > >

> > > > > Hahaha! The funny thing is I actually play with a few guys who say and believe things like that. "The pros' lofts are all jacked. Their 6-irons are more like my 4-iron." . . . as he pulls out his TM M5 6 iron. Yeah, Ted. You're right. It can't have anything to do with them turning their 6-irons into 4-irons at impact, and you turning your 4-iron into a 6-iron at impact.

> > > >

> > > > Sorry to break it to you but not all lofts are the same on each set out there that are being played. The tour vans can easily strengthen the lofts so they can hit it farther if needed from week to week.

> > > >

> > > > This isn't science fiction, its reality in todays game. Especially like the above poster stated that they continue to stretch out courses.

> > >

> > > Why would any good player want their clubs going different yardages each week? A good player wants to KNOW how far each shot will go. Not hit it as far as possible.

> >

> > Exactly.

> >

> > Comments like those make me want to swap sides in this. Lol.

> >

> >

> > I’ll add a little tid bit. Taking your MB pitching wedge and bending it to 40 degrees won’t make it an 8 iron. Nor will it add 2 clubs distance. ( if it doesn’t break ). It’s not a 1to1 raise in performance. Contrary to popular belief. Shaft length and bounce ( turf interaction ) does mattter. And youd be lacking any performance gain in both. It’s much easier and more effective to just hit the 8 iron.

>

> Supposedly Hogan's personal irons were not gapped evenly at all. Some were very close together and others very far apart. He played by feel and what he felt and how he actually hit the club was more important than what measured loft was.

>

> Just a tidbit of info.

 

Yes. But that’s the gapping that’s being referred to. Not loft gaps. My irons are similar. My pw is strong. Why ? I like to flight the ball , and it gaps distance r wise with 9 iron better. it also has much more leading edge grind than 9 iron. To aide in tight pitches.

[Titleist99]

> @smashdn said:

> > @Titleist99 said:

> > > @smashdn said:

> > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > I was watching the Mayakoba tournament today and i saw something that is more rare than an albatross on the PGA Tour, it's called a high lip

> > > > bunker. A high lip bunker is a bunker that is so high on the front side that if a player enter into it he/she can not reach the green on the next sht.

> > > > How 'bout that for a novel idea.....won't see that on the tour for awhile! Imagine if you had a few of those out on the course at oh say ..300 yards......LOL!

> > >

> > > Didn't you say in the other thread you didn't want to make changes because it would inevitably trickle down to your game? How does a bunker designed to challenge the pros one week per year not fit into that category?

> > >

> > > That is the exact mindset that I am trying to avoid, making changes to the courses in order to "challenge the pros" when it would be much simpler and less invasive to everyone to change just their equipment.

> >

> > No I did not say that....point #1...What I said is that I did not want a rollback that would shorten the distance of the high handicaper because he suffers from a shortage as it is. Point #2..... a bunker at 300 will not affect me at all because I don't drive it that far..

> > point #3....I was just pointing out another way to slow down the Tour boys by adding high lip bunkers. Point #4.....name me a great golf course that hasn't had a redesign or two,,,, Many redesigned by Jack Nicklaus.

> >

> > My position is well known...……..Just toughen up the golf courses......put up the water hoses, raise the mowers, make the bunkers penal.

> > **The next time you attempt to quote me ....please get it right Sir. **

> >

> >

> > Regards,

>

> I wasn't quoting you or attempting to quote you. In fact I posed it as a question because I wasn't even sure if it was you who said it.

>

> If a high handicapper, who isn't hitting it far anyway, is not getting the most from today's technology would they even really see a difference if there was a change?

>

> A bunker at 300 yards from the tees that they would play a tour event would put it where exactly from a forward box? Are you saying that you would also play the tee boxes that they would play a tour event from?

>

> I think I understand your point now. I am just pointing out the folly of saying in essence you don't want changes because it would effect high handicappers but then advocating for changes to the courses that would effect all players regardless of handicap level. Making these changes for a week event doesn't mean the changes only exist for that one week. It takes a tremendous amount of time, effort and cost to change mowing lines and grow rough. If say you had an event in June you would be messing with the mowing heights in probably March or April and then slowly bringing it back down until probably August. That assumes you actually have grasses varieties that are actively growing during those months and that you can cut it without stressing it to death. That also assumes that the weather cooperates.

>

> A high lipped bunker, regardless of where it is on the course is subject to a high handicap player getting into it at any point. They may dribble their tee shot and then have that fairway bunker at 150 yards. The spectrum of abilities from the players at the lowest end of ability to the uppermost is so widely spread that I don't think any course can accommodate the lower end while holding the interest of the upper end. And vice versa a course that actually challenges the upper end would be unplayable for a high handicapper. < BUT courses that do this the best are typically the links courses of GB&I and subject to the vagaries of weather and wind.

>

> Or you can adapt the equipment of that subset to provide the challenge.

 

> > @Titleist99 said:

> > > @smashdn said:

> > > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > I was watching the Mayakoba tournament today and i saw something that is more rare than an albatross on the PGA Tour, it's called a high lip

> > > > bunker. A high lip bunker is a bunker that is so high on the front side that if a player enter into it he/she can not reach the green on the next sht.

> > > > How 'bout that for a novel idea.....won't see that on the tour for awhile! Imagine if you had a few of those out on the course at oh say ..300 yards......LOL!

> > >

> > > Didn't you say in the other thread you didn't want to make changes because it would inevitably trickle down to your game? How does a bunker designed to challenge the pros one week per year not fit into that category?

> > >

> > > That is the exact mindset that I am trying to avoid, making changes to the courses in order to "challenge the pros" when it would be much simpler and less invasive to everyone to change just their equipment.

> >

> > No I did not say that....point #1...What I said is that I did not want a rollback that would shorten the distance of the high handicaper because he suffers from a shortage as it is. Point #2..... a bunker at 300 will not affect me at all because I don't drive it that far..

