Matthew Fitzpatrick whines about BDC...

[m d g]

2 hours ago, Soloman1 said:

 

This is wrong...according to 'experts,' the track difference is 2-3%. Give Owens the benefit of the doubt and give him the full 3%. His '36 time was 10.3 seconds (not 10.2 as shown in this video). 

 

Doing the math (which I'm bad at) converts to a time of 10.3 X .03 = .309 (call it .31). 10.3 - .31 = 9.99 seconds.

 

Bolt's world record is 9.58 seconds. That makes him .41 seconds faster than Owens...almost half a second.

 

I will happily concede that Owens was a superior athlete to Bolt in that he competed and excelled in other events (not a one hit wonder), but Bolt will always be faster.

 

See my other post above for the argument that Bob Hayes was actually faster than both of them...

[Christen_The_Sloop]

The big question is how long can one hit bombs before the body starts breaking down. Tiger's swing took it's toll. But, from what I read it was also overtraining. 

 

DeChambeau seems to be a little more dedicated to training specific to the requirements of tournament golf. If he wins at Augusta. Look out. 

[OrangeGravy]

9 hours ago, bubbagump said:

 

The field can not get to 350 by choice lol.  That is natural talent, and there are probably a few to a handful of guys in each tourney that can keep up with BAD as is, without all the weight gain etc.  Bryson was a long hitter as is, and those peers could and do keep pace without the same coverage.  Going forward, long hitters will still be that and still have advantages, but the "field" wont all of the sudden start doing things outside their skillset and physical ability.  

The next crop of young golfers certainly can get there by choice. All it takes is enough kids growing up to adopt the same philosophy and enough of them will have the raw tools to get there and they will make up the field in the future. Never said anything about current fields. What we have out there now is what we have. 

[Sean2]

9 hours ago, Tgstan said:

I haven’t seen many people talk about an important point in this ‘debate.’

 

Namely, BAD is maybe the first guy to just come out and say “heck with fairways, I’m just gonna hit it as stupidly far as I can. That’s a bigger advantage.”

 

Of course, other pros have alluded to or suggested this approach, but he says it without reservation. I think that’s what’s polarizing people and putting some people off. 

Like anything else in life, golf is evolving/changing and BD is leading this particular change. Some people don't like change. 

[bladehunter]

6 hours ago, m d g said:

This is wrong...according to 'experts,' the track difference is 2-3%. Give Owens the benefit of the doubt and give him the full 3%. His '36 time was 10.3 seconds (not 10.2 as shown in this video). 

 

Doing the math (which I'm bad at) converts to a time of 10.3 X .03 = .309 (call it .31). 10.3 - .31 = 9.99 seconds.

 

Bolt's world record is 9.58 seconds. That makes him .41 seconds faster than Owens...almost half a second.

 

I will happily concede that Owens was a superior athlete to Bolt in that he competed and excelled in other events (not a one hit wonder), but Bolt will always be faster.

 

See my other post above for the argument that Bob Hayes was actually faster than both of them...

The thing with Bolt is ..... he’s a guy with a motor and more gears than he even knows about.  I’ve often wondered this.   If he had a “ rabbit “ that he could chase , meaning any competition that would get out on him consistently that he’d have to push to defeat , how fast could he be ?  My guess is faster .  I’d bet on it.  He’s a once in 100 years guy.  No doubt in my mind.  

Edited October 12, 2020 by bladehunter

[MattyO1984]

I can imagine that I could potentially be jumped on but I can see where Matt Fitzpatrick is coming from. I am not sure that he is entirely correct, there are innumerable sides to all of this but as I say, I can see where he is coming from. To my mind it is more difficult to hit it straight than it to hit it long. Hitting is straight is a skill, hitting it long is an ability.

 

I think that we can all agree that Bryson has, in large part, been able to pick up the distance he now hits it as a result of his training. Not time spent on the golf course or range. Sure he will have needed time on the range to get used to his new body but the major part of the improvement to his game, namely an ability to hit it 50 yards further than he used to, has come from something which is not directly golf. Lifting what he now lifts, is there a golf skill in that?

 

As far as I am aware, there is nothing that I can do in the gym which will help me hit it straighter. The only way of doing that is by putting the time in with a club in my hand to develop that skill. Just like spending time in the gym it will take hard work and dedication but in a different way. 

