Course Setup To Combat Today's Bomb-And-Gouge Game

[smashdn]

Comparatively, a 440 cc titanium  driver is stupid easy to hit vs. a ~190 cc persimmon driver.  I don't think it is hyperbole to say that persimmon driver has a sweet spot about the same as a dime or nickel and my 913 is more the size of a half dollar or more.  I've hit some dang good balls high off the toe with the 913.  Anything outside the screws, and fair bit just inside the screws is way less than optimal with that hogan speed slot I play.

 

The old TM r7 425 was hottest high on the toe side of center.

[Shilgy]

37 minutes ago, smashdn said:

Comparatively, a 440 cc titanium  driver is stupid easy to hit vs. a ~190 cc persimmon driver.  I don't think it is hyperbole to say that persimmon driver has a sweet spot about the same as a dime or nickel and my 913 is more the size of a half dollar or more.  I've hit some dang good balls high off the toe with the 913.  Anything outside the screws, and fair bit just inside the screws is way less than optimal with that hogan speed slot I play.

 

The old TM r7 425 was hottest high on the toe side of center.

The sweet spot is the same size on both....and yes, if you miss the sweet spot on both by a bunch, say half to three quarters an inch, you will get a more serviceable shot with the new driver. Not a good one but serviceable. BUT..the persimmon is harder for a decent player to miss by that much. What decent player misses the sweet spot on their three wood by that much? Very few.

[smashdn]

Is the current swing with a 3 wood, off the deck or off the tee, akin to what the swing with a persimmon driver would be?  Or do you think they will still attempt to swing out of their shoes with their driver swing still?

 

I think we would agree that Nicklaus was more than capable of hitting a cut driver 300+ yards.  I don't think that he in his prime would have been less capable of speed/power than say JB Holmes.  Why didn't Nicklaus hit it 330 if he could?  Why didn't he hit a draw and get the extra roll?  The answer to the latter is control.

 

Why did most all professionals swing at far less than their hardest back in the day?  Distance was just as valuable then as it is now.  While I subscribe to the SG mindset to a degree, the benefit of distance is not new.  The quantifying of the value of distance is a recent thing but knowing that being closer to the hole is better is not.

 

So, my point, I think the pros would have to throttle back significantly to get the same results from an accuracy standpoint.  That would naturally reign some driving distance.  A 43" length steel shaft is probably good for an other 5-8 yards of reduction.  Not being able to go up and over stuff as easily (without a significant reduction in distance anyway) will bring them back below the trees to an extent.

 

It will never happen.  And just reducing head size and/or COR won't do it.  I don't know how to if restoring the playing characteristics of wood woods is the goal aside from making them play wood woods on a steel shaft.

[Shilgy]

1 hour ago, smashdn said:

Is the current swing with a 3 wood, off the deck or off the tee, akin to what the swing with a persimmon driver would be?  Or do you think they will still attempt to swing out of their shoes with their driver swing still?

 

I think we would agree that Nicklaus was more than capable of hitting a cut driver 300+ yards.  I don't think that he in his prime would have been less capable of speed/power than say JB Holmes.  Why didn't Nicklaus hit it 330 if he could?  Why didn't he hit a draw and get the extra roll?  The answer to the latter is control.

 

Why did most all professionals swing at far less than their hardest back in the day?  Distance was just as valuable then as it is now.  While I subscribe to the SG mindset to a degree, the benefit of distance is not new.  The quantifying of the value of distance is a recent thing but knowing that being closer to the hole is better is not.

 

So, my point, I think the pros would have to throttle back significantly to get the same results from an accuracy standpoint.  That would naturally reign some driving distance.  A 43" length steel shaft is probably good for an other 5-8 yards of reduction.  Not being able to go up and over stuff as easily (without a significant reduction in distance anyway) will bring them back below the trees to an extent.

 

It will never happen.  And just reducing head size and/or COR won't do it.  I don't know how to if restoring the playing characteristics of wood woods is the goal aside from making them play wood woods on a steel shaft.

