46 Inch + Drivers on Tour

[PZero]

They are completely out of touch with reality. They're banning something that isn't a problem.

 

 

[storm319]

1 minute ago, PZero said:

They are completely out of touch with reality. They're banning something that isn't a problem.

 

 

As previously mentioned, this is a preventative measure to limit future gains prior to the inevitable mass adoption of longer shaft lengths at the highest levels of competition. The fact that this will impact a very minimal number of players is a positive. 

[Titleist_PT23]

11 hours ago, MountainKing said:

Phil and maybe Bryson?  I think more guys are using 44-45 than 46+, but I could be wrong that. 

Most players are at/above 45 these days.  The 44 - 44.5 inch pro driver length was applicable 10-15 years ago.

[bladehunter]

3 hours ago, davep043 said:

That is already in the Equipment Rules.  This MLR is just one step in doing what they've said they intend to do since early 2020, try to limit future equipment-related distance gains.  So damn near everyone in the world can play the same driver they're using now, they just can't take a step to one longer than 46 inches.  If anyone didn't expect this, they've had their heads in the sand for more than 18 months.  

I agree. I did see this type response coming from them.   A kind of ceremonial  offering , that has absolutely no effect or meaning.  A bit of sleight of hand , hoping that the calls to limit simmer down 

Edited October 13, 2021 by bladehunter

[bobfoster]

1 hour ago, storm319 said:

As previously mentioned, this is a preventative measure to limit future gains prior to the inevitable mass adoption of longer shaft lengths at the highest levels of competition. The fact that this will impact a very minimal number of players is a positive. 

It is solving a non-existent problem. There are no signs there is about to be some "mass adoption" of longer shafts. Driver shafts are very different from something like wedges, or golf balls, or driver head CCs. Shaft length poses a fundamental trade-off between distance and accuracy. The pros always try to optimize it, but can never get around the brutal physics of it. It is simple math. A lot of pros, in conjunction with OEMs, (obviously) have already experimented - that's what they do. (You don't think the top 50 have not played around with everything from 42" to 48"? Really? These guys fly on private jets and do this for a living. They try everything.) But after all that, they have almost universally settled on 44" - 45" as the top of the bell curve in that trade-off. If there was going to be some "inevitable" migration to longer shafts, it would have already happened. 

 

IMO, the USGA just has never liked bomb-and-gouge golf. They've made that very clear (it is also what was behind the wedge groove rule). But if you step back a bit and look, doesn't it seem bizarre that a sport's rule making body would be against a certain style of play? Especially when that style of play is incredibly popular with the fans themselves? (People love watching these guys do monster drives, and then try to hit impossible shots out of deep rough.) 

 

More to the point, to state it succinctly, why is increasing distance a problem that has to be solved?

Edited October 13, 2021 by bobfoster

[munichop]

The governing bodies got out engineered over 30 years ago and now are parsing regulations to go back to the future.  This approach will lead to a deadened ball down the road after the groove debacle, anchoring and the max driver length.. So the local rule or conditions of competition will be their preferred method to skew the skill sets at the highest level back to where they want them, all while appeasing manufacturers for the everyday players. They realize they have loads the war, they just want to win a few battles going forward so they can claim some relevance.

[bladehunter]

6 hours ago, munichop said:

The governing bodies got out engineered over 30 years ago and now are parsing regulations to go back to the future.  This approach will lead to a deadened ball down the road after the groove debacle, anchoring and the max driver length.. So the local rule or conditions of competition will be their preferred method to skew the skill sets at the highest level back to where they want them, all while appeasing manufacturers for the everyday players. They realize they have loads the war, they just want to win a few battles going forward so they can claim some relevance.

Agree all but the war being lost. They could always go nuclear snd “ win “ but I suppose if everyone “ dies” nobody “wins” , so maybe point taken.  
 

but on that same note. Welcome to bifurcation without the name folks. Most here I see praising the USga for this move also argued loudly against bifurcation. Seems it was only the label that bothered them. 

Edited October 13, 2021 by bladehunter

[RCGA]

Introduce a rule that says the gallery is OB.

 

No one is going to use a 48" driver when there's actual hazards in play off the tee.

