Bryson interview “the 7ft golfer”

[Frankensteins Monster]

8 minutes ago, wcbjr said:

 

To over-exaggerate...which is easier, to hit the center of the clubface with a 1' club or a 10' club?  Additionally, it is harder to gauge distance control with longer clubs, think about Bryson and his single length wedges.  Sure, on average, taller players can hit it farther, but it's also harder for them to control.

Absolutely no science to back up being a taller golfer means less of a ball striker, which is what your original argument was.

 

Also, taller golfers don't player overly long clubs, which makes your new argument moot. At most, taller golfers us 1" over standard.

 

The reason there aren't many super tall golfers is simply because they play other sports before golf.

[smashdn]

8 hours ago, Mustard_Tiger said:

I think Byson likes to hear himself talk.

Name me all the golfers taller than 6'4" (193cm) who have won majors.

 

That's fair.  But honestly if you are 6'4" and have a bit of athletic prowess you likely went into a sport that paid more than golf and was more popular.  Golf was not the big pay day tournaments it is now 25 years ago.

 

There were only a handful of guys my age who only played golf here growing up.  They were all exposed at a fairly young age but when they got into HS and got out of baseball or basketball they gravitated to golf.  I don't run into very many people who take up the sport after HS or college who are great players let alone PGA or PGA elite.

[toddyc]

1 hour ago, jwhite86 said:

I understand where he is coming from, however, there is likely a lot more money to be made elsewhere at that height *cough* NBA

 

Agree with one of the posters above, he just like to hear himself talk

I mean the guys being interviewed...would you rather him not talk? Or just say a few random cliches? 

[toddyc]

1 hour ago, jwhite86 said:

I understand where he is coming from, however, there is likely a lot more money to be made elsewhere at that height *cough* NBA

 

Agree with one of the posters above, he just like to hear himself talk

I mean the guys being interviewed...would you rather him not talk? Or just say a few random cliches? 

[Need4spd]

8 hours ago, Mustard_Tiger said:

 

 

Maybe 200 years from now. Maybe even 500 years. I'll let you know...

Seriously, I’m always amused when that’s the side of an argument someone resorts to. Happened in another thread while debating Jack’s major record. 
 

If it doesn’t happen in our lifetime, is it really relevant to the conversation being had today?

[Dpavs]

The USGA response will be simple - they will append Part 2 C (equipment rules) to roll back player length requirements.

 

C. Length-

The overall length of the club must be at least 18 inches (0.457m) and, except for putters, must not exceed 48 inches. (see fig. 3)

 

"The overall length of the golfer must not exceed 76 inches." (see fig. 4)

 

Edited April 9, 2021 by Dpavs

[smashdn]

45 minutes ago, Need4spd said:

If it doesn’t happen in our lifetime, is it really relevant to the conversation being had today?

 

Not to us certainly.  But seems kind of selfish not to protect the integrity of the game for the future.  We have the benefit of longer hindsight to have an idea how glacially slow it is to change the rules and how ingrained some things are in the game.  Better we talk about them and the potential consequences now and prepare with contingencies than be caught flat-footed.

 

The driver size thing was one such example.  Guy in charge of the equipment rules couldn't fathom why a pro would want to use a driver larger than 300cc.  The impression I got was he kind of poo-pooed the thought and didn't take it seriously.  Boom.  Driver size exploded and they had to react quick to set an end point.  Same with COR and some of the other equipment characteristics that novbody ever thought needed to be defined because "we can't do that today" or "that technology doesn't exist."

 

You have known unknowns and unknown unknowns.  Might as well talk about how you can prepare for the things you know you don't know.

[hoselpalooza]

9 hours ago, Mustard_Tiger said:

So he's referring to a unicorn?

 

maybe like the kevin duarnt of golf: a 7-footer who can also play like a guard. but in this case a 7-footer who can out drive everyone based on size alone, and who also has tour-level short game/touch.

 

it could happen but we're talking generational talent. would be great for the game. and definitely something i would be happy to see in my lifetime, but little chance of it actually happening. because, you know, 7-footers get paid to play basketball even if they can't play basketball.

[Bad9]

12 hours ago, CW13 said:

I saw an interview today where Bryson said eventually there would be a 7ft golfer swinging it as fast as him that will make him irrelevant and it got me thinking...he’s right; then what’s the tours excuse gonna be?
 