> > point #3....I was just pointing out another way to slow down the Tour boys by adding high lip bunkers. Point #4.....name me a great golf course that hasn't had a redesign or two,,,, Many redesigned by Jack Nicklaus.

> >

> > My position is well known...……..Just toughen up the golf courses......put up the water hoses, raise the mowers, make the bunkers penal.

> > **The next time you attempt to quote me ....please get it right Sir. **

> >

> >

> > Regards,

>

> I wasn't quoting you or attempting to quote you. In fact I posed it as a question because I wasn't even sure if it was you who said it.

>

> If a high handicapper, who isn't hitting it far anyway, is not getting the most from today's technology would they even really see a difference if there was a change?

>

> A bunker at 300 yards from the tees that they would play a tour event would put it where exactly from a forward box? Are you saying that you would also play the tee boxes that they would play a tour event from?

>

> I think I understand your point now. I am just pointing out the folly of saying in essence you don't want changes because it would effect high handicappers but then advocating for changes to the courses that would effect all players regardless of handicap level. Making these changes for a week event doesn't mean the changes only exist for that one week. It takes a tremendous amount of time, effort and cost to change mowing lines and grow rough. If say you had an event in June you would be messing with the mowing heights in probably March or April and then slowly bringing it back down until probably August. That assumes you actually have grasses varieties that are actively growing during those months and that you can cut it without stressing it to death. That also assumes that the weather cooperates.

>

> A high lipped bunker, regardless of where it is on the course is subject to a high handicap player getting into it at any point. They may dribble their tee shot and then have that fairway bunker at 150 yards. The spectrum of abilities from the players at the lowest end of ability to the uppermost is so widely spread that I don't think any course can accommodate the lower end while holding the interest of the upper end. And vice versa a course that actually challenges the upper end would be unplayable for a high handicapper. < BUT courses that do this the best are typically the links courses of GB&I and subject to the vagaries of weather and wind.

>

> Or you can adapt the equipment of that subset to provide the challenge.

 

 

 

Please excuse me if I mistook you for many other posters on this board that put words in peoples mouth to make their own point. Lets address your issues because I see you advocate an equipment modification....I am assuming that the high-handicapper is getting as much of a boost in relationship with his slow swing speed as the Touring Pro, so to deny the pro would affect players down the line and those are the ones that can least afford it. Assuming that a high - handicapper plays his appropriate tees the 300 yard bunker would not affect him because he thinks that he hits its it 260 when in reality he hits it 220 (based on my experience). At my golf course the greens are mowed rolled every day, the tee boxes and fairway are mowed every other day and the rough is mowed every 5-6 days and all in sections depending on the help....they can easily control the rough with watering and cutting. As far as the bunkers are concerned everyone enters at their own peril.

 

 

 

Facts to consider before changing the game and changing the equipment:

 

Point #1 ....We're talking 300 PGATOUR players and 200 Euro Tour players.

 

Point #2 .....The elite player has only gained 40 yards in 40 years.

 

 

Point #3 ...... 90% of high-handicappers can't break 90. Certainly don't want to take any distance away from them.

 

We already have measures in place to monitor Power on the tour...Besides, the PGA TOUR love these guys bombing it!

 

 

Regards,

 

 

[BNGL]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @BNGL said:

> > and here’s a fun fact not a lot people know, there used to be a different ball golfers played when the went to British Open, or played in Europe. > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > @BNGL said:

> > > > From a pure length perspective no course can be built long enough to test a PGA Tour player lest you’re going 10k yards plus. That’s consensus from a handful of golf architects (the ones doing the work) that work for Coore/Crenshaw, Nicklaus Design, Arnold Palmer Design. > @Golfjack said:

> > > > > Why does it matter what courses the Pro's play at? It doesn't affect regular joes. How many times have most of us come up to a course that is short and shot under par? Until I'm just shooting under par at those short courses I'm not complaining. For the courses that want to host tournaments they just need to tighten the fairways and grow the rough and make the tournaments boring (which they will not). Instead they just keep making it longer.

> > > >

> > > > It affects a few on this site that live for this.> @gvogel said:

> > > > > > @Golfjack said:

> > > > > > > @bscinstnct said:

> > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > > > > > > > And Raymon Floyd won the masters in 1976 with a score of -17, only 1 stroke lower that the record set by Tiger in 1997 and matched by Spieth in 2015.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Spieth was T78 in distance at 291 yards at the time.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Driving distance stats only go back to 1980, so I can’t go to 76, but in 80, Floyd was T78 at 258 yards. Course played 7030 yards in 1976. It played 6925 in 1997, when Tiger averaged 40 yards longer, and yet he only scored 1 stroke better.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > Again, distance isn’t the boogie man people want it to be.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > And Augusta was 450 yards shorter in 1976 than it is today. The average driving distance on Tour back then was probably about 255 with the leader probably around 275. Distance from modern equipment has fundamentally changed how these courses are played by the Tour and have required them to add substantially more length.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > If the profile of the *winner has remained unchanged. If just as many guys who win majors with shorter but accurate driving, great irons, and putting, as guys who bomb the ball.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > If the fundamental skills and play required to win championship golf tournaments has remained unchanged.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > That shoots down the argument that, while courses are lengthened, the nature of the game and the way courses are played has actually changed.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > We actually saw a decrease in driving distance from 2018 to 2019 on the pga tour. Not cause guys can’t hit it farther. There’s just a point where distance over accuracy stops working.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Like I’ve said before, JB Holmes came out on tour, no problem carrying 330. He averaged like 320. But he couldn’t win. So, he toned it down, went to a fade, and dropped his driving distance substantially. And the poor guy still can’t win a major ; )

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Exactly. They are lengthening the courses to maintain the integrity. Trying to keep the average pro to have to hit a mid iron into a par 4. There's always going to be the power players. If they can combine power and accuracy, good for them! They should dominate courses. Don't punish guys for being good! Imagine when Jack was dominating, and people would be like oh he's not winning cuz he's good, just hits it really far. Come on now. We want more and better athletes to play the game, not less.

