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

[ThinkingPlus]

17 minutes ago, gvogel said:

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.

That would be a 2% effect at most since the average tour driver length is something like 44.75".  The 2% is based on the radius of arc reduction of about 1".  In reality the effective arc is longer making the 1" reduction of less significance.  So all else being the same, the swingspeed would drop an insignificant amount.

[bscinstnct]

27 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

That would be a 2% effect at most since the average tour driver length is something like 44.75".  The 2% is based on the radius of arc reduction of about 1".  In reality the effective arc is longer making the 1" reduction of less significance.  So all else being the same, the swingspeed would drop an insignificant amount.

 

Would a 2% drop in SS result in a 2% drop in distance?

 

That could be like 6 yards. And if you add a smaller head that is far less forgiving on off center hits, they would have to more closely weigh risk/reward of “leaning on it” and the probability of a Mishima finding big trouble. 
 

Mishima?! 😂😂
 

That’s some autocorrect for mishit!

Edited February 22, 2021 by bscinstnct

[storm319]

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.

 

What was the loft and length of those 8 irons? Are they really comparable to the 8 irons of whatever era distance that most would consider acceptable?

[gvogel]

1 hour ago, ThinkingPlus said:

That would be a 2% effect at most since the average tour driver length is something like 44.75".  The 2% is based on the radius of arc reduction of about 1".  In reality the effective arc is longer making the 1" reduction of less significance.  So all else being the same, the swingspeed would drop an insignificant amount.

I have a Ping G25 driver, and a Ping Rapture mini driver.  i lose a not "insignificant" amount of distance with the mini driver.

[ThinkingPlus]

3 minutes ago, gvogel said:

I have a Ping G25 driver, and a Ping Rapture mini driver.  i lose a not "insignificant" amount of distance with the mini driver.

When did you tee it up in your last tour event?

[gvogel]

3 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

When did you tee it up in your last tour event?

When was the last time that you hit a mini driver?  Or one of the first metal woods that were tiny compared to today's drivers?

[ThinkingPlus]

43 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

Would a 2% drop in SS result in a 2% drop in distance?

 

That could be like 6 yards. And if you add a smaller head that is far less forgiving on off center hits, they would have to more closely weigh risk/reward of “leaning on it” and the probability of a Mishima finding big trouble. 
 

Mishima?! 😂😂
 

That’s some autocorrect for mishit!

Sure 2% distance loss as well at most.  Likely less.  Remember the number that Jack, architecture snobs, and the RBs want is more like 20%.  And you can't touch the fairways.  Fast and firm won't work with stimp 4 fairways.

[ThinkingPlus]

Just now, gvogel said:

When was the last time that you hit a mini driver?  Or one of the first metal woods that were tiny compared to today's drivers?

I hit 3Ws all the time.  I have hit a mini-driver a handful of times.  I am not a tour player nor do I generate swing speeds anywhere near PGA tour standards.  Just because most amateurs would be affected adversely doesn't mean the pros would notice much.

[tungstenplug]

Smaller driver heads won't reduce the distance or accuracy of a purely struck shot, but they certainly do reduce distance and accuracy on a shot that is mishit

 

I'm not advocating for smaller clubheads, but it's obvious that smaller clubheads would help identify the better ballstrikers

[mahonie]

6 minutes ago, tungstenplug said:

Smaller driver heads won't reduce the distance or accuracy of a purely struck shot, but they certainly do reduce distance and accuracy on a shot that is mishit

 

I'm not advocating for smaller clubheads, but it's obvious that smaller clubheads would help identify the better ballstrikers

What most people seem to assume is that while the pros are hitting the centre of the face, the clubhead to target path is also square. Justin Thomas immediately springs to mind as someone who regularly hits it over 300 yards but also 60 yards right of the fairway.

[milesgiles]

8 hours 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.

 

 

i have answered your first point endlessly and I know you know my answer perfectly well im not repeating it yet again

 

The irons dont bother me, that 8 iron was a 6 iron loft 30 years ago 

[storm319]

2 hours ago, mahonie said:

What most people seem to assume is that while the pros are hitting the centre of the face, the clubhead to target path is also square. Justin Thomas immediately springs to mind as someone who regularly hits it over 300 yards but also 60 yards right of the fairway.

 

Big difference between an impact location miss and a directional miss (face angle/path). Sure PGA Tour pros have occasional directional misses (JT's last win was a prime example), but they typically have a tight pattern when it comes to impact location which is primarily why they tend to be fairly consistent from a ball speed efficiency standpoint. 