 

It solves the distance problem (who cares if Bryson hits a 290y 3 wood?). It improves spectator/volunteer safety. It makes the game harder for the pros while have zero impact on regular golfers.  

[Bad9]

Raise your hand if you believe this will have any impact on driving distance at any level of gold, especially high amateur and professional.

 

Didn't think so.

[smashdn]

11 hours ago, PHILsThemannnn said:

This is kind of a stupid way to go about it IMO.  I know they did that whole insights report in 2019-20, but I think they should be looking at course design instead of shafts. In 2021 all 4 major champions were middle of the pack in driving accuracy for that week and Morikawa/Hideki were near the bottom in distance. They are approaching this whole issue the wrong way. Why don't course designers take a look at Augusta National? 6 of the par 4s are under 460 and all 4 par 5s are reachable in 2. The course is long, but it's not like an Erin Hills long.

 

How does the USGA regulate course design?  How do they regulate golf equipment?

 

Have you seen the thread on the first page currently about ANGC?  What are they currently doing to the course?

 

Were all four par fives intended to be reachable by the whole field in two?

[Mustard_Tiger]

No one is going to adopt this local rule. It's irrelevant.

[smashdn]

8 hours ago, munichop said:

The governing bodies got out engineered over 30 years ago and now are parsing regulations to go back to the future.  This approach will lead to a deadened ball down the road after the groove debacle, anchoring and the max driver length.. So the local rule or conditions of competition will be their preferred method to skew the skill sets at the highest level back to where they want them, all while appeasing manufacturers for the everyday players. They realize they have loads the war, they just want to win a few battles going forward so they can claim some relevance.

 

I agree with your premise but not your word choice in the bolded part.  The governing bodies are on record as not seeking to limit skill, in fact, the opposite.  The equipment changes are an attempt to inject skill back into the game at the highest levels.

[cardoustie]

The USGA has now F’d me 3 times

 

1.  The long putter.  Was amazing for my crap back.   It was better for putting inside 10 feet but worse from long range.  Ridiculous to ban anchoring on body .. but allow arm anchoring to continue

 

2.  SM2 wedge grooves.   Screwed me again, thanks blue jackets.n.  Hone a feel for greenside grab and release and bye bye.  P Harrington says this was a real setback for him

 

3.  Driver length.  Most of my drivers are 46.25 to 46.5 and have been for a long time.  It’s just easier with my back

If your back isn’t horrific please don’t take an alternate stance.  I’ve lengthened short irons for the same reason

 

 

And before you say it doesn’t affect me .. it does for mid-am events and senior events starting in 14 months

[cardoustie]

32 minutes ago, Bad9 said:

Raise your hand if you believe this will have any impact on driving distance at any level of gold, especially high amateur and professional.

 

Didn't think so.

 

I am a little longer with 46+ vs 44-45 … just sayin’

[smashdn]

32 minutes ago, Bad9 said:

Raise your hand if you believe this will have any impact on driving distance at any level of gold, especially high amateur and professional.

 

Didn't think so.

 

I think the point here is that you will not notice its impact.  It is pre-emptive.  Just like if the characteristics of the ProV1 were never allowed we wouldn't know what we were missing if we still played a spinny wound ball.

[davep043]

3 minutes ago, Mustard_Tiger said:

No one is going to adopt this local rule. It's irrelevant.

The PGA and LPGA Tours will use this MLR starting January 2022.  The USGA will use this MLR in all 14 of its championships in 2022.  It will affect very few rank and file golfers, but at the very top level it may have a small effect.

 

[RCGA]

12 minutes ago, cardoustie said:

The USGA has now F’d me 3 times

 

3.  Driver length.  Most of my drivers are 46.25 to 46.5 and have been for a long time.  It’s just easier with my back

If your back isn’t horrific please don’t take an alternate stance.  I’ve lengthened short irons for the same reason

 

And before you say it doesn’t affect me .. it does for mid-am events and senior events starting in 14 months

 

If a 1/4" is that critical on the driver, how are you swinging irons? 

[Mustard_Tiger]

23 minutes ago, davep043 said:

The PGA and LPGA Tours will use this MLR starting January 2022.  The USGA will use this MLR in all 14 of its championships in 2022.  It will affect very few rank and file golfers, but at the very top level it may have a small effect.