Guessing that was at me....do I think Jack could hit a 300 yard cut any time he wanted? Simple answer is no.  In 1980...the first year we have tour stats and granted Jack was 40 ...he averaged 269 yards off the tee. Do I think that on average he left 30yards in the bag? No. And I started watching pro golf in the late 60’s. No matter what  percentage he “felt” he was swinging at he swung hard at the ball. Same as today’s players their speed does not vary by as much as it feels like it does. Would Jack be as long as a JB Holmes? Sacrilege to say but probably not. But if he had grown up 40-50 yards later probably yes.  Today’s player, with modern instruction , refined techniques and modern speed training has a huge advantage. 
Let me ask you this. Jack started about 20 years...maybe 25 years...after Snead. Was he longer than Snead? Today’s players have about 50 years of instruction, fitness(not just slimness but golf speed training included) to improve over players of Jacks era. Jack was an improvement over Snead , Nelson and Hogan. But the posters on Snailmailgolfwrx probably disagreed. As I posted earlier Claude Harmon III said it would be a massive dereliction of duty if players were not better than those of half a century ago. 
So yes...Jack was long for his era. With equipment that was shorter than today’s . But he could not hit it longer than today’s players do with yesterday’s equipment. That does not mean he didn’t hit it 340 or whatever at a PGA long drive contest. Clearly the conditions were such that he did. What we never hear is how long were the other guys? If they were 270ish I would say bravo. But I would venture a guess it was more like 18 at Kapalua where many today are over 400. 
Most of today’s pros feel like that are playing for control most of the time as well. Given time to acclimate to the old equipment I believe they would be longer than the players of the past. Jack included. But this is a meaningless discussion because we will never ever know.

Edited September 28, 2020 by Shilgy

[Kilo1545]

Jack's not that long.  The 19th Hole at Payne's Valley was something like 110-120yds and I believe they said he was hitting a 7-iron. Thomas, McIlroy, Rose, and Tiger all hit a wedge.  That's at least a 3 club difference, if not 4, and they were all using modern equipment.  Plus Jack's 7-iron probably had jacked lofts, so it was more like a 6-iron.

 

It's definitely the fitness levels of the modern players that makes the difference.

 

[jons1]

3 hours ago, Kilo1545 said:

Jack's not that long.  The 19th Hole at Payne's Valley was something like 110-120yds and I believe they said he was hitting a 7-iron. Thomas, McIlroy, Rose, and Tiger all hit a wedge.  That's at least a 3 club difference, if not 4, and they were all using modern equipment.  Plus Jack's 7-iron probably had jacked lofts, so it was more like a 6-iron.

 

It's definitely the fitness levels of the modern players that makes the difference.

 

 

LOL. Jack is 80 and can barely walk.  The fact that he can even hit an island green at this age makes him the GOAT.

[imakaveli]

Didn't see many bombs on this course

 

[Kilo1545]

1 hour ago, imakaveli said:

Didn't see many bombs on this course

 

 

Yeah, but they're playing oval tee boxes there.   Courses like Winged Foot, with their square/rectangle tee boxes, are more susceptible to the bomb-and-gouge because the ball gets off the tee box quite a bit hotter.  

[Pepperturbo]

If FedEx cup final was any indicator, we don't need to do anything more that configure courses similarly to Winged Foot.  Only a few guys had what it took to bomb and gouge the ball out of deep rough using a 8i-W, and only "1" guy was under par at the end. 

 

I'd say proof is in all the failures to B&G.  Don't need to make courses longer either.  Sure, many players can bomb it from the tee, but they discovered they didn't have the next shot from ugly rough; often leaving the ball in the rough 20-50' in front, and facing bogie or double.  I, for one, like that style of play, even at my age.  It may or may not reign in many of the big hitters but it for sure will have each of them thinking about what happens if I end up in the junk?  Can I get it out and save par?

Edited September 29, 2020 by Pepperturbo

[EmperorPenguin]

13 minutes ago, Kilo1545 said:

Yeah, but they're playing oval tee boxes there.   Courses like Winged Foot, with their square/rectangle tee boxes, are more susceptible to the bomb-and-gouge because the ball gets off the tee box quite a bit hotter.  

Wut?  What difference does a tee box make if it is ovular or rectangular?

[Pepperturbo]

1 minute ago, EmperorPenguin said:

Wut?  What difference does a tee box make if it is ovular or rectangular?

Agree - not a thing.

[oikos1]

Nothing like a crisp, square corner edge for flying bombs off of the tee box.  I thought everybody knew that.

[Bubbtubbs]

1 hour ago, EmperorPenguin said:

Wut?  What difference does a tee box make if it is ovular or rectangular?

Fairly certain they were being facetious.