> > > > >

> > > > > Instead of lengthening the courses, they could shorten the ball to maintain the integrity. Which is> @ebrasmus21 said:

> > > > > > @bscinstnct said:

> > > > > > > @ebrasmus21 said:

> > > > > > > It’s 460cc you guys. Think about that.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > 460cc. Am I the only one who gets that, I feel like I’m taking crazy pills.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Jack could do more with a wooden spatula than these modern “pros”

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Now, this is a good point. For a pro is like

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > >

> > > > > With all the multiple threads on this topic I still have some unanswered questions. In no particular order:

> > > > >

> > > > > 1. Is Tiger Better then Jack?

> > > > > 2. Did the old pros “play with power”?

> > > > > 3. Would Jack be a bomber with modern technology?

> > > > > 4. Is distance ruining the game?

> > > > > 5. Is distance helping the game?

> > > > > 5. Does fitness matter?

> > > > > 6. Does technology matter

> > > > > 7. Does agronomy matter?

> > > > >

> > > > > With all these threads it still seems like no one can agree on anything!! Cheers to that :)

> > > >

> > > > Since no one agrees I’ll grace y’all with the answers...

> > > >

> > > > 1. Yes. Jack will admit it...best way to describe it; Tigers currently is the greatest player, Jack is the greatest champion.

> > > > 2. Yes. Just as some are longer than others today, some were longer than others yesterday.

> > > > 3. Yes. Would he still be Jack Nicklaus; obviously. But would he win 18 majors? Probably not.

> > > > 4. Depends, I’m of the opinion that it evolves.

> > > > 5. Helping how? Designers make more money absolutely. Players enjoying the game? I’m not so sure.

> > > > 5b. Yes.

> > > > 6. How would it not matter?

> > > > 7. F***ing right it plays a role, it is trending towards getting out of hand.

> > >

> > > It's all about the debate my friend. Trying to convince others by presenting facts and opinion in a civilized manor.....without it we are just chimpanzees.

> >

> > While I agree with your sentiment, I think we have very different ideas of what “debate” is. This is all moot to the thread and possibly over the head of many, so carry on, but here’s where I think y’all are wrong and need to improve to convince people and actually make a change (which is the whole point of trying to convince someone).

> >

> > There’s three parts to a debate; a thesis, antithesis, and synthesis (abstract, negation, concrete if you follow Hegel). The abstract starts off totally acceptable, however it’s when the negations are presented that I am quite puzzled, because I don’t see a logical negation/antithesis put forward. What I see/read is purely subjective, and when those answers are used your derive answers...those are purely rhetorical not logical, making the synthesis/concrete derived indefensible against any variation of other synthesis’ presented, YET it will be spouted off as gospel. That’s the problem I have and see with these distance debates lately.

> >

> > By no means do I have all the answers, but I am still waiting to find one purely objective answer saying the ball goes to far rendering courses obsolete. Mind you I worked at some of the best clubs in the world, played them, and even been fortunate enough to take up membership at some. Have there been some grumblings? Sure. But we made changes and evolved to meet the challenge of the day. Now whether or not those changes are sustainable...eh I earned many fat bonuses from successful projects whether I agreed or didn’t agree with them.

> >

> >

>

> I agree with this in a lot of ways.

>

>

> But I think it goes for both sides. I’ve seen no real objective , concrete answer as to why the rollback would kill the game either. Lots of opinion. But no study or poll or anything has been posted. Which is why I’ve repeatedly stated that both sides are self serving ( myself absolutely) in those OPINIONS.... and that is met with down right rage. I’m not sure why?

 

Oh 1000 percent it does. I have zero opinion on it truly I’m trying to get every yard that I can out of game. And big name designers, like Jack for example, that talk about golf getting too long nowadays are talking out of both sides of their mouths. Jacks made a nice career, Possibly more than he ever made designing the initial property, reworking his championship properties > @NJpatbee said:

> Course design and not just length add to the difficulty of a course. Pine Valley will never host a pro tournament beacuse of their inability to handle the crowds, I would speculate that even the regular tees would be a challenge for the PGA Tour pros. The Champiosnhip Tees would be a bear. Now, I have never played there but I am available if any member wishes to invite me!

>

> Pine Valley Slope, Rating, and Yardage as of 2010

>

> Championship Tees

> Slope 155

> Rating 75.6

> Yardage 7057

> Par 70

>

> Regular Tees

> Slope 153

> Rating 72.8

> Yardage 6532

> Par 70

>

 

Not to be that guy, but strictly off numbers (ratings/slope) Medalist is tougher, 155/77.9. Tiger and Rickie have both shot 62 there.

 

If PV were to host an event, you’d see a winner averaging in the mid teens regularly, the pack would be high single digits low double digits. Cut would be 2-3 under easily.

[Titleist99]

> @BNGL said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @BNGL said:

> > > and here’s a fun fact not a lot people know, there used to be a different ball golfers played when the went to British Open, or played in Europe. > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > > @BNGL said:

> > > > > From a pure length perspective no course can be built long enough to test a PGA Tour player lest you’re going 10k yards plus. That’s consensus from a handful of golf architects (the ones doing the work) that work for Coore/Crenshaw, Nicklaus Design, Arnold Palmer Design. > @Golfjack said:

> > > > > > Why does it matter what courses the Pro's play at? It doesn't affect regular joes. How many times have most of us come up to a course that is short and shot under par? Until I'm just shooting under par at those short courses I'm not complaining. For the courses that want to host tournaments they just need to tighten the fairways and grow the rough and make the tournaments boring (which they will not). Instead they just keep making it longer.

