Rory's Rant - Distance Insights Project - Your thoughts?

[storm319]

On 2/7/2021 at 4:45 AM, mahonie said:

The one thing that never gets discussed is how out of context the 460cc driver is with the rest of the game. It should never have seen the light of day, but the genie is out of the bottle and it’s going to be hard to get it back in. It’s only now, after a few years of development that the full impact of that decision to allow 460cc is coming home to roost. Driving used to be the hardest skill in the game and now it’s the easiest. I would go as far to say that if you cannot consistently hit a 460cc driver you have no business playing golf in the first place.

 

Just think on this, if tennis had been run by the USGA:

 

 

and the majority of pro tennis players today still play racquets smaller than the maximum size allowable by their applicable governing body.

[storm319]

On 2/7/2021 at 2:24 PM, milesgiles said:

 

The anti roll backers are quite consistent in one belief:

 

it makes no difference to the pro’s how big the clubhead is but they simply HAVE to use a 460 because that’s what the manufacturers are trying to sell to the masses.

 

in other words it’s amateurs like yourself, who think the sky will fall in if the 460 disappears, who are dictating how we all have to play. Not me.

 

btw, I’m pretty sure pro’s are well represented on both the R and A and usga committees (without looking it up)

I believe that most people are advocating leaving the regulations as is which allows a greater range equipment choice. You are advocating for changes that will reduce choices under the rules of golf. Anyone advocating for taking something away from people better have a good reason.

 

I think it is fair for stakeholders to ask for the “problem” and “optimal solution” to be quantitatively defined before any proposals are considered (this has not happened to date). Additionally it is irresponsible to move forward with any proposed rollback without a regressional impact study. 

Edited February 21, 2021 by storm319

[storm319]

On 2/8/2021 at 6:53 PM, milesgiles said:

 

Faldo, Jack, Gary.. all won more majors than Rory so their opinion is more valid, yeah? And they all want a rollback, I'm just advocating for them..

Given that any rollback would not impact any of these past players, IMHO their opinion matters less than an active competitor regardless of their accomplishments.

[TiScape]

2 hours ago, Nard_S said:

Yes, TM in an interview on WRX stated that their Drivers have a different assembly line, that they have a CG placement that is more forward and closer to shaft and (surprisingly to me anyway) they are lighter to allow for more foam fill for custom weighting. The Diamond & Dot series from Callaway is very much the same. I cannot say how Titleist handles this stuff but Speith does not play off the shelf CB irons, again per interview on WRX.

 

I own a set of irons from a Master champ and from a journeyman. They are not the same as the retail versions available at the time. You can buy the irons that won Molinari a major but they are JDM from Miura, not Callaway and cost twice as much the Apex MB's his are stamped as.

It definitely makes sense that a professional is going to benefit from a different CG than someone that has a 95mph club head speed (if that for a majority of general public) and vice versa. The average player using DJs driver would do about as well with it as they would with his irons or 7.0 or DG X7 shafts in their irons. So with “wood” heads, is it safe to say the quality is the same, they’re just different?

Edited February 21, 2021 by TIScape

[mahonie]

12 minutes ago, storm319 said:

Given that any rollback would not impact any of these past players, IMHO their opinion matters less than an active competitor regardless of their accomplishments.

Sorry...Rory is only an ‘active competitor’ when the course is watered to death and there’s no wind...why do you think he moved to the PGA Tour? 🤦🏼‍♂️

[storm319]

1 minute ago, mahonie said:

Sorry...Rory is only an ‘active competitor’ when the course is watered to death and there’s no wind...why do you think he moved to the PGA Tour? 🤦🏼‍♂️

Same reason any European moves to the PGA Tour full time...more money!

[Nard_S]

31 minutes ago, TIScape said:

It definitely makes sense that a professional is going to benefit from a different CG than someone that has a 95mph club head speed (if that for a majority of general public) and vice versa. The average player using DJs driver would do about as well with it as they would with his irons or 7.0 or DG X7 shafts in their irons. So with “wood” heads, is it safe to say the quality is the same, they’re just different?