 

All of that said, take Bryson out of the conversation and rewind 25-30 years ago to John Daly. His physical ability (which lets be honest, he didn’t really seem to work on) allowed him to hit the ball ridiculous distances for the time. You are not telling me that that was skill. It was simple fluke luck that he had the ability to do that. Clearly Bryson has had to put a hell of a lot of work in to get that ability and nothing has come to him by luck but ability to hit 350 is not a skill. The skill comes in hitting as many fairways as he does.

[thorens]

6 hours ago, m d g said:

This is wrong...according to 'experts,' the track difference is 2-3%.

Does that number account for all changes over time (starting blocks, developments in shoes etc.) or is that only the difference in track surface performance?

Edited October 12, 2020 by thorens
Fixed a typo...

[pinestreetgolf]

14 hours ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Jack and TW were both as strong with the putter as their drivers. If the weren’t,

 

theyd be

 

 

Tony Finau ; ) 

 

 

Plus both were absolutely elite long/mid iron players. 
 

You can do a lot as a tour pro with just a tremendous driver, but guys like TW and Jack need their irons and putting to be top notch or neither would have been nearly as effective.

 

And Rory and DJ show us that there is a lot you need to do besides be a great driver in order to win a *lot of majors.

 

This is where we will see how it works out for BD. He won the US Open with driver but also he putted lights out and his wedge game was unusually good for him. He is a consistent putter and with driver and putter, he will win. But if his wedge game drops back to mediocre and he can’t keep swinging out of his shoes and keep it on the fairway, he will be highly competitive but not a dominant player.

 

 

 

 

 

1. Neither Jack nor Tiger were historically elite putters, let alone "absolutely elite".  Woods was significantly better than Jack but he still doesn't crack the ranks of historically good putters.

 

2. The closer you hit the ball to the hole the better putter you are.  Woods hit his irons are full 1.3 strokes better than everyone else during his heyday.  If I hit it to six feet and you hit it to sixteen, I'll be the "better" putter because I starter closer most of the time.

 

3. Rory and DJ haven't shown us that.  Its not black and white.  You're not either a great driver or not one.  Its grey.  Rory is a great driver but he's not that much better than the field.  In 2000 Tiger lapped the field off the tee.  Its not about "good" or "bad" but "how much better or worse".

 

4. If he stays 20-30 yards longer than everyone else consistently he will dominate like the only other two guys who have ever had that big an advantage on the field off the tee: Tiger and Jack.

 

[pinestreetgolf]

14 hours ago, bladehunter said:

Never said there was.  In fact I said loudly that i wanted the long hitter to remain the king.  I’m concerned with scale.  378 yard drives don’t fit.  Period.  

 

Doesn't fit what?  Courses?  Games evolve.  Change is a constant.  And nobody cares about tradition. Tradition is just peer pressure from dead people.

[Superbrit]

1 hour ago, MattyO1984 said:

I can imagine that I could potentially be jumped on but I can see where Matt Fitzpatrick is coming from. I am not sure that he is entirely correct, there are innumerable sides to all of this but as I say, I can see where he is coming from. To my mind it is more difficult to hit it straight than it to hit it long. Hitting is straight is a skill, hitting it long is an ability.

 

I think that we can all agree that Bryson has, in large part, been able to pick up the distance he now hits it as a result of his training. Not time spent on the golf course or range. Sure he will have needed time on the range to get used to his new body but the major part of the improvement to his game, namely an ability to hit it 50 yards further than he used to, has come from something which is not directly golf. Lifting what he now lifts, is there a golf skill in that?

 

As far as I am aware, there is nothing that I can do in the gym which will help me hit it straighter. The only way of doing that is by putting the time in with a club in my hand to develop that skill. Just like spending time in the gym it will take hard work and dedication but in a different way. 

 

All of that said, take Bryson out of the conversation and rewind 25-30 years ago to John Daly. His physical ability (which lets be honest, he didn’t really seem to work on) allowed him to hit the ball ridiculous distances for the time. You are not telling me that that was skill. It was simple fluke luck that he had the ability to do that. Clearly Bryson has had to put a hell of a lot of work in to get that ability and nothing has come to him by luck but ability to hit 350 is not a skill. The skill comes in hitting as many fairways as he does.

Swinging a driver with a clubhead speed of over 120mph and hitting the centre most of the time, while controlling trajectory and direction is not skill? sorry but what absolute baloney!