> > > > >

> > > > > It affects a few on this site that live for this.> @gvogel said:

> > > > > > > @Golfjack said:

> > > > > > > > @bscinstnct said:

> > > > > > > > > @LICC said:

> > > > > > > > > > @bigred90gt said:

> > > > > > > > > > And Raymon Floyd won the masters in 1976 with a score of -17, only 1 stroke lower that the record set by Tiger in 1997 and matched by Spieth in 2015.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Spieth was T78 in distance at 291 yards at the time.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Driving distance stats only go back to 1980, so I can’t go to 76, but in 80, Floyd was T78 at 258 yards. Course played 7030 yards in 1976. It played 6925 in 1997, when Tiger averaged 40 yards longer, and yet he only scored 1 stroke better.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Again, distance isn’t the boogie man people want it to be.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > And Augusta was 450 yards shorter in 1976 than it is today. The average driving distance on Tour back then was probably about 255 with the leader probably around 275. Distance from modern equipment has fundamentally changed how these courses are played by the Tour and have required them to add substantially more length.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > If the profile of the *winner has remained unchanged. If just as many guys who win majors with shorter but accurate driving, great irons, and putting, as guys who bomb the ball.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > If the fundamental skills and play required to win championship golf tournaments has remained unchanged.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > That shoots down the argument that, while courses are lengthened, the nature of the game and the way courses are played has actually changed.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > We actually saw a decrease in driving distance from 2018 to 2019 on the pga tour. Not cause guys can’t hit it farther. There’s just a point where distance over accuracy stops working.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Like I’ve said before, JB Holmes came out on tour, no problem carrying 330. He averaged like 320. But he couldn’t win. So, he toned it down, went to a fade, and dropped his driving distance substantially. And the poor guy still can’t win a major ; )

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Exactly. They are lengthening the courses to maintain the integrity. Trying to keep the average pro to have to hit a mid iron into a par 4. There's always going to be the power players. If they can combine power and accuracy, good for them! They should dominate courses. Don't punish guys for being good! Imagine when Jack was dominating, and people would be like oh he's not winning cuz he's good, just hits it really far. Come on now. We want more and better athletes to play the game, not less.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Instead of lengthening the courses, they could shorten the ball to maintain the integrity. Which is> @ebrasmus21 said:

> > > > > > > @bscinstnct said:

> > > > > > > > @ebrasmus21 said:

> > > > > > > > It’s 460cc you guys. Think about that.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > 460cc. Am I the only one who gets that, I feel like I’m taking crazy pills.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Jack could do more with a wooden spatula than these modern “pros”

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Now, this is a good point. For a pro is like

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > >

> > > > > >

> > > > > > With all the multiple threads on this topic I still have some unanswered questions. In no particular order:

> > > > > >

> > > > > > 1. Is Tiger Better then Jack?

> > > > > > 2. Did the old pros “play with power”?

> > > > > > 3. Would Jack be a bomber with modern technology?

> > > > > > 4. Is distance ruining the game?

> > > > > > 5. Is distance helping the game?

> > > > > > 5. Does fitness matter?

> > > > > > 6. Does technology matter

> > > > > > 7. Does agronomy matter?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > With all these threads it still seems like no one can agree on anything!! Cheers to that :)

> > > > >

> > > > > Since no one agrees I’ll grace y’all with the answers...

> > > > >

> > > > > 1. Yes. Jack will admit it...best way to describe it; Tigers currently is the greatest player, Jack is the greatest champion.

> > > > > 2. Yes. Just as some are longer than others today, some were longer than others yesterday.

> > > > > 3. Yes. Would he still be Jack Nicklaus; obviously. But would he win 18 majors? Probably not.

> > > > > 4. Depends, I’m of the opinion that it evolves.

> > > > > 5. Helping how? Designers make more money absolutely. Players enjoying the game? I’m not so sure.

> > > > > 5b. Yes.

> > > > > 6. How would it not matter?

> > > > > 7. F***ing right it plays a role, it is trending towards getting out of hand.

> > > >

> > > > It's all about the debate my friend. Trying to convince others by presenting facts and opinion in a civilized manor.....without it we are just chimpanzees.

> > >

> > > While I agree with your sentiment, I think we have very different ideas of what “debate” is. This is all moot to the thread and possibly over the head of many, so carry on, but here’s where I think y’all are wrong and need to improve to convince people and actually make a change (which is the whole point of trying to convince someone).

> > >

> > > There’s three parts to a debate; a thesis, antithesis, and synthesis (abstract, negation, concrete if you follow Hegel). The abstract starts off totally acceptable, however it’s when the negations are presented that I am quite puzzled, because I don’t see a logical negation/antithesis put forward. What I see/read is purely subjective, and when those answers are used your derive answers...those are purely rhetorical not logical, making the synthesis/concrete derived indefensible against any variation of other synthesis’ presented, YET it will be spouted off as gospel. That’s the problem I have and see with these distance debates lately.

> > >

> > > By no means do I have all the answers, but I am still waiting to find one purely objective answer saying the ball goes to far rendering courses obsolete. Mind you I worked at some of the best clubs in the world, played them, and even been fortunate enough to take up membership at some. Have there been some grumblings? Sure. But we made changes and evolved to meet the challenge of the day. Now whether or not those changes are sustainable...eh I earned many fat bonuses from successful projects whether I agreed or didn’t agree with them.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > I agree with this in a lot of ways.

> >

> >

> > But I think it goes for both sides. I’ve seen no real objective , concrete answer as to why the rollback would kill the game either. Lots of opinion. But no study or poll or anything has been posted. Which is why I’ve repeatedly stated that both sides are self serving ( myself absolutely) in those OPINIONS.... and that is met with down right rage. I’m not sure why?

>

> Oh 1000 percent it does. I have zero opinion on it truly I’m trying to get every yard that I can out of game. And big name designers, like Jack for example, that talk about golf getting too long nowadays are talking out of both sides of their mouths. Jacks made a nice career, Possibly more than he ever made designing the initial property, reworking his championship properties > @NJpatbee said:

> > Course design and not just length add to the difficulty of a course. Pine Valley will never host a pro tournament beacuse of their inability to handle the crowds, I would speculate that even the regular tees would be a challenge for the PGA Tour pros. The Champiosnhip Tees would be a bear. Now, I have never played there but I am available if any member wishes to invite me!

