What's coming next from the USGA and R&A...

[ThinkingPlus]

3 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

Doesn't the current (or past version) of the handicap system allow for T scores to flush that stuff out?  I am not a handicap mathematician but my understanding is the T score application was supposed to stop people from showing up at events and miraculously scoring magnitudes below their handicaps.  I get it would not be fool proof but it would have to help some.

 

There was an article a few years back regarding the big amateur tournament played in Myrtle Beach.  It was a guy from Louisville as I recall.  He played in a regular league on a tough course from a box farther back than he should have been playing for his age.  He had about a 10 cap or so.  He goes down to wherever they play this tournament and he ends up shooting below his cap like the first 3 rounds.  Turns out for his age they were playing A) from about 1000 yards shorter than he was accustomed to playing and B) on a much flatter course.  Now, don't ask me how the course rating and slope didn't catch that as, again, I am not handicap expert, but they DQ'd him from the tournament despite all sorts of evidence that he was not sandbagging nor gaming the system so to speak, he was just a victim of how the system works (or doesn't ) when you travel.

It doesn't exactly work that way anymore although I think committees still have the ability to adjust handicaps mid-tourney if necessary.  However, the scenario I portrayed would be exactly like the one you illustrated.  Someone following all the rules could be DQed or have their handicap unfairly lowered.

[clevited]

3 hours ago, milesgiles said:

And the simplest way to do that is limit the tee to 3/4”

 

no  need to touch anything else. Leave the ball, no bifurcation, and amateurs learn how to play properly 

 

What is to stop a pro from using what would end up being a lighter, longer low spin 3 wood off the tee?  I don't think you are going to gain nearly what would be needed in order to satisfy the problem statement of the USGA/R&A.  

 

Then you are still maybe forgetting about the extended argument that not changing the ball means they still have the same performance for their second shots.  I really don't think a 3/4 tee would change the game much if at all.

 

You do NO tee, then I think you might have something but then I think that hurts everyone just as much as a ball roll back would.   

 

Just for some reference, I added a video below of what the top pro's of the future I think will be capable of.  I have seen him hit 185 ball speed with an off the rack 3 wood.  Imagine what a tour pro with his power can do with a full length, low spin, lighter variant of today's 3 wood off a 3/4 inch tee.

 

 

[PureStrikes54]

10 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

What is to stop a pro from using what would end up being a lighter, longer low spin 3 wood off the tee?  I don't think you are going to gain nearly what would be needed in order to satisfy the problem statement of the USGA/R&A.  

 

Then you are still maybe forgetting about the extended argument that not changing the ball means they still have the same performance for their second shots.  I really don't think a 3/4 tee would change the game much if at all.

 

You do NO tee, then I think you might have something but then I think that hurts everyone just as much as a ball roll back would.   

 

Just for some reference, I added a video below of what the top pro's of the future I think will be capable of.  I have seen him hit 185 ball speed with an off the rack 3 wood.  Imagine what a tour pro with his power can do with a full length, low spin, lighter variant of today's 3 wood off a 3/4 inch tee.

 

 

 

You do realize he switched from long drive to tournament golf a number of years back and has already played in numerous worldwide and PGA tour events right?

[clevited]

1 minute ago, PureStrikes54 said:

 

You do realize he switched from long drive to tournament golf a number of years back and has already played in numerous worldwide and PGA tour events right?

 

Fully aware but he isn't on the tour.  My point was, someone with power like him (or maybe Jamie himself, which would be awesome cause I am a big fan of his), will eventually be on tour, and probably multiples more down the road.

[Titleist99]

3 hours ago, clevited said:

 

Fully aware but he isn't on the tour.  My point was, someone with power like him (or maybe Jamie himself, which would be awesome cause I am a big fan of his), will eventually be on tour, and probably multiples more down the road.

Kyle Berkshire, the current long drive champ want to be a PGATOUR member. he's currently working with Bryson Dechambeau with his distance. Kyle is a +3 which IMO is the minimum for a tour player.