Eventually there’s gonna be an elite golfer tall enough that’s gonna play 48” as their standard length and theyre gonna carry it 375+ as their stock yardage. Are they still gonna cry for lesser equipment or acknowledge they need longer venues? Food for thought. 

The Tour is not calling for restrictions, the USGA is, a bunch of older journalists and lots of poster on golf forums

[smashdn]

I used to work for a guy that was around 6'6".  Now I think he was a terrible golfer because he only played once a year but his buddies would come in the store who were actually pretty decent players.  I asked them about his game.  He could kill a driver (not straight mind you) but had no touch with his irons and wedges because he had them made 2" over standard and still was hunched over.

 

There is something to be said for club lengths suitable for their purpose.  Wedges are for detail work.  One approaching the length of a standard 4i can't possibly be as useful as one where you are closer to the target of the club, the ball, can it?

[Arn]

I’ve been saying this for years. The PGA Tour is going to look like the NBA in the future. Those long levers create soooo much power.

[hoselpalooza]

13 minutes ago, smashdn said:

Wedges are for detail work.  One approaching the length of a standard 4i can't possibly be as useful as one where you are closer to the target of the club, the ball, can it?

 

good question. maybe? 

 

i'm about 6' / 6'4" wingspan and all my wedges are the same length as a standard PW. i feel my touch is actually better with slightly longer wedges because i don't need to crouch to grip down a little for delicate shots.

 

a hyper athletic tall person may do just fine with a wedge that is super long for us but not for them, if that makes sense.

[Dr. Block]

4 hours ago, Frankensteins Monster said:

Absolutely no science to back up being a taller golfer means less of a ball striker, which is what your original argument was.

 

Also, taller golfers don't player overly long clubs, which makes your new argument moot. At most, taller golfers us 1" over standard.

 

The reason there aren't many super tall golfers is simply because they play other sports before golf.

My Dad played in a golf outing with 6'11" hall of fame NBA center Bob Lanier back in the 80's. He said his clubs were easily 3 inches + over standard with grips like a tennis racket... and he still looked like he was holding a miniature golf putter when he addressed the ball. Said he was a great guy - very funny and personable. Also said he hit the ball miles in all directions.

 

Bob Lanier is not a direct comparison to a dedicated tour level golfer at that height, but I think someone standing around 7ft is going to need some long sticks.  I recall Michael Jordan's clubs also looking very long in clips of him on the golf course in that "Last Dance" documentary.  It seems like operating levers and implements at such lengths could introduce more variance in a lot of ways. 

Edited April 8, 2021 by Dr. Block

[Frankensteins Monster]

11 minutes ago, Dr. Block said:

My Dad played in a golf outing with 6'10" hall of fame NBA center Bob Lanier back in the 80's. He said his clubs were easily 3 inches + over standard with grips like a tennis racket... and he still looked like he was holding a miniature golf putter when he addressed the ball. Said he was a great guy - very funny and personable. Also said he hit the ball miles in all directions.

 

Bob Lanier is not a direct comparison to a dedicated tour level golfer at that height, but I think someone standing around 7ft is going to need some long sticks.  I recall Michael Jordan's clubs also looking very long in clips of him on the golf course in that "Last Dance" documentary.  It seems like operating levers and implements at such lengths could introduce more variance in a lot of ways. 

Last I read, this was years ago, Jordan used clubs 1/2" over standard. That's all. Remember, there's a limit on club length.

[Dr. Block]

11 minutes ago, Frankensteins Monster said:

Last I read, this was years ago, Jordan used clubs 1/2" over standard. That's all. Remember, there's a limit on club length.

I am aware. It's 48 inches.

 

longer levers create more variance. Hold a pencil normally and sign your name, then hold it up by the eraser and sign it again.  I bet the first one is more legible then the other.  That's what was implied by diminishing returns, and I think it's true.  Not to say it couldn't be overcome, but I think it exists, and is a realistic obstacle. 

Edited April 8, 2021 by Dr. Block

[Frankensteins Monster]

4 minutes ago, Dr. Block said:

I am aware. It's 48 inches.

 

longer levers create more variance. Hold a pencil normally and sign your name, then hold it up by the eraser and sign it again.  I bet the first one is more legible then the other. 