> >

> > Pine Valley Slope, Rating, and Yardage as of 2010

> >

> > Championship Tees

> > Slope 155

> > Rating 75.6

> > Yardage 7057

> > Par 70

> >

> > Regular Tees

> > Slope 153

> > Rating 72.8

> > Yardage 6532

> > Par 70

> >

>

> Not to be that guy, but strictly off numbers (ratings/slope) Medalist is tougher, 155/77.9. Tiger and Rickie have both shot 62 there.

>

> If PV were to host an event, you’d see a winner averaging in the mid teens regularly, the pack would be high single digits low double digits. Cut would be 2-3 under easily.

 

LOL! ……. Sounds like a regular PGATOUR event to me.....

[Golfjack]

Another problem is if you made the ball fly shorter, female and junior golfers (who can't yet stripe it 300 yards) will struggle. You wouldn't be able to move the tee far enough up. You could make regular handicappers play from the red tee or gold tee, but then what about them? You would need new tee boxes, and for seniors as well.

[smashdn]

> @Titleist99 said:

>

> Please excuse me if I mistook you for many other posters on this board that put words in peoples mouth to make their own point. Lets address your issues because I see you advocate an equipment modification....I am assuming that the high-handicapper is getting as much of a boost in relationship with his slow swing speed as the Touring Pro **But he is not. Physics say he is not. Newton's third law of motion is at work.**, so to deny the pro would affect players down the line and those are the ones that can least afford it **This assumes that we implement uniform equipment rules top to bottom. I don't think we can. We can say, "Oh, golf is different. Amateurs play the same equipment the pros do. That is not true on many levels. Someone mentioned the "Tour Only Shafts" as an example. Custom forged irons, custom built putters, etc.**. Assuming that a high - handicapper plays his appropriate tees the 300 yard bunker would not affect him because he thinks that he hits its it 260 when in reality he hits it 220 (based on my experience)**I don't know what to say to this. It is hard to come up with a factual rebuttal to anecdotal evidence. Just that if an archie is going to the trouble to put a fairway bunker out there most often the intention is to provide a tee box where the majority of golfers will have to contend with it when playing the appropriate tee box. If your high handicappers overestimate their driver distance by 40 yards I have little sympathy for them playing the wrong tee boxes and even less since he is one of "the ones that can least afford it." **. At my golf course the greens are mowed rolled every day, the tee boxes and fairway are mowed every other day and the rough is mowed every 5-6 days and all in sections depending on the help....they can easily control the rough with watering and cutting. As far as the bunkers are concerned everyone enters at their own peril.

>

>

>

> Facts to consider before changing the game and changing the equipment:

>

> Point #1 ....We're talking 300 PGATOUR players and 200 Euro Tour players. **Which makes the equipment modifications all that more palatable since two "ruling bodies" could implement the change for only these players.**

>

> Point #2 .....The elite player has only gained 40 yards in 40 years. **40 yards average driving, 40 yards is four clubs different for me. A difference between a 4 iron and 8 iron. A well designed 330 yard "drive and pitch hole" has lost it's design intent. That doesn't take into account at all that iron shots also go farther with new technology completing irrespective of "jacked lofts."**

>

>

> Point #3 ...... 90% of high-handicappers can't break 90. Certainly don't want to take any distance away from them. **Don't. High cappers are amateurs. They can play whatever equipment they would like to get enjoyment out of the game. Use a Hammer driver or a Callaway ERC and square grooves if you would like.**

>

> We already have measures in place to monitor **Power** on the tour...Besides, the PGA TOUR love these guys bombing it! **Speed. Speed alone is not power.**

>

>

> Regards,

>

>

 

What would you do if you have zoysia or bermuda fairways and bluegrass roughs? How do you alter the fairways for one week?

[oikos1]

> @smashdn said:

> > @Titleist99 said:

> >

> > Please excuse me if I mistook you for many other posters on this board that put words in peoples mouth to make their own point. Lets address your issues because I see you advocate an equipment modification....I am assuming that the high-handicapper is getting as much of a boost in relationship with his slow swing speed as the Touring Pro **But he is not. Physics say he is not. Newton's third law of motion is at work.**, so to deny the pro would affect players down the line and those are the ones that can least afford it **This assumes that we implement uniform equipment rules top to bottom. I don't think we can. We can say, "Oh, golf is different. Amateurs play the same equipment the pros do. That is not true on many levels. Someone mentioned the "Tour Only Shafts" as an example. Custom forged irons, custom built putters, etc.**. Assuming that a high - handicapper plays his appropriate tees the 300 yard bunker would not affect him because he thinks that he hits its it 260 when in reality he hits it 220 (based on my experience)**I don't know what to say to this. It is hard to come up with a factual rebuttal to anecdotal evidence. Just that if an archie is going to the trouble to put a fairway bunker out there most often the intention is to provide a tee box where the majority of golfers will have to contend with it when playing the appropriate tee box. If your high handicappers overestimate their driver distance by 40 yards I have little sympathy for them playing the wrong tee boxes and even less since he is one of "the ones that can least afford it." **. At my golf course the greens are mowed rolled every day, the tee boxes and fairway are mowed every other day and the rough is mowed every 5-6 days and all in sections depending on the help....they can easily control the rough with watering and cutting. As far as the bunkers are concerned everyone enters at their own peril.

> >

> >

> >

> > Facts to consider before changing the game and changing the equipment:

> >

> > Point #1 ....We're talking 300 PGATOUR players and 200 Euro Tour players. **Which makes the equipment modifications all that more palatable since two "ruling bodies" could implement the change for only these players.**

> >

> > Point #2 .....The elite player has only gained 40 yards in 40 years. **40 yards average driving, 40 yards is four clubs different for me. A difference between a 4 iron and 8 iron. A well designed 330 yard "drive and pitch hole" has lost it's design intent. That doesn't take into account at all that iron shots also go farther with new technology completing irrespective of "jacked lofts."**

> >

> >

> > Point #3 ...... 90% of high-handicappers can't break 90. Certainly don't want to take any distance away from them. **Don't. High cappers are amateurs. They can play whatever equipment they would like to get enjoyment out of the game. Use a Hammer driver or a Callaway ERC and square grooves if you would like.**

> >

> > We already have measures in place to monitor **Power** on the tour...Besides, the PGA TOUR love these guys bombing it! **Speed. Speed alone is not power.**

> >

> >

> > Regards,

> >

> >

>

> What would you do if you have zoysia or bermuda fairways and bluegrass roughs? How do you alter the fairways for one week?