[mahonie]

7 hours ago, ThinkingPlus said:

It doesn't exactly work that way anymore although I think committees still have the ability to adjust handicaps mid-tourney if necessary.  However, the scenario I portrayed would be exactly like the one you illustrated.  Someone following all the rules could be DQed or have their handicap unfairly lowered.

This is where the World Handicap System is totally flawed. The current system in the UK is based on competition scores only and they must be verified by another player. Your handicap is fixed by your performance in competition and it is very difficult to side-step. The dumbed down WHS is open to so many abuses. Sorry to side-track 😳

[milesgiles]

7 hours ago, clevited said:

 

What is to stop a pro from using what would end up being a lighter, longer low spin 3 wood off the tee?  I don't think you are going to gain nearly what would be needed in order to satisfy the problem statement of the USGA/R&A.  

 

Then you are still maybe forgetting about the extended argument that not changing the ball means they still have the same performance for their second shots.  I really don't think a 3/4 tee would change the game much if at all.

 

You do NO tee, then I think you might have something but then I think that hurts everyone just as much as a ball roll back would.   

 

Just for some reference, I added a video below of what the top pro's of the future I think will be capable of.  I have seen him hit 185 ball speed with an off the rack 3 wood.  Imagine what a tour pro with his power can do with a full length, low spin, lighter variant of today's 3 wood off a 3/4 inch tee.

 

 

 

Right now, in the present reality, it would achieve all or most of what is required. Yes the driver/3 wood would change, lower CoG etc. But it would require far more speed and skill to carry it 300. The second shots have never been an issue I have even mentioned.

Pointing out what one of the very fastest swingers to ever live might be able to do (even though he’s nowhere near tour standard) is ridiculous. Actually it’s beneath you 

[clevited]

5 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

Right now, in the present reality, it would achieve all or most of what is required. Yes the driver/3 wood would change, lower CoG etc. But it would require far more speed and skill to carry it 300. The second shots have never been an issue I have even mentioned.

Pointing out what one of the very fastest swingers to ever live might be able to do (even though he’s nowhere near tour standard) is ridiculous. Actually it’s beneath you 

 

I disagree.  I don't think the  long term goal of the USGA/R&A would be met with your 3/4 inch tee idea..  I think the changes to the driver would happen quickly and I disagree that the skill required is much different than today.  Do you have any trouble hitting a fairway wood off of a short tee? 

 

The reason i showed Jamie was to illustrate what is possible today with a standard length, off the shelf 3W from the fastest pro's out there.  I believe strongly that if you put an even greater premium on distance whether it be a roll back or it be a temporary shuffle of the way we hit tee shots, the longer faster player will become even more prominent on tour, and potentially very quickly.

 

If you watch the Trackman data for some of the tee shots on tour, you can see that the faster players often hit their 3 woods in the low 170s ball speed wise.  That right there, still translates to over 300 total if all you did was change spin to be lower at launch.  The reason Rory is in the 170s  with a 3 wood, I contend, is primarily because he is swinging a much shorter, heavier  and spinnier club vs his driver.  If you make that 3 wood driver length, lighten it, and lower the spin, you have a mini driver.  Last time I checked, pro's have no issue hitting 3 woods off the tee, I doubt they would struggle to bomb a mini driver.  

 

I am just trying to illustrate why  I think your particular proposed solution would amount to no meaningful change long term as far as the USGA/R&A is concerned.  

 

I mentioned the second shot thing not because I thought you brought it up, but because that is also a perceived issue by at least some pro rollback people I have conversed with.

 

I added a few pictures showing a typical 3 wood ball speed and launch of Rory's (i wouldn't pay attention to the carry or total, something was screwy with that LM that day or he had a tail wind and or big elevation change).  I also included launch monitor data for what a typical fairway wood at his launch conditions (my best guess), vs what it would be just by lowering spin to something closer to a driver.  This is before any proposed lightening, and lengthening of the club.  Just a spin change.