 

In my opinion of course

[MattyO1984]

2 minutes ago, Superbrit said:

Swinging a driver with a clubhead speed of over 120mph and hitting the centre most of the time, while controlling trajectory and direction is not skill? sorry but what absolute baloney!

 

In my opinion of course

 

The ability to swing it 120mph + is not a skill but as I said “the skill comes from hitting as many fairways as he does”.

[bladehunter]

21 minutes ago, pinestreetgolf said:

 

Doesn't fit what?  Courses?  Games evolve.  Change is a constant.  And nobody cares about tradition. Tradition is just peer pressure from dead people.

Nobody said tradition.  Again. Your words.  
 

im talking about physical scale.   400 yard carries do not fit current golf courses.  Current courses aren’t designed for waits on the tee on par 4s for greens to clear etc.  waist on the tee for people to get on a green on par 5s etc.  scale.  Simple idea. 

[bladehunter]

22 minutes ago, Superbrit said:

Swinging a driver with a clubhead speed of over 120mph and hitting the centre most of the time, while controlling trajectory and direction is not skill? sorry but what absolute baloney!

 

In my opinion of course

Not a learned skill.  Most who can ... can...  that’s the disconnect in that vein of thought.  Learned vs natural skills.  You can polish that natural skill , sure. But you can’t teach a lot of things. 

[bladehunter]

41 minutes ago, pinestreetgolf said:

 

1. Neither Jack nor Tiger were historically elite putters, let alone "absolutely elite".  Woods was significantly better than Jack but he still doesn't crack the ranks of historically good putters.

 

2. The closer you hit the ball to the hole the better putter you are.  Woods hit his irons are full 1.3 strokes better than everyone else during his heyday.  If I hit it to six feet and you hit it to sixteen, I'll be the "better" putter because I starter closer most of the time.

 

3. Rory and DJ haven't shown us that.  Its not black and white.  You're not either a great driver or not one.  Its grey.  Rory is a great driver but he's not that much better than the field.  In 2000 Tiger lapped the field off the tee.  Its not about "good" or "bad" but "how much better or worse".

 

4. If he stays 20-30 yards longer than everyone else consistently he will dominate like the only other two guys who have ever had that big an advantage on the field off the tee: Tiger and Jack.

 

I’d argue that. Jack made more putts that counted than anyone except tiger.  Jack not a good putter ?  In other news.  The earth has been found to be flat.  🤦‍♂️

[bscinstnct]

49 minutes ago, pinestreetgolf said:

 

1. Neither Jack nor Tiger were historically elite putters, let alone "absolutely elite".  Woods was significantly better than Jack but he still doesn't crack the ranks of historically good putters.

 

2. The closer you hit the ball to the hole the better putter you are.  Woods hit his irons are full 1.3 strokes better than everyone else during his heyday.  If I hit it to six feet and you hit it to sixteen, I'll be the "better" putter because I starter closer most of the time.

 

3. Rory and DJ haven't shown us that.  Its not black and white.  You're not either a great driver or not one.  Its grey.  Rory is a great driver but he's not that much better than the field.  In 2000 Tiger lapped the field off the tee.  Its not about "good" or "bad" but "how much better or worse".

 

4. If he stays 20-30 yards longer than everyone else consistently he will dominate like the only other two guys who have ever had that big an advantage on the field off the tee: Tiger and Jack.

 

 

 

 

TW was ranked 6th or better in SG putting from 2004-2008. They only started calculating in SG putting in 2004 but I’m thinking it was even better prior to that. 
 

 

**And keep in mind that SG calculates that particular skill, putting in this case, without any other skills (driving, approach, chipping) impacting the stat. 

 

Did you know that?
 

 

[Arn]

We’re just going to keep hearing this. I’m a huge DeChambeau fan and it’s not his fault. The USGA and R&A are to blame for the whole mess. They chased the sex appeal of long drives and the sponsor/industry/fan $$$$$ that came with it. They did not protect the game. Now most famous courses are obsolete and they won’t be building and maintaining new one’s to support a single pro event per year. Any other sport would have regulated equipment to protect the field it’s played on. Golf got greedy.

Edited October 12, 2020 by Arn

[bladehunter]

2 minutes ago, Arn said:

We’re just going to keep hearing this. I’m a huge DeChambeau fan and it’s not his fault. The USGA and R&A are to blame for the whole mess. They chased the sex appeal of long drives and the sponsor/industry/fan $$$$$ that came with it. They did not protect the game. Now most famous courses are obsolete and they won’t be building and maintaining news one to support a single pro event per year. Any other sport would have regulated equipment to protect the field it’s played on. Golf got greedy.