 

You speak as if this doesn't happen already on the PGA Tour:

 

"Golf courses must typically undergo some changes when they play host to PGA Tour events. One of the key changes the tour suggests is the narrowing of a course’s fairways. By offering a course with more rough and less fairway space, the typical tour venue provides a challenge worthy of the best golfers in the world."

 

"A PGA Tour agronomist will typically visit a course two or three months before a scheduled tournament. The agronomist will make recommendations regarding the course, including its fairway widths and shape. While the tour believes fairway width must vary on holes for a variety of reasons, its guidelines call for fairways to be 25 to 30 yards wide in the expected landing area for a tour player’s drive on par-4 and par-5 holes. "

 

https://golftips.golfweek.com/average-fairway-width-pga-tour-20729.html

[gvogel]

> @Golfjack said:

> Another problem is if you made the ball fly shorter, female and junior golfers (who can't yet stripe it 300 yards) will struggle. You wouldn't be able to move the tee far enough up. You could make regular handicappers play from the red tee or gold tee, but then what about them? You would need new tee boxes, and for seniors as well.

 

At the muni I play, they put some short polls in the fairway well forward of the red tees. They are intended for young players, as well as short hitters. As a matter of fact, i played them a few times this Fall with the highly reduced distance ball - the Point Five. I did that because using that ball was relative pain free on my shoulder. (i'm typing this left handed after shoulder surgery yesterday.) the Point Five was enjoyable, just a good bit shorter.

 

new tee boxes, if necessary, are relatively easy to make. a couple of nice markers in the fairway also work. if the equipment is rolled back, it will take a slight difference in mind set to adjust. but i maintain that anyone who enjoys playing golf, the competition, the enjoyment of a well struck shot, the fun of sinking a long putt, will play and enjoy the game just fine.

 

or, like a good wrx'er, stock up on today's balls. a 5 year supply ought to do until you decide that the change is ok.

[golfer07840]

Log on after a few weeks.

 

I see the distance thread is locked.

 

I see another one has popped up.

 

Logs off

[smashdn]

> @oikos1 said:

> You speak as if this doesn't happen already on the PGA Tour:

>

> "Golf courses must typically undergo some changes when they play host to PGA Tour events. One of the key changes the tour suggests is the narrowing of a course’s fairways. By offering a course with more rough and less fairway space, the typical tour venue provides a challenge worthy of the best golfers in the world."

>

> "A PGA Tour agronomist will typically visit a course two or three months before a scheduled tournament. The agronomist will make recommendations regarding the course, including its fairway widths and shape. While the tour believes fairway width must vary on holes for a variety of reasons, its guidelines call for fairways to be 25 to 30 yards wide in the expected landing area for a tour player’s drive on par-4 and par-5 holes. "

>

> https://golftips.golfweek.com/average-fairway-width-pga-tour-20729.html

 

I know full well it happens.

 

And that is part of my point. When you make tactful equipment changes at the pro level you lessen the need to modify the course (expense, inconvenience to members etc.) in order to challenge them.

 

You could go play a high school baseball game at Yankee stadium and the challenge to those players would be almost identical to what they face on their high school field. (Most fields I played on in HS were actually larger than old Yankee stadium dimensionally.)

Same with football and with a little paint for the three point line basketball.

[gvogel]

> @golfer07840 said:

> Log on after a few weeks.

>

> I see the distance thread is locked.

>

> I see another one has popped up.

>

> Logs off

 

nice of you to visit, and your assessment is correct.

 

and neither side is making much of an impression on the other.

[Titleist99]

> @gvogel said:

> > @golfer07840 said:

> > Log on after a few weeks.

> >

> > I see the distance thread is locked.

> >

> > I see another one has popped up.

> >

> > Logs off

>

> nice of you to visit, and your assessment is correct.

>

> and neither side is making much of an impression on the other.

 

The thread is about obsolete golf courses that can no longer host a pro tournament or host a Major tournament due to power on the pgatour. I ask for specific courses....posters try to make it about distance but it is not. I'm still waiting on my request. Brendon Todd just won back to back tournaments on the PGATOUR, Brendon Average 285 yards off the tee, 70% accuracy, 70% greens in regulation. I think the courses of America is pretty safe....we don't have to lengthen them, we just need to toughen them up...

[Titleist99]

> @smashdn said:

> > @oikos1 said:

> > You speak as if this doesn't happen already on the PGA Tour:

> >

> > "Golf courses must typically undergo some changes when they play host to PGA Tour events. One of the key changes the tour suggests is the narrowing of a course’s fairways. By offering a course with more rough and less fairway space, the typical tour venue provides a challenge worthy of the best golfers in the world."

> >

> > "A PGA Tour agronomist will typically visit a course two or three months before a scheduled tournament. The agronomist will make recommendations regarding the course, including its fairway widths and shape. While the tour believes fairway width must vary on holes for a variety of reasons, its guidelines call for fairways to be 25 to 30 yards wide in the expected landing area for a tour player’s drive on par-4 and par-5 holes. "

> >

> > https://golftips.golfweek.com/average-fairway-width-pga-tour-20729.html

>

> I know full well it happens.

>

> And that is part of my point. When you make tactful equipment changes at the pro level you lessen the need to modify the course (expense, inconvenience to members etc.) in order to challenge them.

>

> You could go play a high school baseball game at Yankee stadium and the challenge to those players would be almost identical to what they face on their high school field. (Most fields I played on in HS were actually larger than old Yankee stadium dimensionally.)

> Same with football and with a little paint for the three point line basketball.