 

I am very interested to discuss this more.  Can you detail more precisely why you think it would be an adequate change?  Maybe with some estimated numbers you think pro's would drop to distance wise etc?  Thanks for calling my example of Jamie ridiculous btw, that is good discussion right there.  He is a pro golfer believe it or not.  He isn't on tour but I think the likelihood he beats several in the field during events is high, meaning, he is plenty good to be on tour.  It is just super difficult to get your tour card.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 22, 2020 by clevited
Extra pictures I thought i deleted.

[smashdn]

15 hours ago, Dr. Block said:

Blasphemy!  Just kidding  🙂     Seriously though, that is a high tee for a tiny persimmon head.  I am going to try that next time I play them, though.  Usually I enjoy the low bullet risers they produce from a low tee, but that could prove a handy method when it's damp. 

 

Zoysia tee boxes that are kind of fluffy.  That tee doesn't get the ball all that high really.  1/4 to 1/2 ball above the crown.

 

I drove the ball like crap yesterday afternoon.

 

Interesting article:

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/par-5-jerry-tarde-last-shot?utm_medium=email&utm_source=102120&utm_campaign=ggcontent&camp=EML:GG_PRM:10212020_10212020_C_GolfDigest_Editorial_GG:LINK_24&customerkey=B312748FF3D87F9FC4FB336F7746BE17ED20D58E8CB52AC75EA801AF83313832&mcid=385383828&AthleteID=&hdpid=895054d4-13e1-4d3a-9540-59fcd46a026d

Edited October 22, 2020 by smashdn

[milesgiles]

1 hour ago, clevited said:

 

I disagree.  I don't think the  long term goal of the USGA/R&A would be met with your 3/4 inch tee idea..  I think the changes to the driver would happen quickly and I disagree that the skill required is much different than today.  Do you have any trouble hitting a fairway wood off of a short tee? 

 

The reason i showed Jamie was to illustrate what is possible today with a standard length, off the shelf 3W from the fastest pro's out there.  I believe strongly that if you put an even greater premium on distance whether it be a roll back or it be a temporary shuffle of the way we hit tee shots, the longer faster player will become even more prominent on tour, and potentially very quickly.

 

If you watch the Trackman data for some of the tee shots on tour, you can see that the faster players often hit their 3 woods in the low 170s ball speed wise.  That right there, still translates to over 300 total if all you did was change spin to be lower at launch.  The reason Rory is in the 170s  with a 3 wood, I contend, is primarily because he is swinging a much shorter, heavier  and spinnier club vs his driver.  If you make that 3 wood driver length, lighten it, and lower the spin, you have a mini driver.  Last time I checked, pro's have no issue hitting 3 woods off the tee, I doubt they would struggle to bomb a mini driver.  

 

I am just trying to illustrate why  I think your particular proposed solution would amount to no meaningful change long term as far as the USGA/R&A is concerned.  

 

I mentioned the second shot thing not because I thought you brought it up, but because that is also a perceived issue buy at least some pro rollback people I have conversed with.

 

I added a few pictures showing a typical 3 wood ball speed and launch of Rory's (i wouldn't pay attention to the carry or total, something was screwy with that LM that day or he had a tail wind and or big elevation change).  I also included launch monitor data for what a typical fairway wood at his launch conditions (my best guess), vs what it would be just by lowering spin to something closer to a driver.  This is before any proposed lightening, and lengthening of the club.  Just a spin change.

 

I am very interested to discuss this more.  Can you detail more precisely why you think it would be an adequate change?  Maybe with some estimated numbers you think pro's would drop to distance wise etc?  Thanks for calling my example of Jamie ridiculous btw, that is good discussion right there.  He is a pro golfer believe it or not.  He isn't on tour but I think the likelihood he beats several in the field during events is high, meaning, he is plenty good to be on tour.  It is just super difficult to get your tour card.

 

 

I’ve answered all of that before, many times.

 

in summary, nobody wants to cancel the advantage of long straight hitters. 

 

DJ with a persimmon(under no pressure mind you) is where Norman was 30 years ago. He averaged 280 over a season at his best.. In competition.

