DeChambeau bad for the game?

[Fairway14]

5 minutes ago, nsxguy said:

 

 

 

 

Sounds like you feel very strongly both ways !!!

 

First you say the statement that all-time greats tend to be long hitters is misleading because they must have a sensational short game. Then you say there are no Tour players with less than a sensational short game.

 

Forgetting for the moment that if they ALL have a sensational short game then none of them have.

 

Make up my mind, will ya ? 

 

 

It's simple to understand. Every Tour player has a sensational short game.

So, at the Tour level of skill it is reasonable to discuss the merits of pursuing some extra tee shot yardage as a means to gain an advantage.

But amateur play is deficient at short game, so improving short game is the best sense strategy for an amateur to lower scoring average.

The problem (and reason for this thread topic) is that the media talking heads, incompetent instructors, ignorant amateur players etc... are discussing Bryson's agenda as though it may apply as well to non Tour skill level players.

[woodriff]

One thing for sure. The chiropractors won’t complain. 

[weavej1]

I think he shows how hard work can pay off..  for the average golfer hitting it that far without control as he demonstrated this weekend won’t work.   You need a couple dozen ball spotters out in front of you to keep you in the game.  If he had to find those balls on his own he would be in trouble.

[ATLgopher]

1 minute ago, Fairway14 said:

It's simple to understand. Every Tour player has a sensational short game.

So, at the Tour level of skill it is reasonable to discuss the merits of pursuing some extra tee shot yardage as a means to gain an advantage.

But amateur play is deficient at short game, so improving short game is the best sense strategy for an amateur to lower scoring average.

The problem (and reason for this thread topic) is that the media talking heads, incompetent instructors, ignorant amateur players etc... are discussing Bryson's agenda as though it may apply as well to non Tour skill level players.

more distance is an advantage at any level

 

Now, given the limited amount of time most weekend golfers have to improve. It may not be the best way to spend your time.  

[Lincoln_Arcadia]

19 minutes ago, HackDaddy360 said:

I think this is a reasonable but overblown fear - largely because what you’re saying might happen is already happening and has been for years.  

Right, there’s no way I’m ever getting back to 240 pounds Hahaha!

[jordan2240]

It's the job of the pundits to talk about something interesting, and Bryson is certainly interesting.  With Tiger playing mediocre to poor golf, tournaments need a golfer that is entertaining.  I mean, how many tournaments do you tune into to see Webb Simpson?  I think most anyone who golfs regularly knows that chipping and putting are the real score makers, though I do understand  the OP's point, as you often see people on the course taking way too much time to hit the ball as they try to imitate pros.  I really don't have too much concern that the average weekend warrior will try to increase his driver distance by 40 yards because of Bryson and the talk surrounding him, but I do think they might be wise to try to imitate his swing somewhat.  Raising the hands and trying to swing more on one plane has done wonders for my ball contact.

[TooSteep]

A lot of assumptions are being made here that Bryson's style will make him more prone to injury. I doubt it. Moe would hit balls like this for hours and hours a day, 7 days a week right into his mid 70's. The only part of his body taking abuse seemed to be his hands.

 

It took tremendous hand and forearm strength from Moe, and looks like it does for Bryson too. But if you watch closely, he has much less curvature to his spine than most other tour players. Compare his spine position through impact to someone like Joaquín Niemann. Now THAT is hard on the spine! I would wager that Bryson will hold up just fine physically from the golf swings - no idea about the training he does outside of golf.

 

I'd never seen Wolff play before this weekend. To me, his swing looked much more unorthodox than Bryson's ?

 

Finally, the irony of this thread, when thinking of Moe Norman as Bryson's inspiration, is amazing:

   "I hit my 18 fairways and 18 greens, and go on to the next day"

 

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/the-story-of-moe-norman-golfs-troubled-genius

Edited September 21, 2020 by TooSteep

[Fairway14]

11 minutes ago, ATLgopher said:

more distance is an advantage at any level

 

Now, given the limited amount of time most weekend golfers have to improve. It may not be the best way to spend your time.  

 

Maybe so, but the problem is that too many amateur players , and incompetent instructors, tend to hear about Tour player distance or Tour player "strokes gained from distance stats" and they hang their hats on that, ignoring the more relevant factors of scoring.

 

[mosesgolf]

Folks are mad because we have a long drive guy who can hit 200mph ball speeds with a 48" driver.  They're feelings are hurt becase there is a guy who already has around 190mph ball speeds with decent accuracy who can chip n putt.  BD is only going to get better.

[Fairway14]

4 hours ago, mosesgolf said:

Disagree.  Sometimes you gotta think outside the box to improve, to innovate.  It's OP's style of thinking that leads to same old same old.  Didn't Curtis Strange think Tiger was off his rocker?

 

You are correct that about 23 years ago Strange asked Tiger if he thought he could win every tournament and when Tiger replied "yes", Strange told him "you'll learn".