 

Golf was invented to be played outside and to be affected by the elements (i.e. rain, wind, terrain etc...). Golf started out at 9 or 12 holes then went to 22 holes and then adopted the 18 hole format with different lenghts to test the golfers ability. You can not equate the dimensions of a baseball field, tennis courts or basketball courts to golf layouts....golf was meant to challenge ones self, the golf course or played in a tournament setting where as the lowest score wins!

[mahonie]

> @smashdn said:

> > @oikos1 said:

> > You speak as if this doesn't happen already on the PGA Tour:

> >

> > "Golf courses must typically undergo some changes when they play host to PGA Tour events. One of the key changes the tour suggests is the narrowing of a course’s fairways. By offering a course with more rough and less fairway space, the typical tour venue provides a challenge worthy of the best golfers in the world."

> >

> > "A PGA Tour agronomist will typically visit a course two or three months before a scheduled tournament. The agronomist will make recommendations regarding the course, including its fairway widths and shape. While the tour believes fairway width must vary on holes for a variety of reasons, its guidelines call for fairways to be 25 to 30 yards wide in the expected landing area for a tour player’s drive on par-4 and par-5 holes. "

> >

> > https://golftips.golfweek.com/average-fairway-width-pga-tour-20729.html

>

> I know full well it happens.

>

> And that is part of my point. When you make tactful equipment changes at the pro level you lessen the need to modify the course (expense, inconvenience to members etc.) in order to challenge them.

>

> You could go play a high school baseball game at Yankee stadium and the challenge to those players would be almost identical to what they face on their high school field. (Most fields I played on in HS were actually larger than old Yankee stadium dimensionally.)

> Same with football and with a little paint for the three point line basketball.

 

‘...30 yards wide in the landing area...’wow!

 

The average on my home course is about 25 yards wide with about 5 yards of rough then trees. There are a couple of fairways that stretch to 30-32 yards and they are definitely the easy scoring holes.

[LICC]

> @Titleist99 said:

> > @gvogel said:

> > > @golfer07840 said:

> > > Log on after a few weeks.

> > >

> > > I see the distance thread is locked.

> > >

> > > I see another one has popped up.

> > >

> > > Logs off

> >

> > nice of you to visit, and your assessment is correct.

> >

> > and neither side is making much of an impression on the other.

>

> The thread is about obsolete golf courses that can no longer host a pro tournament or host a Major tournament due to power on the pgatour. I ask for specific courses....posters try to make it about distance but it is not. I'm still waiting on my request. Brendon Todd just won back to back tournaments on the PGATOUR, Brendon Average 285 yards off the tee, 70% accuracy, 70% greens in regulation. I think the courses of America is pretty safe....we don't have to lengthen them, we just need to toughen them up...

 

285 yards off the tee would have been, by far, the distance leader on the PGA Tour 40 years ago.

[Titleist99]

> @LICC said:

> > @Titleist99 said:

> > > @gvogel said:

> > > > @golfer07840 said:

> > > > Log on after a few weeks.

> > > >

> > > > I see the distance thread is locked.

> > > >

> > > > I see another one has popped up.

> > > >

> > > > Logs off

> > >

> > > nice of you to visit, and your assessment is correct.

> > >

> > > and neither side is making much of an impression on the other.

> >

> > The thread is about obsolete golf courses that can no longer host a pro tournament or host a Major tournament due to power on the pgatour. I ask for specific courses....posters try to make it about distance but it is not. I'm still waiting on my request. Brendon Todd just won back to back tournaments on the PGATOUR, Brendon Average 285 yards off the tee, 70% accuracy, 70% greens in regulation. I think the courses of America is pretty safe....we don't have to lengthen them, we just need to toughen them up...

>

> 285 yards off the tee would have been, by far, the distance leader on the PGA Tour 40 years ago.

 

> @LICC said:

> > @Titleist99 said:

> > > @gvogel said:

> > > > @golfer07840 said:

> > > > Log on after a few weeks.

> > > >

> > > > I see the distance thread is locked.

> > > >

> > > > I see another one has popped up.

> > > >

> > > > Logs off

> > >

> > > nice of you to visit, and your assessment is correct.

> > >

> > > and neither side is making much of an impression on the other.

> >

> > The thread is about obsolete golf courses that can no longer host a pro tournament or host a Major tournament due to power on the pgatour. I ask for specific courses....posters try to make it about distance but it is not. I'm still waiting on my request. Brendon Todd just won back to back tournaments on the PGATOUR, Brendon Average 285 yards off the tee, 70% accuracy, 70% greens in regulation. I think the courses of America is pretty safe....we don't have to lengthen them, we just need to toughen them up...

>

> 285 yards off the tee would have been, by far, the distance leader on the PGA Tour 40 years ago.

 

 

 

Brendon Todd average drive in 2019 is 285....He won Back to back PGA TOUR tournament. The tour leader drive 40 years ago was 275 yards. Jack Nicklaus hit drives of 300 yards in 1962.....So stop with the " driver is out of control" narrative, please....

 

I repeat.....Brendon Todd was almost out of the PGA tour and managed to win two yes two tournaments .....did I mention back to back...with a driver of a whopping 285 average.

[Ashley Schaeffer]

> @LICC said:

> > @Titleist99 said:

> > > @gvogel said:

> > > > @golfer07840 said:

> > > > Log on after a few weeks.

> > > >

> > > > I see the distance thread is locked.

> > > >

> > > > I see another one has popped up.

> > > >

> > > > Logs off

> > >

> > > nice of you to visit, and your assessment is correct.

> > >

> > > and neither side is making much of an impression on the other.

> >

> > The thread is about obsolete golf courses that can no longer host a pro tournament or host a Major tournament due to power on the pgatour. I ask for specific courses....posters try to make it about distance but it is not. I'm still waiting on my request. Brendon Todd just won back to back tournaments on the PGATOUR, Brendon Average 285 yards off the tee, 70% accuracy, 70% greens in regulation. I think the courses of America is pretty safe....we don't have to lengthen them, we just need to toughen them up...