 

i disagree strongly with this argument that pros would adjust and be back to where they were before, if using a short tee. You simply can’t swing as hard with a smaller club head, hence why average 3 wood carry is about 260. You can keep quoting ridiculous long drive examples all you want. 

 

You know what though, no one will ever convince you of anything on this board, as someone else noted. Here’s the great thing with my idea, that you KNOW is right.. we could TRY IT, next week, and get the pro feedback. See how the tournament plays out. See if people enjoy watching it more. See if the better ball strikers do better and start pressing for a dialling back in clubhead size/tee height.

 

WHERE IS THE HARM IN TRYING THAT RATHER THAN WORRYING ABOUT A FANTASY BUNCH OF 140mph SWINGS THAT ARE GOOD ENOUGH TO BE ON TOUR 

[clevited]

@milesgiles

 

I’ve answered all of that before, many times.

 

I haven't read all of your past arguments for why you think the 3/4" tee will work.  Perhaps you could restate with a quick summary?  Otherwise I will try my best to go back through and find them but unfortunately, in the world of online forums, that can be hard to do as thoughts can be strewn across many threads and many individual posts.  Any help with finding maybe one post with a good summary would also be appreciated.

 

You know what though, no one will ever convince you of anything on this board, as someone else noted.

 

You are not going to be convinced either it seems, why do you even bring up such a thing?  This is discourse, we can disagree and explain why we disagree.  What is the issue with that?  The tone in your post sounds hostile, if it is, lets tone it down and realize we are having a discussion.  I have been guilty in the past of getting defensive and such and still do at times, but lets try not to.  I am not trying to be mean to you, I am trying to have a discussion and show you why I think what you propose won't work and isn't even worth trying.

 

Here’s the great thing with my idea, that you KNOW is right.. we could TRY IT, next week, and get the pro feedback. See how the tournament plays out. See if people enjoy watching it more. See if the better ball strikers do better and start pressing for a dialling back in clubhead size/tee height.

 

Yes, they could try it, but here is where I feel you lose what I am getting at.  USGA/R&A want to curb distance gains and make players "fit" on courses again.  Short term (very short term), you lower the tee, distances will come down to players 3 wood distance roughly.  Few weeks later, players will have tweaked strong 3 woods with longer shafts and low loft.  A few years later, you have purpose built mini drivers that largely circumvent what a short tee does.  Now I never said that pro golfers wouldn't hit shorter, I didn't say they would bomb it out there just as far as today, but I have said that it will not be to the extent that does anything to achieve the goal.  Complaints will come back, "lack of skill" and "do something about distance" threads will come roaring back only this time, Bryson is carrying golf balls under normal conditions 320 instead of 330-340.  So I ask you, why try something if it isn't obvious it will work?  Are you going to try it for a season, see that tour pro's largely hit 3 woods and then make a decision that aha it worked!?

 

WHERE IS THE HARM IN TRYING THAT RATHER THAN WORRYING ABOUT A FANTASY BUNCH OF 140mph SWINGS THAT ARE GOOD ENOUGH TO BE ON TOUR 

 

 Is that yelling with the all caps?  Take a deep breath, it is going to be ok man.  The harm in trying isn't as much as a full roll back I agree with you.  The problem I mainly have with that idea is that it will take some time to know if it worked and I already laid out what I think are extremely reasonable expectations as to why it won't.  I think there isn't any harm in trying it, but not on the tour.  How about in a closed lab where OEMS participate by providing the best club they can manage that will mitigate the effects of a short tee, have pro's come in and test along with a robot and see if it looks like a long term viable solution? At least then they can make a much more educated and evidence backed effort before implementing it on tour.  Then if they discover it has very good potential at meeting their goals, they can choose to apply it much like they did the groove rule.  They might even decide to change driver limits design wise along with it as part of the solution.