Yeah I would guess it's more about the math and dance of grams. I'm not a major ho of metals so cannot say if TI is qualitatively better than retail though i suspect little slides by there. You mentioned Tsi3, I'm looking at that and the 4 variety. Titleist's gear is always nicely made, at least that's been my experience. The Tsi's look beautiful and are getting solid reviews. My current metals are Mizuno. The driver is JDM, incredibly well built club and the Tsi might be the only club to kick them out this Spring.

[TiScape]

1 minute ago, Nard_S said:

Yeah I would guess it's more about the math and dance of grams. I'm not a major ho of metals so cannot say if TI is qualitatively better than retail though i suspect little slides by there. You mentioned Tsi3, I'm looking at that and the 4 variety. Titleist's gear is always nicely made, at least that's been my experience. The Tsi's look beautiful and are getting solid reviews. My current metals are Mizuno. The driver is JDM, incredibly well built club and the Tsi might be the only club to kick them out this Spring.

I am playing around with the TSi 2 and 3. For me the Titleist heads just have the best feel/sound. Always have. Hope you find one you like!

[mahonie]

28 minutes ago, storm319 said:

Same reason any European moves to the PGA Tour full time...more money!

Exactly. When the game is about the money it’s no longer a game. Now he’s Chair of the PGA Tour player’s advisory council, expect him to toe the party line even more. The first thing he’ll do is pull any course that has any fairway less than 60 yards wide and make sure that every course is over-watered to suit his ‘air game.’

 

It’s all part of the PGA Tour self-funding its members and clueless advertising execs being bought by the PGA Tour ‘product.’ You can tell that the ruling bodies are just a bit of an irritation to the PGA Tour who have no respect for the integrity of the game although they are fast becoming the only ‘visible’ element.

 

I can see a break coming with the PGA Tour setting their own rules in the not too distant future.

[storm319]

2 minutes ago, mahonie said:

Exactly. When the game is about the money it’s no longer a game. Now he’s Chair of the PGA Tour player’s advisory council, expect him to toe the party line even more. The first thing he’ll do is pull any course that has any fairway less than 60 yards wide and make sure that every course is over-watered to suit his ‘air game.’

 

It’s all part of the PGA Tour self-funding its members and clueless advertising execs being bought by the PGA Tour ‘product.’ You can tell that the ruling bodies are just a bit of an irritation to the PGA Tour who have no respect for the integrity of the game although they are fast becoming the only ‘visible’ element.

 

I can see a break coming with the PGA Tour setting their own rules in the not too distant future.

Whether they like it or not, the USGAs influence would suffer dramatically if the PGA Tour decided to adopt their own rule set. It is in the USGAs best interest to get buy in from all major organizations before any change and that will likely never change.

[caniac6]

16 minutes ago, mahonie said:

Exactly. When the game is about the money it’s no longer a game. Now he’s Chair of the PGA Tour player’s advisory council, expect him to toe the party line even more. The first thing he’ll do is pull any course that has any fairway less than 60 yards wide and make sure that every course is over-watered to suit his ‘air game.’

 

It’s all part of the PGA Tour self-funding its members and clueless advertising execs being bought by the PGA Tour ‘product.’ You can tell that the ruling bodies are just a bit of an irritation to the PGA Tour who have no respect for the integrity of the game although they are fast becoming the only ‘visible’ element.

 

I can see a break coming with the PGA Tour setting their own rules in the not too distant future.

I would be all in favor of the PGA of America staring to make rules rather than the Tour or the USGA. The PGA of America members deal with the golfing public everyday, and they are actually interested in growing the game. They know what is going on with the 99.99%!