Exactly. I like Bryson too.  It can be both. I can like his approach and know that golf messed up years ago.   

[TMoakley1547]

I know im late to the party here, but in response to FitzPatrick saying distance is not a skill, I would argue that it absolutely is. It must take incredible skill to swing as hard as Bryson is, and still have the accuracy to hit the fairway a good percentage of the time. 

 

And as for his comment that hes making a mockery of the game, hes swinging harder and hitting it further than everyone else. Not what i would call a mockery. Are MLB pitchers that throw 101 mph fastballs making a mockery of baseball? Is Aaron Judge making a mockery of the game because he hits home runs further than most? 

 

 

[Dr. Block]

4 hours ago, MattyO1984 said:

I can imagine that I could potentially be jumped on but I can see where Matt Fitzpatrick is coming from. I am not sure that he is entirely correct, there are innumerable sides to all of this but as I say, I can see where he is coming from. To my mind it is more difficult to hit it straight than it to hit it long. Hitting is straight is a skill, hitting it long is an ability.

 

I think that we can all agree that Bryson has, in large part, been able to pick up the distance he now hits it as a result of his training. Not time spent on the golf course or range. Sure he will have needed time on the range to get used to his new body but the major part of the improvement to his game, namely an ability to hit it 50 yards further than he used to, has come from something which is not directly golf. Lifting what he now lifts, is there a golf skill in that?

 

As far as I am aware, there is nothing that I can do in the gym which will help me hit it straighter. The only way of doing that is by putting the time in with a club in my hand to develop that skill. Just like spending time in the gym it will take hard work and dedication but in a different way. 

 

All of that said, take Bryson out of the conversation and rewind 25-30 years ago to John Daly. His physical ability (which lets be honest, he didn’t really seem to work on) allowed him to hit the ball ridiculous distances for the time. You are not telling me that that was skill. It was simple fluke luck that he had the ability to do that. Clearly Bryson has had to put a hell of a lot of work in to get that ability and nothing has come to him by luck but ability to hit 350 is not a skill. The skill comes in hitting as many fairways as he does.

Daly's enormous backswing and associated speed was the product of playing with a men's full-size set that he refused to let his dad cut-down when he was a kid.  So yeah, kind of luck in a way.  His ability to shallow the club into a perfect impact position is pure talent and skill though.

 

From what I know of Bryson, natural talent wasn't his path.  Research, discovery, and serious grit were.  Hogan like almost.  Like it was said earlier in this thread, touring pro's have huge ego's.  Fitzpatrick won't be the last to stick his foot in his mouth regarding Bryson's methods.  

 

[cardia10]

I'm with others that say distance is not a skill, but more of a ability. Growing up, some guys just hit it longer than others and have the ability to continue that process of hitting it longer. Some of us peck it out there 250 and just always will. We rely on those 15 yards Taylor Made promises every year. The skill is putting the entire package together and being long and straight. TPC Summerlin tamed him. He didn't win. At that speed, every millimeter matters and when you are perfect, it is gong to be amazing. When you are slightly off, it will be streaky. With Augusta's limited rough, who knows if his short game will hold up. The beauty is, we will all see in a few weeks. I'm more concerned at his chipping and bunker play with a 6 iron, but I would not even put him in the Rory/DJ talk yet, much less Jack and Tiger.

Edited October 12, 2020 by cardia10

[jmck]

Yes, Augusta will be interesting.  If you think heads are exploding over some fairly innocuous Matty Fitzpatrick comments just wait.  Bryson has a good week at Augusta and Fred Ridley is going to single-handedly bifurcate the game.  The USGA and R&A have been dithering around about distance for 30 years now.  Augusta draws more water than the USGA and R&A combined, and they're not going to stand by and watch their course become a pitch and putt at 7600 yards.

[johnseg]

17 minutes ago, jmck said:

Yes, Augusta will be interesting.  If you think heads are exploding over some fairly innocuous Matty Fitzpatrick comments just wait.  Bryson has a good week at Augusta and Fred Ridley is going to single-handedly bifurcate the game.  The USGA and R&A have been dithering around about distance for 30 years now.  Augusta draws more water than the USGA and R&A combined, and they're not going to stand by and watch their course become a pitch and putt at 7600 yards.

