Bubba Watson says golf doesn't celebrate "its great players", bemoans limiting big hitters

[Tgstan]

1 hour ago, phizzy30 said:

I train pro athletes for a living.  Walk a mile in their shoes then tell me you feel the same way.  A lot of these guys don't use PEDs just for craps and giggles.  They do it because it could mean the difference between putting food on the table or living in poverty.  Many of them didn't grow up with mommy and daddy supporting them but rather had to struggle their entire lives to make it to the pro level. 

Hi! I’ve been a pro athlete for a portion of my life. Competed and medaled internationally and domestically. Some of my closest friends are Olympians and world record holders and I promise they will find these types of comments abhorrent. None of them are silver-spooners. 

[bladehunter]

2 hours ago, phizzy30 said:

We can agree to disagree.  For me, I'd rather see everyone in pro sports playing on a level playing field.  What a lot of fans don't realize is that the time these guys and gals(pro sports) have in order to maximize their income is very limited.  If that means that they feel the need to use PEDs in order to keep their jobs so to speak, then so be it.  For some, it's about feeding their families because they don't have the education or opportunities to better their lives.  For others, it's about ego, fame, attention, etc.   

sure we can definitely agree to disagree. But really we don’t disagree.  I’m saying a level playing field too. Just limit it to actual human ability.   No artificial aides.  . 
 

 

I just can’t think of any reasoning that justifies it.  Including short nfl careers. That argument fits paying ncaa players better than it does allowing guys in the league to juice on the excuse of no education etc.   pay them as college players and incentivize good grades. And penalize bad ones.  Paying them would give the leverage needed to do so.
 

 In other words fix that issue rather than bandaid  it artificially later. 
 

and please. Let’s don’t get off on the “ no parents at home “ train track.  I’ve lived that , still am.  Give me $20 mil sign on bonus and I’d be A-ok.  The reason I didn’t go to school on a full D1 ride for the 400m ( I had 3 offers ) was due to that home  life. And yet here I am.  Never having missed a meal.  Same education level you’re talking about. Or less. It’s no excuse to cheat.  

Edited June 25, 2021 by bladehunter

[johnseg]

I am not sure where I stand on PED's. So many use them that it puts others at a disadvantage. The users will always be ahead of the testers or so it seems. I want everyone to have the opportunity to complete on a level playing field. I fear that only way to make sure that is possible is to legalize everything and let the athlete choose. I know that position kind of sucks but I can't see another way unless you go to a lifetime ban for first offenses.

[BlackDiamondPar5]

20 hours ago, tacklingdummy said:

 

But distance off the tee statistics may not tell the entire picture. Tiger used a 3-wood or long irons off the tee a lot, so his driver likely was not representative of how far he really hit the ball. 

The inflection point in the curve occurred several years before Tiger was on Tour.   How did John Daly gain 18 yards between 1995 and 2002? John wasn't hitting the gym.  Look at most any pro during that period and similar gains can be seen.  Phil went from driving it 269 in 1993 to 284 in 1997, now in 2021 303.  How is 51 year old Phil Mickelson driving it 34 yards farther than 23 year old Phil?

How am I now in my late 50's, driving it farther than 30 yo BD? I say it's at least 90% because of metal woods and the modern ball. 

 

Bubba in his article says "We're the only sport not celebrating accomplishments of being a guy working out in the gym that can hit the ball miles. We're mad at that guy. I don't know why, but we are. I'm not, but some people are - golf course designers." --- to that I say hogwash, I haven't seen or heard anyone that is mad at anyone for hitting the gym, not one. He ignores the entire history of the distance increase and its adverse impact on golf course costs. 

 

The problem started in 1990's when they let technology get out of hand and now it's been a constant battle requiring HUGE capital investment and on-going operational cost increases to keep golf courses relevant.  A cost burdening all of us while Bubba and the guys on tour cash checks that have grown exponentially.  Guys hitting the gym only serves to highlight the problem, but no one is "Mad."

 

 

[johnseg]

4 minutes ago, BlackDiamondPar5 said:

The problem started in 1990's when they let technology get out of hand and now it's been a constant battle requiring HUGE capital investment and on-going operational cost increases to keep golf courses relevant.  A cost burdening all of us while Bubba and the guys on tour cash checks that have grown exponentially.  Guys hitting the gym only serves to highlight the problem, but no one is "Mad."

 

 

 

Is this really true or is it vanity of courses and course architects. This week they will light up the Travelers Championship. Big Deal. Everyone plays the same course and by playing a shorter course it gives more people a chance to win. The driver wedge argument doesn't hold water either because I for one don't find a 4 iron any more exciting than a pitching wedge when watching golf.