[milesgiles]

7 hours ago, storm319 said:

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. 

 

Can you really not put two and two together? Make the clubhead enormous you can swing confidently and hard.. i know literal 9 handicaps who can barely miss with a 460.

 

I have no choice if Im in a competition, obviously. If you play a decent level of golf you would know that. If im playing socially I hit a low loft 3 wood a lot more because its more rewarding, as long as I can reach in regulation 

[milesgiles]

5 hours ago, ThinkingPlus said:

Sure 2% distance loss as well at most.  Likely less.  Remember the number that Jack, architecture snobs, and the RBs want is more like 20%.  And you can't touch the fairways.  Fast and firm won't work with stimp 4 fairways.

 

you can have soft fairways and firm greens and surrounds, unbelieveable i know 

[storm319]

2 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

Can you really not put two and two together? Make the clubhead enormous you can swing confidently and hard.. i know literal 9 handicaps who can barely miss with a 460.

 

I have no choice if Im in a competition, obviously. If you play a decent level of golf you would know that. If im playing socially I hit a low loft 3 wood a lot more because its more rewarding, as long as I can reach in regulation 

 

You always have a choice, again the competitive advantage of a larger driver is winning out over your convictions in this case.

[storm319]

9 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

you can have soft fairways and firm greens and surrounds, unbelieveable i know 

 

Yet we never see that from the USGA or PGA Tour (outside of acclimate weather) hence the reason why the point is being raised. If these organizations simply increase the standard fairway mowing height to 1/2", we would see a noticeable reduction in driving averages (without added costs). 

[Nard_S]

 

One inch of driver length does equate to 6 yards.

 

Bunch of talk about softening fairways but the best Open in a long time was fast fairways and slow greens. 

 

It's not how far off tee, it's how far left into green that is the issue. Risk/reward on par 5's has dropped considerably. 

 

The ball flat out flies too straight. It hides Pro's talents and removes creative shot making. Speith hitting a banana #8i for a hole out at PB is what I would love to see more of. Driver/wedge golf is cancer to that type of play.

 

Add initial spin, add aerodynamic drag to ball in alignment with 3 piece wound. Drop COR, lower MOI by 10-20%. Sell it retail, sell current stuff too. If there is a purse, they have to use it. Easy.

[HappyGilmoresBoots]

Fellas, we might be on the road to another 50 page thread.

[ThinkingPlus]

44 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

you can have soft fairways and firm greens and surrounds, unbelieveable i know 

That's not what the RBs desire.  Firm greens are only part of the equation.  They want fast, firm fairways to keep the guys from playing lawn darts off the tee.  They want a tee shot played at the wrong angle to a dogleg to bound into the rough under a bush or roll into a bunker.  You won't see soft fairways for any USGA or R&A event unless the weather prevents it.

[storm319]

3 minutes ago, Nard_S said:

 

One inch of driver length does equate to 6 yards.

 

Bunch of talk about softening fairways but the best Open in a long time was fast fairways and slow greens. 

 

It's not how far off tee, it's how far left into green that is the issue. Risk/reward on par 5's has dropped considerably. 

 

The ball flat out flies too straight. It hides Pro's talents and removes creative shot making. Speith hitting a banana #8i for a hole out at PB is what I would love to see more of. Driver/wedge golf is cancer to that type of play.

 

Add initial spin, add aerodynamic drag to ball in alignment with 3 piece wound. Drop COR, lower MOI by 10-20%. Sell it retail, sell current stuff too. If there is a purse, they have to use it. Easy.

 

There is no way to universally add additional spin to the ball would restore past styles of play. Club delivery is the primary driver of the direction/spin of the ball and that is extremely player dependent. If the USGA tried to add some type of spin minimum to the ODS test, a) it could unfairly impact certain players more than others and b) could be circumvented with changes to club delivery and/or club design to compensate. The limits that the USGA has in place like the ball velocity limit or ball weight max/diameter min are universal limits that impact all players and unfortunately I don't believe there are any more untapped universal attributes that are not already limited in some way (whether you agree that the existing limits are sufficient is another discussion). 

[Nard_S]

39 minutes ago, storm319 said:

 

There is no way to universally add additional spin to the ball would restore past styles of play. Club delivery is the primary driver of the direction/spin of the ball and that is extremely player dependent. If the USGA tried to add some type of spin minimum to the ODS test, a) it could unfairly impact certain players more than others and b) could be circumvented with changes to club delivery and/or club design to compensate. The limits that the USGA has in place like the ball velocity limit or ball weight max/diameter min are universal limits that impact all players and unfortunately I don't believe there are any more untapped universal attributes that are not already limited in some way (whether you agree that the existing limits are sufficient is another discussion). 