Strange could not comprehend or relate to Tiger's self confidence, but that's not what this thread is about.

This thread is about how discussion of DeChambeau's driver distance sends a misleading and counter productive message to amateurs looking to improve their own games.

Yes, at Bryson's skill level pursuing extra tee box distance may be a worthwhile pursuit. But for amateurs trying to shoot par , break, 80, 90, or 100, extra distance is not a good sense priority.

[ScottF]

31 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

Maybe so, but the problem is that too many amateur players , and incompetent instructors, tend to hear about Tour player distance or Tour player "strokes gained from distance stats" and they hang their hats on that, ignoring the more relevant factors of scoring.

 

I seriously doubt there are many golfers who would put in the hard work emulating Bryson who didn’t also understand that you need a short game in order to score. 

[TexasTurf]

37 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

You are correct that about 23 years ago Strange asked Tiger if he thought he could win every tournament and when Tiger replied "yes", Strange told him "you'll learn".

Strange could not comprehend or relate to Tiger's self confidence, but that's not what this thread is about.

This thread is about how discussion of DeChambeau's driver distance sends a misleading and counter productive message to amateurs looking to improve their own games.

Yes, at Bryson's skill level pursuing extra tee box distance may be a worthwhile pursuit. But for amateurs trying to shoot par , break, 80, 90, or 100, extra distance is not a good sense priority.

 

If you back up a couple of tee boxes it absolutely becomes the priority. You wouldn't be able to reach the greens on 9-10 holes in regulation for amateurs without more distance. Your game from the forward tees is not the game the pro's play. These guys are athletes, not insurance salesman who work 15 hours per week.

[Fairway14]

30 minutes ago, ScottF said:

I seriously doubt there are many golfers who would put in the hard work emulating Bryson who didn’t also understand that you need a short game in order to score. 

 

Well, golf internet discussion forums are filled with posters who think the reason they shoot high scores is because they don't hit the ball far enough.

Even in this particular thread there are a couple of guys who posted that  the greatest player of all time, Jack Nicklaus, played shots swinging out of his shoes trying for maximum distance. But the truth is that  Nicklaus wrote in his books and has spoken in videos that he swung within himself and very rarely sought maximum distance. On today's US Open broadcast Azinger made the point that Jack Nicklaus liked playing "comfortable golf", which was different than the tee shot distance games DeChambeau and Wolff were playing today. On five different occasions I was in the gallery watching Jack Nicklaus play full 18 hole rounds, either at Pebble or Olympic Club, and I can't recall a single shot when Nicklaus went especially hard at the ball. His game was about putting the ball in a good sense position from which to play his next shot.

So , the above is evidence that some people  are either not aware of what's relevant to good scoring or they are just so anxious to try and pound the ball that they close their ears to any other message.

[Tax77]

Cobra bought to bank on some One length. 

[m d g]

No...that is all.

[PowerPlayer]

3 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

 

That statement is misleading because it does not specify that the long hitter must also have a sensational short game. Without a great short game and putting game no long hitter shoots low scores, regardless of the tee boxes they play.

 

How has it been established that to score low a long hitter has to have a sensational short game and great putting? Any reputable study that you can source? I'm sure that by now you're familiar with Broadie, Fawcett, Stagner, etc. 

 

I can say empirically that the emphasis on power golf and the technological gamification of the sport are doing wonders for the effort to grow the game. There has been a substantial amount of new young players with a very noticeable athletic disposition flooding practice facilities and golf courses around my neck of the woods. That may not be statistically significant but I have confirmed as much in conversations with facilities owners. That seems to be further confirmed by the latest NGF report on participation. 

 

To your point on the need to "refine one's skill in the shorter clubs before you graduate to longer clubs and/or golf courses." This "traditional" mentality has been what's rendered golf's growth in China Dead On Arrival. Even more significantly than the Chinese government's perceived distaste for the sport. The rule of thumb is that any new player should hit 20,000 balls before thinking of playing 9 holes. Accordingly, maybe one out of 20 new players or so gets to play > 3 rounds of golf. 

 

Sure, some of you look down on the above-referenced examples and dismiss them as unwelcome "mashed potatoes" shouters or a phenomena that's happening in a place too far to matter. I can guarantee without hesitation that if there's no money in golf for investors, operators, etc. there will be no quality golf or the lifestyle/experiences that come with it. 

 

So, please, stop with the get off my lawn nonsense. 

[Hairpie]

3 hours ago, Old Tom Morris said:

It's been bomb and gouge for almost twenty years now.  Difference is that Bryson is hitting those long shafted short irons through the rough with a lot of clubhead speed.  It's the first time that US Open rough was ever neutralized by a player.