[phizzy30]

2 hours ago, bladehunter said:

sure we can definitely agree to disagree. But really we don’t disagree.  I’m saying a level playing field too. Just limit it to actual human ability.   No artificial aides.  . 
 

 

I just can’t think of any reasoning that justifies it.  Including short nfl careers. That argument fits paying ncaa players better than it does allowing guys in the league to juice on the excuse of no education etc.   pay them as college players and incentivize good grades. And penalize bad ones.  Paying them would give the leverage needed to do so.
 

 In other words fix that issue rather than bandaid  it artificially later. 
 

and please. Let’s don’t get off on the “ no parents at home “ train track.  I’ve lived that , still am.  Give me $20 mil sign on bonus and I’d be A-ok.  The reason I didn’t go to school on a full D1 ride for the 400m ( I had 3 offers ) was due to that home  life. And yet here I am.  Never having missed a meal.  Same education level you’re talking about. Or less. It’s no excuse to cheat.  

Not so much no parents at home shtick bur rather, a lot of these guys from the DR that have absolutely nothing growing up over there come over here with the dreams of making to the MLB one day.  They have absolutely nothing growing up.  The scouts go to the island and watch these kids and pick up the cream of the crop and bring them over here from a very young age and groom them.  I have a guy from the DR that's in the minors who I train on a regular basis.  He tells me that without baseball, he would have absolutely nothing and I believe him. 

[gioguy21]

4 hours ago, phizzy30 said:

I train pro athletes for a living.  Walk a mile in their shoes then tell me you feel the same way.  A lot of these guys don't use PEDs just for craps and giggles.  They do it because it could mean the difference between putting food on the table or living in poverty.  Many of them didn't grow up with mommy and daddy supporting them but rather had to struggle their entire lives to make it to the pro level. 

so you advocate cheating b/c of...empathy?

news flash - if you're a pro athlete and you can't cut it on talent, hard work and your own will/determination -- (and this is a huge pill to swallow) you're done. go home to that family and find another way to support them. 

you're more than an athlete -- your kids will know that it's ok to cheat b/c your parent did it. your own subconscious will know you had to cheat to get where you were. 

c'mon man. 

[gioguy21]

19 minutes ago, phizzy30 said:

Not so much no parents at home shtick bur rather, a lot of these guys from the DR that have absolutely nothing growing up over there come over here with the dreams of making to the MLB one day.  They have absolutely nothing growing up.  The scouts go to the island and watch these kids and pick up the cream of the crop and bring them over here from a very young age and groom them.  I have a guy from the DR that's in the minors who I train on a regular basis.  He tells me that without baseball, he would have absolutely nothing and I believe him. 

not an excuse to cheat. sorry. 

[phizzy30]

13 minutes ago, gioguy21 said:

so you advocate cheating b/c of...empathy?

news flash - if you're a pro athlete and you can't cut it on talent, hard work and your own will/determination -- (and this is a huge pill to swallow) you're done. go home to that family and find another way to support them. 

you're more than an athlete -- your kids will know that it's ok to cheat b/c your parent did it. your own subconscious will know you had to cheat to get where you were. 

c'mon man. 

I don't advocate it, but I don't condone it either.  These guys have to go make a living like the rest of us.  People can be so judgemental but like I said, if you've never walked a mile in their shoes, you don't know what it's like. 

Edited June 25, 2021 by phizzy30

[BlackDiamondPar5]

Why are PED's wrapped up in this thread?  They certainly didn't create the dramatic increase in distance seen across the board of all players over the last 27 years.  

[gioguy21]

9 minutes ago, phizzy30 said:

I don't advocate it, but I don't condone it either.  These guys have to go make a living like the rest of us.  People can be so judgemental but like I said, if you've never walked a mile in their shoes, you don't know what it's like. 

i played collegiate baseball - played summer ball with previous pros and top prospects, including one team that was run by a regional scout for the dodgers. yes, i do. i've had more than 7+ tryouts with pro teams, including the Padres when i was 15. 

knowing that i was clean seeing guys cheat to get better -- yea, it's bs -- i have a career, just like 1,000s of other athletes that didn't have 'it' to make it pro. i take ZERO empathy for those guys who cheat to try to make it or keep the dream alive. i have empathy only for the clean guys -- the day comes, and we've all seen it. 


 

Edited June 25, 2021 by gioguy21

[johnseg]

2 minutes ago, BlackDiamondPar5 said:

Why are PED's wrapped up in this thread?  They certainly didn't create the dramatic increase in distance seen across the board of all players over the last 27 years.  

Because it is the internet. Duh.😉

 

I love threads that diverge away from the original topic.