 

 

 

So we have bifurcation of the rules? Cool. It's about time.

[bladehunter]

17 minutes ago, cardoustie said:

The USGA has now F’d me 3 times

 

1.  The long putter.  Was amazing for my crap back.   It was better for putting inside 10 feet but worse from long range.  Ridiculous to ban anchoring on body .. but allow arm anchoring to continue

 

2.  SM2 wedge grooves.   Screwed me again, thanks blue jackets.n.  Hone a feel for greenside grab and release and bye bye.  P Harrington says this was a real setback for him

 

3.  Driver length.  Most of my drivers are 46.25 to 46.5 and have been for a long time.  It’s just easier with my back

If your back isn’t horrific please don’t take an alternate stance.  I’ve lengthened short irons for the same reason

 

 

And before you say it doesn’t affect me .. it does for mid-am events and senior events starting in 14 months

Thank you.  I’m same in most of that post.  I’m going to have to measure mine in finite detail.  I believe it’s 45.75 to 46.25 depending on how you measure.  I do tend to slide down the grip a hair. But not much.  And you may have guessed it. I’m hitting driver  best of my life.    I’m not going to change it unless forced.   But the usga will absolutely put this in play.  They love their own ideas. 

[Blonde Line Lizard]

18 hours ago, NevinW said:

You guys need to go read the actual statement.  It is left to tours to decide whether to implement it as a local rule. It has no effect on any amateur.  

So basically it is:

 

Bryson plays, rule enforced.

No Bryson, use what you want.

[MtlJeff]

On 10/12/2021 at 10:06 AM, Londo said:

From my understanding, Phil was the only one who has used it on tour before. Bryson teased that he was considering bringing a 48in to the Masters but didn't end up opting to. @MountainKing you are correct about most tour pros

 

maybe 10 years ago or so Padraig Harrington famously tried it too, he definitely used 48 inches for a bit. After winning his majors he went on a 2-3 year bender of messing with his swing and clubs.

[stinger_gc]

3 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

How does the USGA regulate course design?  How do they regulate golf equipment?

 

Have you seen the thread on the first page currently about ANGC?  What are they currently doing to the course?

 

Were all four par fives intended to be reachable by the whole field in two?

I gotta clarify. I don't think the shaft rollback is necessary, guys will still hit it absurd distances and if the USGA is worried about how far guys are hitting it why don't they start by doing something at the courses their tournament goes to and see if others lead by example.

Look at the last 2 US Open's for ex., this year Rahm averaged 317 off the tee but only hit 51% of the fairways, last year Bryson averaged 333 off the tee and only hit 41% of the fairways. It's seems to me like these guys would still have an advantage in terms of distance and the shaft rollback will only hurt guys who want to go to a longer shaft to squeeze out a couple extra yards

 

Also the thread about Augusta is absolutely stupid. The only complaint people have about 13 is guys hitting 7 and 8 irons into that green. In reality this year it wasn't even the easiest par 5 on the course in terms of scoring. #2 played easier and #8 had the exact same scoring average. Also 11 played .25 shots easier then 13 this year so flipping the 2 wouldn't do anything.

[rblmp32]

On 10/12/2021 at 10:01 AM, MountainKing said:

Phil and maybe Bryson?  I think more guys are using 44-45 than 46+, but I could be wrong that. 

I believe Dylan Fritelli is using a longer one too, not sure of the exact length though.  

[MountainKing]

5 hours ago, Bad9 said:

Raise your hand if you believe this will have any impact on driving distance at any level of gold, especially high amateur and professional.

 

Didn't think so.

 

Minimal to none for sure.  You could put a 44 inch driver in all these guys hands and I doubt you'd see any huge drop in driving distance.  Phil's mini driver is under 44" and he's still hitting the thing miles.   This entire thing makes no sense.  Basically "we're gonna make it look like we're doing something, but not really do anything".   The distance thing is odd, most of the guys on tour these days are averaging 290+.  You have to go 150 places deep on the driving list to find the handful of guys not hitting 290 (or what used to be considered long) on average last season.  I looked up the top 20 in distance and out of the official 50 only 6 wins came from that group.  