 

[bscinstnct]

26 minutes ago, mahonie said:

Exactly. When the game is about the money it’s no longer a game. Now he’s Chair of the PGA Tour player’s advisory council, expect him to toe the party line even more. The first thing he’ll do is pull any course that has any fairway less than 60 yards wide and make sure that every course is over-watered to suit his ‘air game.’

 

It’s all part of the PGA Tour self-funding its members and clueless advertising execs being bought by the PGA Tour ‘product.’ You can tell that the ruling bodies are just a bit of an irritation to the PGA Tour who have no respect for the integrity of the game although they are fast becoming the only ‘visible’ element.

 

I can see a break coming with the PGA Tour setting their own rules in the not too distant future.

 

Rory has said, I think as much as any active player and particularly long high profile players, that he is open to and possibly for equipment roll backs/modifications to make the game “harder”.

 

For pros only, he wouldn’t want roll backs for average ams.

Any premium on ball striking skills/less forgiving clubs will benefit him (he has said the forgiveness penalizes good ball strikers) so it makes sense.

 

I agree that the Tour is driven by money. And for now the long ball brings ratings. But, they also must know that too much  driver/wedge gets boring for fans as well.

 

So, hopefully, even in the context of chasing money, they realize that a “product” that balances and promotes all of the great skills fans want to see is ideal, and will work towards planing the future where the most appealing experience for the fans, is the goal.

Edited February 21, 2021 by bscinstnct

[mahonie]

57 minutes ago, caniac6 said:

I would be all in favor of the PGA of America staring to make rules rather than the Tour or the USGA. The PGA of America members deal with the golfing public everyday, and they are actually interested in growing the game. They know what is going on with the 99.99%!

 

You’ve just hit the nail on the head and highlighted the biggest problem. The PGA of America may know what is going on with 99.99% of golfers in the US, but the distance issue is not a US-centric problem...there’s a whole other world out there where the problem is massive and needs to be recognised.

[caniac6]

5 minutes ago, mahonie said:

You’ve just hit the nail on the head and highlighted the biggest problem. The PGA of America may know what is going on with 99.99% of golfers in the US, but the distance issue is not a US-centric problem...there’s a whole other world out there where the problem is massive and needs to be recognised.

I can't comment on the R&A vs PGA organizations in the rest of the world, but it seems like the PGA of America has a lot more common sense than the USGA. 

[milesgiles]

7 hours ago, storm319 said:

If you can watch this and seriously still think that driver size is the primary contributor to this “distance problem”, then I believe you are beyond help Captain Ahab...

 

 

 

this has been posted a million times and ive said the same thing a million times

 

its a 272 CARRY from one of the very longest players. CARRY is the issue. 

 

Roll is easy to stop.

[milesgiles]

6 hours ago, storm319 said:

Do you buy car insurance only because you get into accidents on a daily basis? No, but it is there for the infrequent accidents that do happen. 
 

Additionally there is no major sport that has a single global set of rules. If anything, most golf regulations have historically been driven by the pro game down to amateurs, not the other way around.

 

I dont want to watch bowling with the bumpers up or Nascar with ABS. Why do I want to watch golf where tee shots are made as easy as possible?

[milesgiles]

6 hours ago, storm319 said:

I believe that most people are advocating leaving the regulations as is which allows a greater range equipment choice. You are advocating for changes that will reduce choices under the rules of golf. Anyone advocating for taking something away from people better have a good reason.

 

I think it is fair for stakeholders to ask for the “problem” and “optimal solution” to be quantitatively defined before any proposals are considered (this has not happened to date). Additionally it is irresponsible to move forward with any proposed rollback without a regressional impact study. 

 

Again, Im just asking to go back to something recognisable that was the way the game was played for 250 years. The 460 is anti skill, anti tradition, anti golf.

 

You dont need a regressional study, you simply need to realise people of all standards played and enjoyed the game without a 460  head. 

[milesgiles]

6 hours ago, storm319 said:

Given that any rollback would not impact any of these past players, IMHO their opinion matters less than an active competitor regardless of their accomplishments.