I agree with this in spades. It should also be noted that Winged Foot was a perfect venue for Bryson in that nearly every green was open in front. Not having to carry rough, bunkers,etc. to get the ball on the green negates the lack of spin from the rough. I don't think he's bad for the game at all. He's just taken a different tack that works for him. I like watching Bryson as much as I like watching Bubba hit 30 yard hooks with a pitching wedge. He deserves kudos for the work he's put in and the results he's achieving, but I still wish he'd play a bit faster.

[philly2kuk]

I think he’s different for the game. I doubt you’ll see everyone taking his approach as he hasn’t exactly come out and won the fedex cup and two majors this year. There’s been some weeks where he has been woeful.

 

My problem isn’t with his process or how he approaches golf I just don’t like his constant whining when he mishits a shot even slightly. It’s because I’m also a perfectionist so I see what I look like (without his millions of dollars, game and trophy gf).

[3whacker]

BDC isn't bad for the game, in fact he may be just what the game needed and it may just force the powers that be to take a look at the direction the game has been headed and force them to throttle back the nuclear proliferation that is happening. They cant reinvent Mother Nature nor lengthen every course to combat today's bombers, but they can slow down the game in other ways otherwise they face the real possibility of the game being taken over by  such a small group of people that it no longer becomes pleasing to watch or is a fair representation of the what the founders of the game intended

[Ferguson]

He is great for the game. 

 

 

[sfiggins]

11 minutes ago, Ferguson said:

He is great for the game. 

 

 

Agreed.
 

Players were chasing distance long before Bryson came along. Golf instructors often say that virtually all of their students primary goal is to hit the ball further. IMO DeChambeau’s “get stronger and faster” method may be the roadmap players need to achieve that goal.

 

[games]

The only people saying he's bad for the game are those losing money to him and his corporate sponsors.  BD's main sponsors, Cobra and Bridgestone, aren't the top OEMs in their respective club, apparel, and ball categories.  Don't kid yourself:  The R&A and USGA know who pays the freight...

 

The other OEM club guys now have a decision to make.  Do they start making iron sets that actually fit the masses and not just a 1925 production schedule?   Designing and marketing a single-length iron would cost Callaway and TM millions.  Do they continue to let Cobra eat their lunch in a space that is now going to grow again?  One benefit of SL irons that could apply to the weekend hack is that you don't need to practice as much because they're all the same.  Your 9-iron swings the same as your 5-iron, they just go different distances.  

[Sixcat]

I don't believe Bryson is bad for the game as a player.  He may be bad optically as a human given his treatment of other people.  Bryson the player and Bryson the human are two completely different things.  

 

I do believe his personality will drive the USGA and R&A to make equipment changes. 

[OrangeGravy]

If he can do something similar at Augusta, he could end up being great for golf......If you're pro-rollback! While simultaneously being bad for golf if you like the direction the game is going. Wouldn't that be a strange twist of irony? 

[Sixcat]

4 minutes ago, OrangeGravy said:

If he can do something similar at Augusta, he could end up being great for golf......If you're pro-rollback! While simultaneously being bad for golf if you like the direction the game is going. Wouldn't that be a strange twist of irony? 

He'll have to do it without his greens reading book at Augusta.  They don't allow them.  

 

 

[OrangeGravy]

2 minutes ago, Sixcat said:

He'll have to do it without his greens reading book at Augusta.  They don't allow them.  

 

 

I'm not saying he will. Just what if he does?

[OrangeGravy]

6 minutes ago, Sixcat said:

He'll have to do it without his greens reading book at Augusta.  They don't allow them.  

 

 

And if he figures out how to keep a 48" driver between now and then, the blow back could be spectacular. 

[cardia10]

I think everyone tried jumping on the single length bandwagon a year or so ago showed it was a massive fail. The customization required in weight, loft and lies make this impossible for OEMs and if Joe Blow can't get out of a bunker with a short easy to hit sand wedge, what makes anyone think he can manipulate a 7 iron length wedge any better. Bryson does it his way, which is totally respectable, but I would put zero stock in it truly working for 99.9% of amateur golfers. Single length isn't a new thing with Bryson and has been around, unsuccessfully, for years. Overall, I think he makes the game interesting, so I wouldn't say he is bad for the game though.

 

Any talk of another USGA rule change based on one player wouldn't shock me based on their short sided approach on rules and the effect they have on 99.99% of golfers. They are quick to over react to one golfer or subset of golfers when the results they desire aren't gotten. See USGA distance study if you need any light reading. I did the survey and it basically made you say distance was bad for the game. 

Edited September 21, 2020 by cardia10

[Ferguson]

12 minutes ago, Sixcat said:

He'll have to do it without his greens reading book at Augusta.  They don't allow them.  

 

 

 

This just adds to mystique of Augusta. 

 

 

[Sixcat]

3 minutes ago, Ferguson said:

This just adds to mystique of Augusta. 

Kinda adds to the mystique of Jordan Spieth as well.  He plays well at Augusta year in and year out without the paralysis-by-analysis funk he gets into on the greens in other tournaments.  Maybe he should dump the greens book all the time.