You're assuming my handwriting is legible to being with. I can assure you, it makes no difference.

 

But seriously, that analogy doesn't work because the scale of difference isn't comparable. Holding a pencil higher up changes balance point for starters. That doesn't change in a golf club gripping it normally if you just lengthen clubs. A competent player is a competent player with clubs he or she uses. DJ is a foot taller than Rory and he is a far better ball striker and has better touch around the greens.

 

Just saying someone who is taller, or uses longer clubs, is automatically a worse ball striker is just flat out nonsense.

[hoselpalooza]

6 minutes ago, Frankensteins Monster said:

DJ is a foot taller than Rory and he is a far better ball striker and has better touch around the greens.

 

ehhhh more like 7". but you do have a point. it's certainly possible someone 6'11" could strike the ball as well as DJ.

[Frankensteins Monster]

4 minutes ago, hoselpalooza said:

 

ehhhh more like 7". but you do have a point. it's certainly possible someone 6'11" could strike the ball as well as DJ.

Fleetwood then.

[hoselpalooza]

1 minute ago, Frankensteins Monster said:

Fleetwood then.

 

nope.

 

ian woosnam? yes. 😜

[Frankensteins Monster]

4 minutes ago, hoselpalooza said:

 

nope.

 

ian woosnam? yes. 😜

Tommy is like 5'5" with lifts.

[Dr. Block]

21 minutes ago, Frankensteins Monster said:

You're assuming my handwriting is legible to being with. I can assure you, it makes no difference.

 

But seriously, that analogy doesn't work because the scale of difference isn't comparable. Holding a pencil higher up changes balance point for starters. That doesn't change in a golf club gripping it normally if you just lengthen clubs. A competent player is a competent player with clubs he or she uses. DJ is a foot taller than Rory and he is a far better ball striker and has better touch around the greens.

 

Just saying someone who is taller, or uses longer clubs, is automatically a worse ball striker is just flat out nonsense.

 I said longer levers (limbs), not implements (clubs). The longer your arms are the more challenging it will be to be as accurate with the clubface as a golfer with shorter arms. So lengthening the hold on the pencil would mimic that in a sense. Is the analogy perfect? nope. But it conveys the idea.  If length of arms or clubs made no difference in accuracy, then all golfers would be using a 48 inch driver.  The wider the arc, the more precision is required. 

 

I'm not saying a taller golfer is automatically a worse ball striker. If you read my original post, I'm just saying the longer arc increases the possibility for more variance. Which would support the statement of "diminishing returns". 

 

Also, if you can hold a pencil at the eraser and write as legibly as you can holding it normally, you should be peddling that in the 19th hole as a prop bet. 

Edited April 8, 2021 by Dr. Block

[TwistedSister]

6 hours ago, Frankensteins Monster said:

Your playing partner has more power leaks than the Titanic then.

No power leaks on the Titanic.  the leaks were in the hull!

[hoselpalooza]

4 minutes ago, Frankensteins Monster said:

Tommy is like 5'5" with lifts.

 

LOL he's listed at 5'11", but since when were athletes ever honest about their height/weight? 😂

[Frankensteins Monster]

10 minutes ago, hoselpalooza said:

 

LOL he's listed at 5'11", but since when were athletes ever honest about their height/weight? 😂

Fleetwood is nowhere near 5'11". Source, I've stood right next to him.

[Frankensteins Monster]

18 minutes ago, Dr. Block said:

 I said longer levers (limbs), not implements (clubs). The longer your arms are the more challenging it will be to be as accurate with the clubface as a golfer with shorter arms. So lengthening the hold on the pencil would mimic that in a sense. Is the analogy perfect? nope. But it conveys the idea.  If length of arms or clubs made no difference in accuracy, then all golfers would be using a 48 inch driver.  The wider the arc, the more precision is required. 

 

I'm not saying a taller golfer is automatically a worse ball striker. If you read my original post, I'm just saying the longer arc increases the possibility for more variance. Which would support the statement of "diminishing returns". 

 

Also, if you can hold a pencil at the eraser and write as legibly as you can holding it normally, you should be peddling that in the 19th hole as a prop bet. 

You mean radius, not arc. The arc of of the swing of a 5ft tall golfer is the same as a 7ft golfer if their swing is exactly the same. The radius of their swing is different.

