Tour Pro Driving Distance

[oikos1]

Ok. If you say so.

[smashdn]

Twofold. If everything was rolled back across the board evenly at the pro level, say with a standard spec ball, then the advantage of usable distance is still had by those who had it prior. It isn't diminished, the actual distance is just shifted shorter if that makes sense.

Usable distance as you call it is so much more easily gotten now due to equipment*. In fact the guy that constantly hits it on the screws and gets it out there 330 should be asking for some type of equipment reduction that reduces the size of the usable face area on the driver. His advantage would only be magnified over those who are not as exacting.

 

*In the sense that a mishit is not near as penalizing in terms of lost distance and waywardness.

[RichieHunt]

Tour players hit it further than 279 yards on average. More like 279 yards of carry on average.

 

I think the distance issue is somewhat misunderstood. I think the greatest harm the distance gains have made to the game is that they have forced courses to be longer and increasing the expense of playing golf. It's also difficult for children to walk golf courses because they are longer. And while you could blame the architects for the courses being longer to walk (putting tee boxes far away from the preceding green), the distance gains have also forced that issue as architects have to figure out how to design those holes to take into account how far we hit the ball. Less walkers in the game means less interest in the game.

 

In the end, the super low scores on Tour do not really impact the game as a whole. I don't quite like watching it because it cheapens records, but as far as the health of the game goes...it's not a big deal. However, the length is not the only factor in terms of the scores lowering on Tour. The lowering of the rough, the receptiveness of the greens and the flatter green complexes have played a larger role in that. As we saw from Bay Hill where the rough is fairly high and the wind dried out the course and the greens were no longer receptive, the scores were high and finding the fairway became more important.

 

But these guys on Tour, on average, are about 280 carry and getting 10-40 yards of roll depending on the course and the hole they are playing on.

 

 

 

RH

[bladehunter]

I agree 100 % with you. And yet. Somehow I’m certain most here will. That’s what perplexes me. How most of us agree with reason and yet disagree on doing anything , however small , about it.

[Shilgy]

Mishit theory works better for ams than pros Google Image Result for https://members.swingmangolf.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/tour-players-striking-pattern-after-10-shots.jpg

[Simp]

The net on the old driving range at ANGC was 260 yards from the tee. In 1992 I watched Norman hit line drive bullets 30' up the net while Love and Couples were hitting persimmons toward the top of the net. Well over 300 with inferior equipment compared to what we have today. Those numbers aren't too different than what we have today either. We don't have a distance problem.

[DFS PFD]

You realize there's players that could carry a 260 net with a 2 iron now, right? Or is my anecdote not as good as yours?

[Lincoln_Arcadia]

What’s perplexing is why we don’t just let the scores drop?

Shortening equipment will just make the game less bearable to play and watch. That’s not little.

[bladehunter]

It’s never been about scores. It’s about how those scores are achieved. Less sand wedge. More 5 iron. It’s that simple.

[bladehunter]

Exactly. 260??? That’s where the trees are on my home course driving range. There’s 30 yards of pines from 260 to the side of #2 fairway. Every round I play I walk through hitting range balls back to they range off #2 fairway. Everytime.

if I hit driver on that range I aim at the far right corner. Thicker trees and slightly longer carry. It’s just not that big of a deal at the am level to hit it over a fence at 260. And like you said. Plenty can hit a 2 iron that far off a tee.

sure. It’s not joe hack doing this. But every college player playing can. Every guy of any age trying to qualify for USga events can. State events etc. every single one. It’s not as if it’s 1 person per club that can. And all that is greater now than possibly the greatest driver of the ball ever at Augusta in 92.

[storm319]

Why the continued obsession with the optics of golf on tv? The goal of golf is what is simple, get the ball in the hole in as few stokes as possible within the rules. Until the USGA changes the rules to give more credit for accomplishing that goal in one way vs another, score is the only metric that really matters when it comes to determining challenge.

The ironic thing is that if scores were drastically lower at the pro level today, that is all that you would be hearing from those that support an equipment rollback.

[Simp]

And the Tom Kite's, Paul Goydos's and Corey Pavin's would bounce it into the net. The big hitters still have to chip and putt.