[phizzy30]

1 minute ago, gioguy21 said:

i played collegiate baseball - played summer ball with previous pros and top prospects, including one team that was run by a regional scout for the dodgers. yes, i do. i've had more than 7+ tryouts with pro teams, including the Padres when i was 15. 

knowing that i was clean seeing guys cheat to get better -- yea, it's bs -- i have a career, just like 1,000s of other athletes that didn't have 'it' to make it pro. i take ZERO pity on those guys who cheat to try to make it or keep the dream alive. i have empathy only for the clean guys -- the day comes, and we've all seen it. 


 

Fair enough.  I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on this one and move on. 

[bladehunter]

36 minutes ago, phizzy30 said:

Not so much no parents at home shtick bur rather, a lot of these guys from the DR that have absolutely nothing growing up over there come over here with the dreams of making to the MLB one day.  They have absolutely nothing growing up.  The scouts go to the island and watch these kids and pick up the cream of the crop and bring them over here from a very young age and groom them.  I have a guy from the DR that's in the minors who I train on a regular basis.  He tells me that without baseball, he would have absolutely nothing and I believe him. 

Sure. But wouldn’t it be better with no juicing for him ?  His Talent would shine through vs having it diluted by the pool of juicing players.  
 

it’s no different than equipment in golf.  No doubt in my mind that the harder the equipment is the more cream rises to the top.  Make it easier snd the real cream is met with artificial cream and is harder to see. 

[nvr3putt]

21 minutes ago, gioguy21 said:

so you advocate cheating b/c of...empathy?

news flash - if you're a pro athlete and you can't cut it on talent, hard work and your own will/determination -- (and this is a huge pill to swallow) you're done. go home to that family and find another way to support them. 

you're more than an athlete -- your kids will know that it's ok to cheat b/c your parent did it. your own subconscious will know you had to cheat to get where you were. 

c'mon man. 

Unfortunately professional sports in the US (MLB, NFL, PGA, WWE etc) turn a blind eye to PEDs. We know scientifically and factually that certain pharmaceuticals significantly enhance performance. I am a bit saddened to think that kids and adults are conditioned to believe MONEY trumps INTEGRITY.

[storm319]

1 hour ago, BlackDiamondPar5 said:

The inflection point in the curve occurred several years before Tiger was on Tour.   How did John Daly gain 18 yards between 1995 and 2002? John wasn't hitting the gym.  Look at most any pro during that period and similar gains can be seen.  Phil went from driving it 269 in 1993 to 284 in 1997, now in 2021 303.  How is 51 year old Phil Mickelson driving it 34 yards farther than 23 year old Phil?

How am I now in my late 50's, driving it farther than 30 yo BD? I say it's at least 90% because of metal woods and the modern ball. 

 

Bubba in his article says "We're the only sport not celebrating accomplishments of being a guy working out in the gym that can hit the ball miles. We're mad at that guy. I don't know why, but we are. I'm not, but some people are - golf course designers." --- to that I say hogwash, I haven't seen or heard anyone that is mad at anyone for hitting the gym, not one. He ignores the entire history of the distance increase and its adverse impact on golf course costs. 

 

The problem started in 1990's when they let technology get out of hand and now it's been a constant battle requiring HUGE capital investment and on-going operational cost increases to keep golf courses relevant.  A cost burdening all of us while Bubba and the guys on tour cash checks that have grown exponentially.  Guys hitting the gym only serves to highlight the problem, but no one is "Mad."

 

 

Please stop posting that graph as it is disingenuous at best. There are way too many variables from year to year to simply look at averages and jump to conclusions with respect to a cause. A legitimate study would be digging into the year to year variables in an attempt to isolate down the the actual impact that equipment had. 
 

Example, the players competing on tour change year to year (Q school promotions, card loses, age outs, injuries, etc), some venues change, the environmental conditions change. Then with the static players you need to consider whether they made any equipment/sponsor changes from one year to the next or swing changes or had some kind of life change that impacted them physically or mentally. Then you have on course situational impacts like how a hole is setup/conditioned for that particular day, where the player is in the standings, what happened on the last hole, pace of play which may influence their approach to a specific measure shot.
 

The point is that this is a lot more complicated than simply drawing a circle around a graph of yearly averages (but the doing this fits the narrative of those advocating for an equipment rollback). 

[phizzy30]

5 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Sure. But wouldn’t it be better with no juicing for him ?  His Talent would shine through vs having it diluted by the pool of juicing players.  
 

it’s no different than equipment in golf.  No doubt in my mind that the harder the equipment is the more cream rises to the top.  Make it easier snd the real cream is met with artificial cream and is harder to see. 