 

You tell me not to worry about "a fantasy bunch of 140mph swings that are good enough to be on tour".  I think you meant aren't good enough to be on tour, so I will roll with that.  Jamie, IS good enough to be on tour.  He would no doubt beat many current tour players and has in the past in his exemptions.  He just doesn't have all of the pieces to go along with his very high swing speed to be top tier on tour.  The point again, i was making with that is that in order to achieve the goal of limiting distance, I think you absolutely have to plan for long drive pro distance making its way to the tour.  It is already happening, and frequently.  it is only a matter of time before more and more guys with super high speed also have all of the other skills needed to be a top player.  I think you absolutely have to plan ahead for these things otherwise in my opinion, it is a half arsed effort and will be just as meaningless as the groove rule change was.    If you are going to change the game, make it count imo. 

[oikos1]

"Few weeks later, players will have tweaked strong 3 woods with longer shafts and low loft.  A few years later, you have purpose built mini drivers that largely circumvent what a short tee does."

 

Yes indeed.  OEM's would love this.  It's about time for a new $700 club to be marketed.

[Nard_S]

1 hour ago, clevited said:

 

I am very interested to discuss this more.  Can you detail more precisely why you think it would be an adequate change? 

 

 

I don't think a physical shrinking is enough. The COR needs to drop too. Maybe half or all way persimmon. The ball is a bigger deal, it needs a more balata like profile in terms of initial spin and (often ignored) it's aerodynamic profile and how the inner mass is distributed. Modern ball creates a smooth bubble to travel through the air in. The turbulence has been reduced, yeah, the ball goes farther but more importantly the ball just flies straighter.  I keep hearing how good & stacked the talent is, they ought to be better with computer modeling, high speed video & Trackman around. So let these guys play in the arena with gear that better fits the arena. Restore greater shot shaping & use of long irons again. Restore the balance of player to course, because it's out of whack and it's not all "talent". Changes do nothing to average player. If enthusiast wants to play with that gear, they can & guess what, their ability to get around their home course does not radically change. Ball tech does not apply in linear fashion. Spin & wind matter when you actually put spin on it and get it up in the wind. In the 90's folks got around under 90 in the same frequency as they do today. There was always a soft bifurcation because most folks did not play Tour 100 balls then. If there's a dollar involved the rules apply, if not fire away with your 460cc bomber and go after that plastic trophy. 

[hammersia]

22 hours ago, Dr. Block said:

If the thread were titled, "Equipment, Courses, Players, Let's compare era's" I think it could be quite interesting.   I have to think its been done a few times already though.

 

15 hours ago, clevited said:

 

What is your goal in posting this?  if you have a beef with me,  I will be absolutely happy to discuss via PMs so we can perhaps understand each other better and not derail even more.  I will say this however, I am human, and passionate about this particular subject.  I respond to posts that tag me and ones that I have a counter point for.  I write with confidence and I provide evidence best I can whether it be via logical thoughts, or images of ball performance, or videos of a long drive pro hitting a persimmon 340-350 yards carry.  

 

Edit:  Also, don't you think it is a little hypocritical to accuse me of only ever derailing every thread I am in?  i don't know a single person here that hasn't created tangents and derailed threads directly or helped to derail them.  Not a one.

 

Not me, I’ve never derailed anything. All my posts are thoughtful, insightful, relevant, and correct.

[Titleist99]

23 minutes ago, hammersia said:

 

Not me, I’ve never derailed anything. All my posts are thoughtful, insightful, relevant, and correct.

LOL!......Mine as well!

[Dr. Block]

If derailing threads is cool...consider me Miles Davis 

[airjammer]

12 hours ago, Titleist99 said:

Kyle Berkshire, the current long drive champ want to be a PGATOUR member. he's currently working with Bryson Dechambeau with his distance. Kyle is a +3 which IMO is the minimum for a tour player.

Minimum for the Korn Ferry your is +7. Kyle has a legitimate shot at the champions tour but he’ll never gain 4 shots fast enough to make the pga tour most likely. 

[hammersia]

3 minutes ago, airjammer said:

Minimum for the Korn Ferry your is +7. Kyle has a legitimate shot at the champions tour but he’ll never gain 4 shots fast enough to make the pga tour most likely. 