[disco111]

A two fold contribution to the discussion. 1) It's always about score. That's how the winner is determined. It's a heck of lot easier to score when hitting wedges instead of 5/6/7 irons. I seriously doubt that anyone would dispute that. 2) It's about money, anything that forces a course to increase length and/or conditioning to facilitate the distance being projected, increases operational expenses and ultimately is past on to either members or general golfing public. Now I realize that for the most part, we're dealing with the "elite" category of players, but as been stated, there are lots of sub-elite that can hit it just as far as those elites. They may not score as well, but that's the only saving grace that the rest of has to stay fairly competitive, if we play with/against those folks.

[bladehunter]

That’s what this thread is about. I didn’t start it.

[Titleist99]

LOL!....You can tell when a person has nothing to advance the conversation when they flip another persons facts with "why not"...It's like saying that I won't rob a bank and your reply would be "WHY NOT!....change just for the heck of it is never a good idea.

~just my opinion.

[bladehunter]

And lamest cop out ever

 

it’s Rickie Bobby level. With all due respect.

[gvogel]

Some of us appreciate the challenge that the competitors have to overcome. When Tillery got to the top of Everest, it was a big thing. Now, just about a whole lot of people can do it. In fact, the line of climbers going up when the weather breaks is long, and packed. A conga line. A few of best of them do it without oxygen, and they get bragging rights.

The modern game is too easy for the ball strikers. The fact that the equipment is so good demeans their accomplishments.

Make the game harder from tee to green and the best will be even better compared to their competitors. The serious golfers will celebrate them for their fantastic skills. Climb Everest without oxygen.

[storm319]

Unless you are concerned with comparisons to past eras and protecting legacies, it should not matter as long as everyone competing in a given event are doing so under the same conditions.

[oikos1]

How about this: When you can beat the modern ball strikers, then you can talk about "demeaning" their accomplishments.

[bladehunter]

Agree 1000 %

[bladehunter]

?good Grief. Why set the arbitrary line there? Why not let’s say “ you can have an opinion on the NFL after you win the super bowl “..... or “ you can vote after you become president “. Goodness.

[oikos1]

Demean away. Who's next? Nicklaus because he had iron shafts? We already know the equipment is different. It really adds nothing to the discussion about Tour Pro driving distance.

[bladehunter]

Just trying to hold up the mirror.

 

his comment holds loads of truth. And we both know it.

[storm319]

I think you are confusing “truth” with “opinion”...

[bladehunter]

I didn’t think modern tech offering “ help “ was debatable. If it is I’m all ears.

[storm319]

Comments like “demeaning accomplishments” are subjective opinions and are incredibly disrespectful to the players.

By that logic Jack’s accomplishments are also “demeaned” vs say Bobby Jones’ because of the difference in equipment of their respective times. There will always be an asterisk when comparing different eras in any sport but changing the rules to try and align modern outcomes with those from a past era is simply foolish.

[bladehunter]

Truth hurts sometimes. But disrespectful? That’s funny.

mim just shocked at the double talk that exists on equipment. One hand it helps mountains. And anyone playing a blade is an idiot. Then on this hand “ these guys are good. It’s all the same and its incredibly disrespectful to point out that they are receiving help “. Funny.

[oikos1]

Do you really think that if distance was rolled back, the official world golf rankings would change that dramatically?

Do you really think that if today's players grew up playing persimmon we never would have heard about DJ, Fowler, JT, Spieth, etc?

I would also like to know what shots, not clubs, most tour pros of today can't hit that almost all tour pros of the past could hit.

You seem to be confusing "easier" with the am who finds it easier to hit a hybrid and enhances his/her enjoyment of the game with a professional golfer who is going to hit whatever is deemed legal by the USGA and gives them the best chance to win at the highest tournament level.

[bladehunter]

Who said anything about “ shots”?

 

im not confusing anything. Hoards of tour pros play a hybrid or 3 now. And even more than that have a hollow long iron or 2. Why do they do this ?

[smashdn]

"Mishit theory works better for ams than pros"

 

Not necessarily and not always.

 

I've shared this before but really listen to what the young pro says about how he would have to adapt his game if he were to have to play a persimmon driver. And before anybody starts in on the "they are never going to go back to persimmon" line of thought, I know that. But you can make a metal wood perform in a similar fashion to get these same results.