 The essence of why the ball is better has to do with how the ball reacts to impact, how much of that energy goes to spin, how much goes to the vector & velocity of launch. Ball designers manipulate how the internal mass of the ball is distributed, their elasticities and the profile of the ball cover Ball spin creates it's own envelope, it's own bubble of air around the ball itself.  Engineers have optimized that bubble, reduced it's turbulence, made the ball more impervious to the air it travels in. To say they cannot define parameters on initial launch and air drag is "stick your head in the sand" talk. They probably have computer models on both, they probably have prototypes they can pull off the shelf tomorrow. Because right now they do all these things so Joe Duffer can enjoy the game all the more. There is a handful of different golf ball profiles on the market now. What's one more?

[tungstenplug]

On 2/22/2021 at 6:51 PM, ThinkingPlus said:

That's not what the RBs desire.  Firm greens are only part of the equation.  They want fast, firm fairways to keep the guys from playing lawn darts off the tee.  They want a tee shot played at the wrong angle to a dogleg to bound into the rough under a bush or roll into a bunker.  You won't see soft fairways for any USGA or R&A event unless the weather prevents it.

 

Yes, exactly. Firm conditions reward the player who plays the most precise shots

Edited February 26, 2023 by tungstenplug

[milesgiles]

1 hour ago, ThinkingPlus said:

That's not what the RBs desire.  Firm greens are only part of the equation.  They want fast, firm fairways to keep the guys from playing lawn darts off the tee.  They want a tee shot played at the wrong angle to a dogleg to bound into the rough under a bush or roll into a bunker.  You won't see soft fairways for any USGA or R&A event unless the weather prevents it.

 

i didnt say they should, i said they could.. and why would it be lawn darts? Because of a teed up 460...

[milesgiles]

2 hours ago, storm319 said:

 

You always have a choice, again the competitive advantage of a larger driver is winning out over your convictions in this case.

 

that choice would mean me playing at a lower level of competition, agreed? why would i do that? give it a rest 

[ThinkingPlus]

3 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

i didnt say they should, i said they could.. and why would it be lawn darts? Because of a teed up 460...

Last I saw every club apexes at 100+ feet.

[milesgiles]

15 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

Last I saw every club apexes at 100+ feet.

 

 

Yes and they all go the same driving distance dont they..

[ThinkingPlus]

1 minute ago, milesgiles said:

 

 

Yes and they all go the same driving distance dont they..

No.  They go the distance the pro needs them to go.  Do you actually play golf?  It is really hard to tell at times.

[storm319]

2 hours ago, Nard_S said:

 The essence of why the ball is better has to do with how the ball reacts to impact, how much of that energy goes to spin, how much goes to the vector & velocity of launch. Ball designers manipulate how the internal mass of the ball is distributed, their elasticities and the profile of the ball cover Ball spin creates it's own envelope, it's own bubble of air around the ball itself.  Engineers have optimized that bubble, reduced it's turbulence, made the ball more impervious to the air it travels in. To say they cannot define parameters on initial launch and air drag is "stick your head in the sand" talk. They probably have computer models on both, they probably have prototypes they can pull off the shelf tomorrow. Because right now they do all these things so Joe Duffer can enjoy the game all the more. There is a handful of different golf ball profiles on the market now. What's one more?

I never said a ball cannot be designed to spin more, but it cannot be done  universally to reduce distance the amounts that are being suggested due to the fact that spin is largely a product of how the club is delivered at impact. Again, any realistically attainable spin mandate could be circumvented which would make the regulation change moot (essentially just changing the optimal club delivery parameters). 

[storm319]

2 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

that choice would mean me playing at a lower level of competition, agreed? why would i do that? give it a rest 

Below are definitions for a couple of concepts that you seem to be struggling with:

 

choice

noun

1. an act of selecting or making a decision when faced with two or more possibilities.

    

hy·poc·ri·sy

noun

1. the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform.

 

Edited February 23, 2021 by storm319

[storm319]

1 hour ago, ThinkingPlus said:

No.  They go the distance the pro needs them to go.  Do you actually play golf?  It is really hard to tell at times.

The ironic thing is that all of this complaining only applies to approximately a dozen shots per round.