Of course it would be better for him.  Steroids, hgh and peptides have some horrendous side effects that these guys don't understand.  Weak bones, heart problems, liver and renal toxic, excess bone growth, tumor growth, weakens tendons and ligaments, etc. 

Edited June 25, 2021 by phizzy30

[iBanesto]

Can Kyle Berkshire beat a 4 handicapper?

 

[bladehunter]

5 minutes ago, phizzy30 said:

Of course it would be better for him.  Steroids, hgh and peptides have some horrendous side effects that these guys don't understand.  Weak bones, heart problems, liver and renal toxic, excess bone growth, tumor growth, weakens tendons and ligaments, etc. 

so that’s what the responsible person would lobby for .... right ?  
 

can’t change it if you ride with it.  

[bladehunter]

6 minutes ago, phizzy30 said:

Of course it would be better for him.  Steroids, hgh and peptides have some horrendous side effects that these guys don't understand.  Weak bones, heart problems, liver and renal toxic, excess bone growth, tumor growth, weakens tendons and ligaments, etc. 

2nd thought.  By the way. I get it. It’s realism in the here and  now vs taking ahead to the next guy.  Some of today’s guys might have to be sacrificed in order for the next ones and so on to be better.  Long term I don’t think using these guys as circus acts then watching them sink back to poverty is doing any help.  

[phizzy30]

2 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

so that’s what the responsible person would lobby for .... right ?  
 

can’t change it if you ride with it.  

It is what it is blade.  Pro sports is riddled with PEDs whether we love it or hate it. 

[BlackDiamondPar5]

14 minutes ago, storm319 said:

Please stop posting that graph as it is disingenuous at best. There are way too many variables from year to year to simply look at averages and jump to conclusions with respect to a cause. A legitimate study would be digging into the year to year variables in an attempt to isolate down the the actual impact that equipment had. 
 

Example, the players competing on tour change year to year (Q school promotions, card loses, age outs, injuries, etc), some venues change, the environmental conditions change. Then with the static players you need to consider whether they made any equipment/sponsor changes from one year to the next or swing changes or had some kind of life change that impacted them physically or mentally. Then you have on course situational impacts like how a hole is setup/conditioned for that particular day, where the player is in the standings, what happened on the last hole, pace of play which may influence their approach to a specific measure shot.
 

The point is that this is a lot more complicated than simply drawing a circle around a graph of yearly averages (but the doing this fits the narrative of those advocating for an equipment rollback). 

The graph is not disingenuous!  It's real data that I took the time to put into Excel and plot it.  Go look at the stats yourself, do your own research with real data, not anecdotes... it's widely available.   While there may be other factors, it doesn't change the fact that guys are hitting it longer now than when they were younger. It's universally across the board. No way am I stronger today in my late 50's then I was in my early 30's, yet as a lifetime mid-capper I'm hitting it longer today then 25 years ago.  In my last 2 rounds I've had 4 drives between 277 and 287.  I couldn't even sniff a distance like that back then.

 

I don't see this as a problem for 99% us.  But it's a problem for courses that want to host any elite amateur or pro events--- without spending millions on renovations they are obsolete venues.  Renovation costs are significant, ongoing maintenance costs grow and land is a highly finite resource that we all pay for while Bubba laughs his way to the bank.   I like Bubba but he's dead wrong when he says we are mad at some guy. 

 

  

 

 

[Soloman1]

1 hour ago, storm319 said:

Please stop posting that graph as it is disingenuous at best... 

 

A trend is a trend is a trend.

[bladehunter]

1 hour ago, phizzy30 said:

It is what it is blade.  Pro sports is riddled with PEDs whether we love it or hate it. 

Maybe so.  But a defeatist attitude won’t solve it.  If clean guys called out guys publicly  who do it , it would stop.  Eventually.  I don’t want to see it in golf.  It’s a part of culture that’s not welcomed.  
 

 

I think that hits to the meat of the issue with Bryson and Brooks. Those two meat heads are 1.  Not fit and healthy and 2. The typical “ bro “ culture guy who thinks that he is.  Guys like DJ phil or Rahm or even Rory are 5x as fit as those two , as far as longevity and life in general.  Nobody wants to see fields full of meat heads whos joints explode in 5 seasons .   That’s what the long drive ranks are for.  

Edited June 25, 2021 by bladehunter

[BlackDiamondPar5]

31 minutes ago, Soloman1 said:

 

A trend is a trend is a trend.