 

If the USGA/Tour really want to do something,  it's probably at the point where we need some regulation at the pro level.  The real question is, does anybody really want them to do anything?  There's a lot of profit tied into distance, and as a fan it's fun seeing some of the shots getting played.  As far as not being able to play some old classic courses, Merion in 2013 played under 7k and had a winning score over par.  Since that US Open we've only seen one other US Open have an over par winner.   The modern behemoth of Erin Hills, playing at almost 1000 yards longer than Merion was destroyed at -16.  That should be telling us something. 

[bekgolf]

Phil isn't happy about it.  Just caught part of Morikawa talking about using course design to require precise shots, didn't catch the first part but I'm sure they will show it again.

[Fairway14]

7 hours ago, Bad9 said:

Raise your hand if you believe this will have any impact on driving distance at any level of gold, especially high amateur and professional.

 

Didn't think so.

 

25 years ago several Senior Tour players were gaining significant distance swinging 48" drivers. The reason they stopped was because producing good shots with an extra long driver shaft requires a swing tempo/rhythm that is too different from the other clubs within the bag.

[gvogel]

17 hours ago, bobfoster said:

It is solving a non-existent problem. There are no signs there is about to be some "mass adoption" of longer shafts. Driver shafts are very different from something like wedges, or golf balls, or driver head CCs. Shaft length poses a fundamental trade-off between distance and accuracy. The pros always try to optimize it, but can never get around the brutal physics of it. It is simple math. A lot of pros, in conjunction with OEMs, (obviously) have already experimented - that's what they do. (You don't think the top 50 have not played around with everything from 42" to 48"? Really? These guys fly on private jets and do this for a living. They try everything.) But after all that, they have almost universally settled on 44" - 45" as the top of the bell curve in that trade-off. If there was going to be some "inevitable" migration to longer shafts, it would have already happened. 

 

IMO, the USGA just has never liked bomb-and-gouge golf. They've made that very clear (it is also what was behind the wedge groove rule). But if you step back a bit and look, doesn't it seem bizarre that a sport's rule making body would be against a certain style of play? Especially when that style of play is incredibly popular with the fans themselves? (People love watching these guys do monster drives, and then try to hit impossible shots out of deep rough.) 

 

More to the point, to state it succinctly, why is increasing distance a problem that has to be solved?

Cost of land, cost of water, cost of maintenance off the top of my mind.

 

But the answer also has something to do with the nature of competition - man against the golf course.  With current equipment and current course lengths, most of the time the game becomes a drive it long and make putts deal.  If you like 600 yard par 5's that can be reached in two shots, I guess that's your game.  The USGA is in charge of maintaining the integrity of golf.  Driver, 9-iron on the 13th at Augusta isn't much of a challenge at the moment.  As a sportsman, why shouldn't the competitor embrace a more difficult game from tee to green?

[bladehunter]

9 minutes ago, gvogel said:

Cost of land, cost of water, cost of maintenance off the top of my mind.

 

But the answer also has something to do with the nature of competition - man against the golf course.  With current equipment and current course lengths, most of the time the game becomes a drive it long and make putts deal.  If you like 600 yard par 5's that can be reached in two shots, I guess that's your game.  The USGA is in charge of maintaining the integrity of golf.  Driver, 9-iron on the 13th at Augusta isn't much of a challenge at the moment.  As a sportsman, why shouldn't the competitor embrace a more difficult game from tee to green?

As you know.  I’m all for it.  Roll it back to small 43 inch drivers and then pull back the ball.  And I’ll be on board. But these minute and symbolic changes just irritate.  Like the groove rule they do nothing except annoy a couple of us.  

Edited October 13, 2021 by bladehunter

[grm24]

4 hours ago, rblmp32 said:

I believe Dylan Fritelli is using a longer one too, not sure of the exact length though.  

46" driver for Frittelli. He was previously using a 44.5" driver.

[Pepperturbo]

Lots of people use drivers over 45" but they keep it under 46".  Only a few that I am aware of have made their desire to go past 46" public; namely Phil and Bryson.   No doubt there are others.