I don't think much will happen. Augusta is almost always a double digit under par winner. I think they expect that good shots will be rewarded.

[Krt22]

I love hearing short knockers complain lol. 

[gvogel]

It's funny.  I don't remember anyone in the 1970's and 1980's who went around and said that the game would be so much better if there were a ball that Jack Nicklaus or Tom Watson could hit an additional 30 yards.  Notably, their games were long for the courses that they played, but they still had to contend with fairway bunkers and other hazards laid out for players in their era, and earlier eras.

 

This past week, 5 players averaged 340 yards or more off the tee, with Bryson averaging 363.  God love him.  The top 25 in driving distance averaged just about over 320.

 

I contend that there should be a ball and driver spec for use on some courses, in some competitions.  Those specs could be used for US Opens, Open Championships, the Masters and other tournaments on shorter courses.  Those specs could certainly be used in Las Vegas and Mexico City.

 

To those who say that it would be difficult for players to switch balls from tournament to tournament, I say that you don't know how fantastic these elite players are.

[pinestreetgolf]

4 hours ago, bladehunter said:

Nobody said tradition.  Again. Your words.  
 

im talking about physical scale.   400 yard carries do not fit current golf courses.  Current courses aren’t designed for waits on the tee on par 4s for greens to clear etc.  waist on the tee for people to get on a green on par 5s etc.  scale.  Simple idea. 

 

Who in your group carries it 400 yards?

 

If you're talking about pros, who cares.  Build new courses.

[Titleist99]

3 minutes ago, gvogel said:

It's funny.  I don't remember anyone in the 1970's and 1980's who went around and said that the game would be so much better if there were a ball that Jack Nicklaus or Tom Watson could hit an additional 30 yards.  Notably, their games were long for the courses that they played, but they still had to contend with fairway bunkers and other hazards laid out for players in their era, and earlier eras.

 

This past week, 5 players averaged 340 yards or more off the tee, with Bryson averaging 363.  God love him.  The top 25 in driving distance averaged just about over 320.

 

I contend that there should be a ball and driver spec for use on some courses, in some competitions.  Those specs could be used for US Opens, Open Championships, the Masters and other tournaments on shorter courses.  Those specs could certainly be used in Las Vegas and Mexico City.

 

To those who say that it would be difficult for players to switch balls from tournament to tournament, I say that you don't know how fantastic these elite players are.

While I agree with you......the PGATOUR have the same data. This is right where they want the numbers to be. The tour is in the entertainment business, not in the keep courses relevant business. If the paying public wanted to see touring pros hit drives of 250-260 yards we would see that every week....the public loves the long ball even though driving is just a small part of the game....IMO

[Titleist99]

5 minutes ago, pinestreetgolf said:

 

Who in your group carries it 400 yards?

 

If you're talking about pros, who cares.  Build new courses.

Agreed!.....Pro game is a different game. I don't know anyone that hit it as far and as straight as these guys.... that's why people pay premiums to watch....LOL! IMO

[jmck]

31 minutes ago, pinestreetgolf said:

 

Who in your group carries it 400 yards?

 

If you're talking about pros, who cares.  Build new courses.

Lol at “build new courses.”  Go ahead and tell that to Fred Ridley and see how far you get.

[m d g]

40 minutes ago, gvogel said:

I contend that there should be a ball and driver spec for use on some courses, in some competitions.  Those specs could be used for US Opens, Open Championships, the Masters and other tournaments on shorter courses.

This will work out well...

[oikos1]

20 minutes ago, Titleist99 said:

While I agree with you......the PGATOUR have the same data. This is right where they want the numbers to be. The tour is in the entertainment business, not in the keep courses relevant business. If the paying public wanted to see touring pros hit drives of 250-260 yards we would see that every week....the public loves the long ball even though driving is just a small part of the game....IMO

Exactly.  And now the  Premier Golf League is lurking right around the corner waiving millions of dollars.  A ball/equipment rollback would at the very least disrupt and provide further reasons for players to potentially leave the PGA Tour and join the PGL.  The PGA Tour does not want to see distance reduced and manufacturers don't want the B word.  Long bombs rule and the USGA, twenty years later, find themselves in an even deeper mess. 

 

Adjusting course layouts at the professional level is the most practical solution to satisfy the principals sitting at the table.