 

Again, a longer club is not the same as a longer limb. Those are two different things. Longer limbs has zero baring on delivering the club back to the ball with more consistency. DJ has longer limbs than a lot of players on tour. He is a better ball striker than nearly everyone on tour. Sergio uses a shorter driver and has shorter limbs than Kuchar, yet Kuchar is a more accurate driver of the ball.

 

Saying height has diminishing returns in regards to golf is a fallacy. It comes down to skill, period.

[isaacbm]

As a physicist, Bryson should know that from that  7’ elevation it would be too difficult  to accurately predict the Coriolis effect. Therefore negating any advantage said  player might have...

[Dr. Block]

 

25 minutes ago, Frankensteins Monster said:

You mean radius, not arc. The arc of of the swing of a 5ft tall golfer is the same as a 7ft golfer if their swing is exactly the same. The radius of their swing is different.

 

Again, a longer club is not the same as a longer limb. Those are two different things. Longer limbs has zero baring on delivering the club back to the ball with more consistency. DJ has longer limbs than a lot of players on tour. He is a better ball striker than nearly everyone on tour. Sergio uses a shorter driver and has shorter limbs than Kuchar, yet Kuchar is a more accurate driver of the ball.

 

Saying height has diminishing returns in regards to golf is a fallacy. It comes down to skill, period.

If the arc of the clubhead or the radius of that arc, or the radius (or however you want to describe it) doesn't have an effect on accuracy, then why do many golfers on tour use drivers shorter then 45 inches to increase accuracy?  Would it be because it's easier for them to accurately control the angle of the clubface at impact when it's traveling on a shorter arc or radius or in a range of motion a certain distance from the point where their arms meet their torso? I think the answer is yes.  Would the 7ft tall golfer not be genetically dealt a considerably wide arc increasing the likelihood that controlling the clubface could be more challenging? I think that answer is also yes.  

 

You seem to see this in black and white only. I can assure you it has many shades of gray. 

 

Obviously all sorts of outliers exist on the PGA Tour.  I'm not saying it can't be done, or it won't be done.  I'm saying when it's done, it will be quite an accomplishment. I also think when it's done, it will be a swing like Bryson's, one that has removed nearly all clubface rotation through the impact zone.    

Edited April 8, 2021 by Dr. Block

[gvogel]

15 hours ago, CW13 said:

I saw an interview today where Bryson said eventually there would be a 7ft golfer swinging it as fast as him that will make him irrelevant and it got me thinking...he’s right; then what’s the tours excuse gonna be?
 

Eventually there’s gonna be an elite golfer tall enough that’s gonna play 48” as their standard length and theyre gonna carry it 375+ as their stock yardage. Are they still gonna cry for lesser equipment or acknowledge they need longer venues? Food for thought. 

There might be a player like that; there might even be a few players like that.  The ruling bodies aren't terribly concerned about one guy.  They are more concerned with the average - like the Tour average, or the Korn Ferry tour average.

[Frankensteins Monster]

13 minutes ago, Dr. Block said:

 

If the arc of the clubhead or the radius of that arc, or the radius (or however you want to describe it) doesn't have an effect on accuracy, then why do many golfers on tour use drivers shorter then 45 inches to increase accuracy?  Would it be because it's easier for them to accurately control the angle of the clubface at impact when it's traveling on a shorter arc or radius or in a range of motion a certain distance from the point where their arms meet their torso? I think the answer is yes.  Would the 7ft tall golfer not be genetically dealt a considerably wide arc increasing the likelihood that controlling the clubface could be more challenging? I think that answer is also yes.  

 

You seem to see this in black and white only. I can assure you it has many shades of gray. 

 

Obviously all sorts of outliers exist on the PGA Tour.  I'm not saying it can't be done, or it won't be done.  I'm saying when it's done, it will be quite an accomplishment. I also think when it's done, it will be a swing like Bryson's, one that has removed nearly all clubface rotation through the impact zone.    

Saying height is guaranteed to have diminishing returns is as black and white as it gets. It's all individual. That has been my argument since the beginning. Saying limb length is guaranteed to produce a worse ball striker is as black and white as it gets.

[GLF4EVR]

Never gonna happen.   A 7 footer will make way more money in the NBA.