I’ve seen a bit of long drive, followed a few of them, even took part alongside a very young Joe Miller.  
They are super impressive... at long drive.

 

I'm not taking anything away from any of them, they work hard and take it seriously.

 

But I’ve never seen one of the known long drive guys and ever thought to myself, mmm, yep, future tour pro. 
 

I think of it as a somewhat different, and quite niche, variant of golf. 

[physasst]

19 minutes ago, airjammer said:

Minimum for the Korn Ferry your is +7. Kyle has a legitimate shot at the champions tour but he’ll never gain 4 shots fast enough to make the pga tour most likely. 

Kevin Kisner himself said he was a +5...not sure where +7 is coming from...jus saying...

 

Mike

[Dr. Block]

12 minutes ago, hammersia said:

I’ve seen a bit of long drive, followed a few of them, even took part alongside a very young Joe Miller.  
They are super impressive... at long drive.

 

I'm not taking anything away from any of them, they work hard and take it seriously.

 

But I’ve never seen one of the known long drive guys and ever thought to myself, mmm, yep, future tour pro. 
 

I think of it as a somewhat different, and quite niche, variant of golf. 

There’s something about that Berkshire fella though. He has a very sound swing for a big bomber.  I’m sure he’ll get some sponsors exemptions.  I know I’d give him one.  I think it would be entertaining if he hit a tour event on full attack with his long drive driver.  That would be the show.  
 

Jamie Sadlowski looked to be reigning in his biggest asset when I watched him in a few events.  If I were either of them, I’d be trying to figure out how to take all I had onto the course. 

[bladehunter]

2 hours ago, clevited said:

@milesgiles

 

I’ve answered all of that before, many times.

 

I haven't read all of your past arguments for why you think the 3/4" tee will work.  Perhaps you could restate with a quick summary?  Otherwise I will try my best to go back through and find them but unfortunately, in the world of online forums, that can be hard to do as thoughts can be strewn across many threads and many individual posts.  Any help with finding maybe one post with a good summary would also be appreciated.

 

You know what though, no one will ever convince you of anything on this board, as someone else noted.

 

You are not going to be convinced either it seems, why do you even bring up such a thing?  This is discourse, we can disagree and explain why we disagree.  What is the issue with that?  The tone in your post sounds hostile, if it is, lets tone it down and realize we are having a discussion.  I have been guilty in the past of getting defensive and such and still do at times, but lets try not to.  I am not trying to be mean to you, I am trying to have a discussion and show you why I think what you propose won't work and isn't even worth trying.

 

Here’s the great thing with my idea, that you KNOW is right.. we could TRY IT, next week, and get the pro feedback. See how the tournament plays out. See if people enjoy watching it more. See if the better ball strikers do better and start pressing for a dialling back in clubhead size/tee height.

 

Yes, they could try it, but here is where I feel you lose what I am getting at.  USGA/R&A want to curb distance gains and make players "fit" on courses again.  Short term (very short term), you lower the tee, distances will come down to players 3 wood distance roughly.  Few weeks later, players will have tweaked strong 3 woods with longer shafts and low loft.  A few years later, you have purpose built mini drivers that largely circumvent what a short tee does.  Now I never said that pro golfers wouldn't hit shorter, I didn't say they would bomb it out there just as far as today, but I have said that it will not be to the extent that does anything to achieve the goal.  Complaints will come back, "lack of skill" and "do something about distance" threads will come roaring back only this time, Bryson is carrying golf balls under normal conditions 320 instead of 330-340.  So I ask you, why try something if it isn't obvious it will work?  Are you going to try it for a season, see that tour pro's largely hit 3 woods and then make a decision that aha it worked!?