 

I think thats called confirmation bias

[BNGL]

1 hour ago, milesgiles said:

 

Again, Im just asking to go back to something recognisable that was the way the game was played for 250 years. The 460 is anti skill, anti tradition, anti golf.

 

You dont need a regressional study, you simply need to realise people of all standards played and enjoyed the game without a 460  head. 

And people of all standards play and enjoy the game with a 460 head...I enjoy head not matter what. 

[Wesquire]

2 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

this has been posted a million times and ive said the same thing a million times

 

its a 272 CARRY from one of the very longest players. CARRY is the issue. 

 

Roll is easy to stop.

It was also a low shot and 3w loft. 

[storm319]

3 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

this has been posted a million times and ive said the same thing a million times

 

its a 272 CARRY from one of the very longest players. CARRY is the issue. 

 

Roll is easy to stop.

This example often comes up in these discussions because fairway conditions that allow for rollout equal to nearly 20% of a drive is ridiculous especially when it contributes to the average tour driving distance numbers that the USGA is attempting to use to justify a rollback. The USGA is just as guilty as the PGA Tour when it comes to fairway lengths (or lack there of).
 

Rory’s 272 carry in this example was with a 15 degree 3w that is smaller than the typical persimmon of the past  (and it clearly looks like he has more in the tank). Another example was the 2015 US Open at Chambers Bay. Dustin Johnson and Jason Day both carried the 12th green (par 4 slightly over 300 yards) with 3w that were under 170cc. Reducing driver sizes will not slow these guys down. 

[storm319]

3 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

Again, Im just asking to go back to something recognisable that was the way the game was played for 250 years. The 460 is anti skill, anti tradition, anti golf.

 

You dont need a regressional study, you simply need to realise people of all standards played and enjoyed the game without a 460  head. 

Players from every era have said the same of each influential paradigm shift. The game during Jack’s golden era was very different than that of his predecessors (Bobby Jones stated that the game during that era was not “familiar”). 20th century golf in general was the nowhere near what it was when St Andrews was first established. Things change whether you like it or not. 

[j_giesler]

Just grow the fairways longer, less roll on their drives. Longer fairway rough when the tour comes to town coupled with shaved collars around the greens so missed approach shots roll way back off the green and leave a tight pitch back.

 

Don’t turn the ball back or makes greens impossible, just make an error more costly and fewer guys will take the same number of risks.

[milesgiles]

6 hours ago, storm319 said:

This example often comes up in these discussions because fairway conditions that allow for rollout equal to nearly 20% of a drive is ridiculous especially when it contributes to the average tour driving distance numbers that the USGA is attempting to use to justify a rollback. The USGA is just as guilty as the PGA Tour when it comes to fairway lengths (or lack there of).
 

Rory’s 272 carry in this example was with a 15 degree 3w that is smaller than the typical persimmon of the past  (and it clearly looks like he has more in the tank). Another example was the 2015 US Open at Chambers Bay. Dustin Johnson and Jason Day both carried the 12th green (par 4 slightly over 300 yards) with 3w that were under 170cc. Reducing driver sizes will not slow these guys down. 

 

 

none of them routinely carry a 3 wood anywhere near 300. The clubhead is absolutely not smaller than persimmon.

 

They may well be able to carry a small headed driver 300, but it will be the exception, not the norm, and youll see a lot more mishits, without which the game is boring imo.

 

you havent watched much golf live if you think pro's hit the middle every time 

[milesgiles]

6 hours ago, storm319 said:

Players from every era have said the same of each influential paradigm shift. The game during Jack’s golden era was very different than that of his predecessors (Bobby Jones stated that the game during that era was not “familiar”). 20th century golf in general was the nowhere near what it was when St Andrews was first established. Things change whether you like it or not. 

 

i believe he said, specifically, it was Jacks game that was 'not familiar'.

 

It took 250 years to go from a feathery and hickory shafts to go to 3 piece balls and steel shafts. It took a few months for the authorities to wreck the game by allowing 460 clown shoe clubheads and broomstick putters.