Exactly. Pretty natural for us engineering types to look at that chart and say "geez what's going on here?" 🙂

 

Oh, and here's one more data point for @storm319 How does a guy like Fred Funk go from driving it an average of 254 at age 34 to 271 at age 49?  I mean take your pick and do the research on any one or group of players.  Tell us why everyone hits it farther as they aged from the 90's to the 2000's. I'd be curious to know your theory. 

Edited June 25, 2021 by BlackDiamondPar5

[Titleist99]

2 hours ago, iBanesto said:

Can Kyle Berkshire beat a 4 handicapper?

 

Can Kyle Berkshire beat a 4 handicapper? You ask. Kyle is a plus 3, trying to get to plus 5 which is minimum to compete on the big tour. A plus 3 won't make it on the mini tours....IMO. I think KB might beat the brains out of a four HC. that's assuming that a real question.

[smashdn]

3 hours ago, johnseg said:

Is this really true or is it vanity of courses and course architects. This week they will light up the Travelers Championship. Big Deal. Everyone plays the same course and by playing a shorter course it gives more people a chance to win. The driver wedge argument doesn't hold water either because I for one don't find a 4 iron any more exciting than a pitching wedge when watching golf.

 

Most memberships don't like seeing their courses lit up.  At TPC whatever they don't have much choice but to suck it up but I don't think the membership at Colonial wants to see -28 and guys shooting low 60's multiple days.

 

You and I probably don't care because we aren't members but I bet word gets back around to the tour and the tour set-up people.

 

And for some people who watch golf they are only concerned with how many.  Some are also concerned with how.  Neither group is right or wrong (though I would say you can satisfy both), but do entertain that the argument does hold water for some with that concern.

[Titleist99]

1 hour ago, BlackDiamondPar5 said:

Exactly. Pretty natural for us engineering types to look at that chart and say "geez what's going on here?" 🙂

 

Oh, and here's one more data point for @storm319 How does a guy like Fred Funk go from driving it an average of 254 at age 34 to 271 at age 49?  I mean take your pick and do the research on any one or group of players.  Tell us why everyone hits it farther as they aged from the 90's to the 2000's. I'd be curious to know your theory. 

Todays touring Pro can pick up 20-25 yards off the tee by simply optimizing their swing and using the gym. The launch monitor is a marvelous invention. Todays pros hit up on the ball and use the correct launch angle, optimum club head loft combined with fast running fairways and voila! It's not difficult to understand.

[smashdn]

2 hours ago, storm319 said:

Please stop posting that graph as it is disingenuous at best. There are way too many variables from year to year to simply look at averages and jump to conclusions with respect to a cause. A legitimate study would be digging into the year to year variables in an attempt to isolate down the the actual impact that equipment had. 
 

Example, the players competing on tour change year to year (Q school promotions, card loses, age outs, injuries, etc), some venues change, the environmental conditions change. Then with the static players you need to consider whether they made any equipment/sponsor changes from one year to the next or swing changes or had some kind of life change that impacted them physically or mentally. Then you have on course situational impacts like how a hole is setup/conditioned for that particular day, where the player is in the standings, what happened on the last hole, pace of play which may influence their approach to a specific measure shot.
 

The point is that this is a lot more complicated than simply drawing a circle around a graph of yearly averages (but the doing this fits the narrative of those advocating for an equipment rollback). 

 

You minimize the impact of individual variables with a very large sample size.  The things you mention, player changes, venue changes, and environmental changes, are muted due to the sample size.

 

Also, if you know anything about how they pick which holes are the official measurement holes you would know that they are chosen in a way that also minimizes additional variables.  Holes where the field will most likely universally be using driver, not significantly downwind or upwind, as level as can be practical, straightish, etc.

 

A trend is a trend.  Do a regression analysis to determine which of your variables you want to see has the biggest impact on that trend.

[BlackDiamondPar5]

16 minutes ago, Titleist99 said:

Todays touring Pro can pick up 20-25 yards off the tee by simply optimizing their swing and using the gym. The launch monitor is a marvelous invention. Todays pros hit up on the ball and use the correct launch angle, optimum club head loft combined with fast running fairways and voila! It's not difficult to understand.

No doubt that launch monitors, club/shaft optimizing and the gym is helping today's players squeeze even more yards, but that didn't start the distance revolution that began in the mid-90's.  What did Fred Funk do as his career was winding down to pick up 17 yards from 1990 to 2007?  For me personally I've used no launch monitors, no customized drivers or shafts, no golf specific workouts.  I'm certainly not as strong in my late 50's as I was in my mid-30's.  Yes I'm marginally a better golfer, maybe a bit more fit in some aspects, but it doesn't explain why I can drive the ball 25-30 yards farther.   So what is it?

Edited June 25, 2021 by BlackDiamondPar5