 

WHERE IS THE HARM IN TRYING THAT RATHER THAN WORRYING ABOUT A FANTASY BUNCH OF 140mph SWINGS THAT ARE GOOD ENOUGH TO BE ON TOUR 

 

 Is that yelling with the all caps?  Take a deep breath, it is going to be ok man.  The harm in trying isn't as much as a full roll back I agree with you.  The problem I mainly have with that idea is that it will take some time to know if it worked and I already laid out what I think are extremely reasonable expectations as to why it won't.  I think there isn't any harm in trying it, but not on the tour.  How about in a closed lab where OEMS participate by providing the best club they can manage that will mitigate the effects of a short tee, have pro's come in and test along with a robot and see if it looks like a long term viable solution? At least then they can make a much more educated and evidence backed effort before implementing it on tour.  Then if they discover it has very good potential at meeting their goals, they can choose to apply it much like they did the groove rule.  They might even decide to change driver limits design wise along with it as part of the solution.

 

You tell me not to worry about "a fantasy bunch of 140mph swings that are good enough to be on tour".  I think you meant aren't good enough to be on tour, so I will roll with that.  Jamie, IS good enough to be on tour.  He would no doubt beat many current tour players and has in the past in his exemptions.  He just doesn't have all of the pieces to go along with his very high swing speed to be top tier on tour.  The point again, i was making with that is that in order to achieve the goal of limiting distance, I think you absolutely have to plan for long drive pro distance making its way to the tour.  It is already happening, and frequently.  it is only a matter of time before more and more guys with super high speed also have all of the other skills needed to be a top player.  I think you absolutely have to plan ahead for these things otherwise in my opinion, it is a half arsed effort and will be just as meaningless as the groove rule change was.    If you are going to change the game, make it count imo. 

It would work.  It would force the drivers to go mini.  Right ?    Well.  The upper end of that is much less that 370 plus right ?   Yes.  Search for @QuigleyDU posts here.  See his current mini driver numbers.  I’d bet there’re on a 4 inch tee.     Ask him to test it on a 3/4 inch tee and report back.  I bet he will .  He’s faster than most your guys.  At least enough to give us a decent idea.  At any rate. His current tests with one show the upper limits pretty well.  Even with a raised tee height.  .  

[Dr. Block]

14 minutes ago, physasst said:

Kevin Kisner himself said he was a +5...not sure where +7 is coming from...jus saying...

 

Mike

I’ll venture a guess.  +5 is his number with tournament rounds on the pga tour.  +7 is what you need to break through. 
 

I play occasionally with a +6 who won the state open here in Illinois this year. He’s played in Korn Ferry events, he even come close to the final stage of Korn Ferry q-school a year ago.  His talent is incredible, and he’s yet to break through.  So he’s a +6 from mostly tournament rounds - meaning it takes a lot these days. There are so many great players trying to break through. 

Edited October 22, 2020 by Dr. Block

[QuigleyDU]

7 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

It would work.  It would force the drivers to go mini.  Right ?    Well.  The upper end of that is much less that 370 plus right ?   Yes.  Search for @QuigleyDU posts here.  See his current mini driver numbers.  I’d bet there’re on a 4 inch tee.     Ask him to test it on a 3/4 inch tee and report back.  I bet he will .  He’s faster than most your guys.  At least enough to give us a decent idea.  At any rate. His current tests with one show the upper limits pretty well.  Even with a raised tee height.  .  

I can already tell you as when I play this club I only tee it up about  3/4 of an inch or less. I just want it a bit off the ground really. I can say vs my driver driver. It is about 20-30 yards shorter total. I can regularly get it in the low 170 ball speeds and a smidge over 300 yards carry off the tee. The numbers I posted with that club were off the deck. I can get a little better numbers off a short tee. 

 

I have it playing at 42' in length with a 90 gram x flex shaft. 

[airjammer]

28 minutes ago, physasst said:

Kevin Kisner himself said he was a +5...not sure where +7 is coming from...jus saying...

 

Mike

It came directly for a tour coach when I asked him specifically about Kyle’s chances. This particular coach coaches what seems like a major of the Mackenzie tour players.  

[clevited]

5 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

It would work.  It would force the drivers to go mini.  Right ?    Well.  The upper end of that is much less that 370 plus right ?   Yes.  Search for @QuigleyDU posts here.  See his current mini driver numbers.  I’d bet there’re on a 4 inch tee.     Ask him to test it on a 3/4 inch tee and report back.  I bet he will .  He’s faster than most your guys.  At least enough to give us a decent idea.  At any rate. His current tests with one show the upper limits pretty well.  Even with a raised tee height.  .  