>

> 285 yards off the tee would have been, by far, the distance leader on the PGA Tour 40 years ago.

 

> @LICC said:

> > @Titleist99 said:

> > > @gvogel said:

> > > > @golfer07840 said:

> > > > Log on after a few weeks.

> > > >

> > > > I see the distance thread is locked.

> > > >

> > > > I see another one has popped up.

> > > >

> > > > Logs off

> > >

> > > nice of you to visit, and your assessment is correct.

> > >

> > > and neither side is making much of an impression on the other.

> >

> > The thread is about obsolete golf courses that can no longer host a pro tournament or host a Major tournament due to power on the pgatour. I ask for specific courses....posters try to make it about distance but it is not. I'm still waiting on my request. Brendon Todd just won back to back tournaments on the PGATOUR, Brendon Average 285 yards off the tee, 70% accuracy, 70% greens in regulation. I think the courses of America is pretty safe....we don't have to lengthen them, we just need to toughen them up...

>

> 285 yards off the tee would have been, by far, the distance leader on the PGA Tour 40 years ago.

 

No way. Do you know Nicklaus could drive it 330 on demand and Arnie drove #1 at Cherry Hills when no modern player could accomplish that feat decades later?

[LICC]

> @Titleist99 said:

> > @LICC said:

> > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > @gvogel said:

> > > > > @golfer07840 said:

> > > > > Log on after a few weeks.

> > > > >

> > > > > I see the distance thread is locked.

> > > > >

> > > > > I see another one has popped up.

> > > > >

> > > > > Logs off

> > > >

> > > > nice of you to visit, and your assessment is correct.

> > > >

> > > > and neither side is making much of an impression on the other.

> > >

> > > The thread is about obsolete golf courses that can no longer host a pro tournament or host a Major tournament due to power on the pgatour. I ask for specific courses....posters try to make it about distance but it is not. I'm still waiting on my request. Brendon Todd just won back to back tournaments on the PGATOUR, Brendon Average 285 yards off the tee, 70% accuracy, 70% greens in regulation. I think the courses of America is pretty safe....we don't have to lengthen them, we just need to toughen them up...

> >

> > 285 yards off the tee would have been, by far, the distance leader on the PGA Tour 40 years ago.

>

> > @LICC said:

> > > @Titleist99 said:

> > > > @gvogel said:

> > > > > @golfer07840 said:

> > > > > Log on after a few weeks.

> > > > >

> > > > > I see the distance thread is locked.

> > > > >

> > > > > I see another one has popped up.

> > > > >

> > > > > Logs off

> > > >

> > > > nice of you to visit, and your assessment is correct.

> > > >

> > > > and neither side is making much of an impression on the other.

> > >

> > > The thread is about obsolete golf courses that can no longer host a pro tournament or host a Major tournament due to power on the pgatour. I ask for specific courses....posters try to make it about distance but it is not. I'm still waiting on my request. Brendon Todd just won back to back tournaments on the PGATOUR, Brendon Average 285 yards off the tee, 70% accuracy, 70% greens in regulation. I think the courses of America is pretty safe....we don't have to lengthen them, we just need to toughen them up...

> >

> > 285 yards off the tee would have been, by far, the distance leader on the PGA Tour 40 years ago.

>

>

>

> Brendon Todd average drive in 2019 is 285....He won Back to back PGA TOUR tournament. The tour leader drive 40 years ago was 275 yards. Jack Nicklaus hit drives of 300 yards in 1962.....So stop with the " driver is out of control" narrative, please....

>

> I repeat.....Brendon Todd was almost out of the PGA tour and managed to win two yes two tournaments .....did I mention back to back...with a driver of a whopping 285 average.

 

285 yards average distance off the tee would have been, by far, the distance leader on the PGA Tour 40 years ago. Today it wouldn't break the top 160.

[Ashley Schaeffer]

If anything, these pros need this tech to keep up with the superhumans of yesteryear.

[Titleist99]

> @"Ashley Schaeffer" said:

> If anything, these pros need this tech to keep up with the superhumans of yesteryear.

 

LOL!...To further my point, have you noticed how firm and fast todays fairways are? Easily 20 yards of run....I rest my case!

[gvogel]

yes, brendon todd won back to back on two fairly short, fairly tight golf courses. thinking that the longer guys were handcuffed, and hitting fairway woods and irons. so, what's your point? he'll have a chance of competing at harbour town.

 

of more import, brendon has defeated the driver yips for the time being.

 

also, i see more than 140 players averaging over 300 yards. a 10% reduction would be a start.

[Titleist99]

> @gvogel said:

> yes, brendon todd won back to back on two fairly short, fairly tight golf courses. thinking that the longer guys were handcuffed, and hitting fairway woods and irons. so, what's your point? he'll have a chance of competing at harbour town.

>

> of more import, brendon has defeated the driver yips for the time being.

>

> also, i see more than 140 players averaging over 300 yards. a 10% reduction would be a start.

 

My point is long driving don't necessarily win tournaments....Long driving don't necessarily win tounaments..Brendon Todd is 220th in driving distance on the PGA Tour. People driving it 300 yards means nothing if you can't score. 140 Pros hitting 300 yards means nothing, just ask Brendon Todd. Maybe if they hit their drives in the proper place just maybe they'll win like Todd...

 

 

The Pga tour can toughen these courses up if they wanted to.....but they don't want, the long ball sell tickets!

 

No need to roll anything back....at the end of the tournament the lowest score wins!

[smashdn]

The courses of America are safe. Brendan Todd won on back to back weeks on courses ... not in America.

 

Not sure I really want to go down the dark and ugly road of pointing out that one of those wins was opposite a WGC event, the other was at altitude and finally it is the unofficial "off-season," but you can connect that dots if you see fit.

 

On a positive note 285 would be a fine driving average, for the top performer on the tour. I would guess that would make a really piped drive somewhere around 310-320.

 

 

Diamonds are expensive because they are rare and hard to come by, cubic zirconia is cheaper and artificially made.