[storm319]

2 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

 

none of them routinely carry a 3 wood anywhere near 300. The clubhead is absolutely not smaller than persimmon.

 

They may well be able to carry a small headed driver 300, but it will be the exception, not the norm, and youll see a lot more mishits, without which the game is boring imo.

 

you havent watched much golf live if you think pro's hit the middle every time 

Typical persimmon size was ~190cc. Most modern 3w are smaller than that although shaped very differently. 
 

Few players today routinely carry a 460cc driver over 300 yards. Additionally the 2nd shot is played from the final resting place of the first shot, not where the ball hits the ground for the first time and since the USGA/R&A are focusing on total distance averages (not carry only) it is disingenuous to downplay the role that course conditions have on the modern game.

[milesgiles]

37 minutes ago, storm319 said:

Typical persimmon size was ~190cc. Most modern 3w are smaller than that although shaped very differently. 
 

Few players today routinely carry a 460cc driver over 300 yards. Additionally the 2nd shot is played from the final resting place of the first shot, not where the ball hits the ground for the first time and since the USGA/R&A are focusing on total distance averages (not carry only) it is disingenuous to downplay the role that course conditions have on the modern game.

 

no one has disputed that there is generally too much fairway roll so i hadnt mentioned it particuarly. I cant be disenguous about something that isnt an issue

 

More and more players are capable of 300 carry, saw Sam Burns at 120 club speed last night. Thats the way it has gone and is going and is the reason for so many threads on here about it, which ive explained endlessly 

[Shilgy]

8 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

no one has disputed that there is generally too much fairway roll so i hadnt mentioned it particuarly. I cant be disenguous about something that isnt an issue

 

More and more players are capable of 300 carry, saw Sam Burns at 120 club speed last night. Thats the way it has gone and is going and is the reason for so many threads on here about it, which ive explained endlessly 

Will a smaller club head slow down that 120 club speed? Do you really think they are worried about being able to make center contact with a smaller head? 
I am anti rollback. That said if they do anything it needs to be the ball. There were guys hitting 8 irons into a 181 yard par 3 at sea level this weekend. 
It is not the large driver you hate so much making tee shots go so far.

 

[storm319]

4 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

i believe he said, specifically, it was Jacks game that was 'not familiar'.

 

It took 250 years to go from a feathery and hickory shafts to go to 3 piece balls and steel shafts. It took a few months for the authorities to wreck the game by allowing 460 clown shoe clubheads and broomstick putters.

The Bobby Jones comment about Jack still qualifies as a legacy complaint by a former legacy (Jones was just more polite than Jack has been during the past 30 years of his incessant complaining). 
 

As for club head size, you timeline is a bit off. The first 300+ cc driver was released in 1998, first 400+ cc was released in 2002, and the USGAs limit was set in 2003. 
 

As for pro dispersion on the driver face, the below link from TPI illustrates the difference between a PGA Tour pro and other skill levels (but I fully expect you to diehard this since it does not support your theory that PGA Tour players are hitting the ball all over the face).

 

https://www.mytpi.com/articles/swing/maximize_the_speed_you_already_have

 

As mentioned in a previous comment, your personal adoption of a driver that you claim to so strongly detest is incredibly hypocritical. If the conviction on this topic is truly as strong as your posts suggest, the competition excuse should not win out. 

[gvogel]

1 hour ago, Shilgy said:

Will a smaller club head slow down that 120 club speed? Do you really think they are worried about being able to make center contact with a smaller head? 
I am anti rollback. That said if they do anything it needs to be the ball. There were guys hitting 8 irons into a 181 yard par 3 at sea level this weekend. 
It is not the large driver you hate so much making tee shots go so far.

 

It would be very difficult to play a smaller headed driver with today's shaft length.  43-1/2 or 44" would probably be the max.  So yes, that would slow down club head speed.