 

I don't believe it will accomplish the end goal, no.  I will see if I can find Quigley's posts though.  Perhaps the pro rollbackers can post clearly what they think is enough distance roll back and why.  Maybe that will clarify the reasoning for why you think a short tee will work.

[clevited]

10 minutes ago, QuigleyDU said:

I can already tell you as when I play this club I only tee it up about  3/4 of an inch or less. I just want it a bit off the ground really. I can say vs my driver driver. It is about 20-30 yards shorter total. I can regularly get it in the low 170 ball speeds and a smidge over 300 yards carry off the tee. The numbers I posted with that club were off the deck. I can get a little better numbers off a short tee. 

 

I have it playing at 42' in length with a 90 gram x flex shaft. 

 

I would be interested to see what you could do with a 60g, 45 inch, probably tipped like ~2 inches driver shaft on a 13.5* 3 wood head turned down to 11.5 or less off of that tee.  I bet it is significant if you can get the club set up right for your swing.

[QuigleyDU]

4 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

I would be interested to see what you could do with a 60g, 45 inch, probably tipped like ~2 inches driver shaft on a 13.5* 3 wood head turned down to 11.5 or less off of that tee.  I bet it is significant if you can get the club set up right for your swing.

The nice thing is that the TM adaptors are all the same. I can do that exact test.. My driver shaft is a 60 gram 45 inch shaft. I can crank the OO head down and see.. 

[bladehunter]

8 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

I don't believe it will accomplish the end goal, no.  I will see if I can find Quigley's posts though.  Perhaps the pro rollbackers can post clearly what they think is enough distance roll back and why.  Maybe that will clarify the reasoning for why you think a short tee will work.

300 yard carry should be the exception.  Shorter guys on tour shouldn’t  be Averaging 295-300 plus. 320 carry for the long guys should be a big hit and a big risk dispersion wise.  That’s why the ball has to be included in the rollback in my opinion.  We have guys like  Russel Henley hitting 280 carry 3 woods off the tee. Nothing about him says big hitter.  I’m seeing Wolff carrying 3 wood 300 plus. One confirmed 312 that plugged whne  it hit.  Short tee height and adding spin to the ball will accomplish it easy.  
 

bit you don’t want to hear how.  You don’t want to see it.  Lol.  The how isn’t the hard part. The how much can we bite back on and survive the lawsuits is the real question.  

[bscinstnct]

24 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

I would be interested to see what you could do with a 60g, 45 inch, probably tipped like ~2 inches driver shaft on a 13.5* 3 wood head turned down to 11.5 or less off of that tee.  I bet it is significant if you can get the club set up right for your swing.

 

Just make em use this.

 

Small steel head, 43 inch steel shaft.

 

TW was hitting that 300+ so I’m sure Bryson and the Uber fit crew will have no problem either ; )

 

Far more skill and power/speed required to lean on that to get it out there 300+ than just swinging out of their shoes with a toaster on 46’ graphite shaft.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[bladehunter]

10 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Just make em use this.

 

Small steel head, 43 inch steel shaft.

 

TW was hitting that 300+ so I’m sure Bryson and the Uber fit crew will have no problem either ; )

 

Far more skill and power/speed required to lean on that to get it out there 300+ than just swinging out of their shoes with a toaster on 46’ graphite shaft.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yep.  But they’ll tell you that “ anybody now can fly it 320 with that ..... we just don’t want them to and ruin the club markets “.  Lol. 
 

this fitness idea really blows my mind.  I don’t think half the ones claiming it’s fitness have ever been in the same room with a real natural athlete.  A pga tour pickup basketball league would  show you who’s who inside 20 minutes.  Meanwhile I’m watching guys like Brian Harmon and Kevin Na fly it 3 bills.  All I can say , facepalm to the max dude .... 

Edited October 22, 2020 by bladehunter