distance debate

[milesgiles]

1 minute ago, clevited said:

 

I am pretty convinced that the larger heads of the drivers today really just give a pro 1 or 2 shots a round that are potentially less punished than they might have been with smaller equipment.  If they had to use only fairway head sized drivers (so effectively a really strong 3 wood), I think they would adjust (in both the swing and equipment) and still belt it out there almost as far as they once did with maybe an extra miss or two that we might not even notice as observers.

 

The big heads are more appealing to the masses and I it obviously helps them a lot with getting into the sport.  Less of that whiffing happening that is so embarrassing when you first start playing.

 

It doesn't make much sense to me to bifurcate either.  I don't like that the tour decided to shorten driver length which is effectively a major bifurcation.  I also think it does absolutely nothing for the game other than hurt taller players or players that have refined their swing so much, that they can game a longer driver and keep it in play.

 

 

 

bowlimg with the bumpers up 

[milesgiles]

Just now, clevited said:

 

Define difference.  

 

Does said difference solve the perceived problem?

 

Be honest here.

 

wont know if we dont try 

[clevited]

3 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

bowlimg with the bumpers up 

 

No, more like bowling on a house shot vs a sport shot.  You can get away with a slightly bad throw once and a great while on the house shot but there is no saving you from a REALLY poor shot.  A gutter ball is still gonna gutter.  

[clevited]

5 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

wont know if we dont try 

 

I already showed you evidence to suggest it won't do much of anything given that pro's aren't afraid to swing their fairway woods almost as fast (proportionately) as their drivers.  That is the whole point of me disagreeing with you.  Show me some evidence, anything to suggest what you say has potential.  I really am interested in seeing evidence that leads you to believe this.  

[dmecca2]

9 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

wont know if we dont try 

Not a fan of this argument. We've come too far to just start guessing and making decisions based on feelings

[MattC555]

In my experience smaller drivers won't do much of anything.  I enjoy hitting a steel shafted persimmon 4 wood, including in my indoor golf league.  It really isn't terribly hard to swing, and generates some terrific smash factors.  It is low launching and relatively low spin, rolling out within yards of my Sim 2 3HL.  This is a 40 year old wooden club....  But, that's all with a modern Pro V1.  If they want to control distance it would be best done by standardizing and regulating the ball.  I'm not sure I'm an advocate of that, but it would be the best and easiest way. 

 

I'd like to see softer, narrower fairways, and longer rough for the pros.  I like seeing them hit bombs, but would prefer to see it less often and way less roll out.  

[Pastit]

18 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

if he did (havent seen him say that but could be wrong) he was absolutely the best driver of a ball of his generation. That advantage would be largely nullified today, and thats not right

I don’t have access to what you state he said or it’s timing. As I’ve said elsewhere, I’ve been out for 18 holes with him c 1981 on a course, Moortown,  which allowed uninhibited driver-striking. Probably the last time I saw him was c 1984 but I may be wrong. That was at Northumberland GC where he  also drove flat out. He was often 2 fairways left of his intended target line that week. 
 

It’s possible that he shut down a bit after moving to the USA. Over here, the driver swing was just a lash, hence his nickname. Nowhere near Seve’s quality but both were inaccurate. I remember Seve being so off on 18th that he marooned himself on the tiny practice  putting green behind the 1st tee at Moortown. I liked Howard Clark’s driving - long and he often used less than driver. 

Edited March 3, 2022 by Pastit

[storm319]

17 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

wont know if we dont try 

How do you suggest we objectively measure success of this type of rule change if it was made?

[Nard_S]

47 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

he was absolutely the best driver of a ball of his generation.

Maybe all time. His 2nd Open win was & remains one of the best exhibitions of ball striking ever. 

[milesgiles]

20 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

I already showed you evidence to suggest it won't do much of anything given that pro's aren't afraid to swing their fairway woods almost as fast (proportionately) as their drivers.  That is the whole point of me disagreeing with you.  Show me some evidence, anything to suggest what you say has potential.  I really am interested in seeing evidence that leads you to believe this.  

 

look at average tour carries with 3 woods. Nowhere near driver and not nearly in proportion to shaft length and loft 

[milesgiles]

19 minutes ago, dmecca2 said:

Not a fan of this argument. We've come too far to just start guessing and making decisions based on feelings

 

like mandating 460cc as the maximum?

[clevited]

3 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

look at average tour carries with 3 woods. Nowhere near driver and not nearly in proportion to shaft length and loft 

 

But that is a 3 wood.  Thought we are talking about drivers the size of 3 woods.  So no, that doesn't help your argument any.

 

Edit:  Can you post the tour averages that you are referencing?  That would help rather than just stating something as fact.

Edited March 2, 2022 by clevited

[milesgiles]

13 minutes ago, MattC555 said:

 It is low launching and relatively low spin, rolling out within yards of my Sim 2 3HL.  

 

thankyou 

[milesgiles]

12 minutes ago, Pastit said:

I don’t have access to what you state he said or it’s timing. As I’ve said elsewhere, I’ve been out for 18 holes with him c 1981 on a course, Moortown,  which allowed uninhibited driver-striking. Probably the last time I saw him was c 1984 but I may be wrong. That was at Northumberland GC where he  also drove flat out. He was often 2 fairways left of his intended target line that week. 
 

It’s possible that he shut down a bit after moving to the USA. Over here, the driver swing was just a lash, hence his nickname. Nowhere near Seve’s quality but both were inaccurate. I remember Seve being so off on 18th that he marooned himself on the tiny practice  putting green behind the 1st tee. I liked Howard Clark’s driving - long and he often used less than driver. 

 

He hadnt peaked in the early 80s. I saw a lot of his 93 Open in person and dont recall a bad one 

[milesgiles]

9 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

But that is a 3 wood.  Thought we are talking about drivers the size of 3 woods.  So no, that doesn't help your argument any.

 

Edit:  Can you post the tour averages that you are referencing?  That would help rather than just stating something as fact.

 

no offense but its been posted many times in every thread of this type along with video evidence.  Rory himself was around 270 carry if I recall on course, at best 

[milesgiles]

19 minutes ago, storm319 said:

How do you suggest we objectively measure success of this type of rule change if it was made?

 

you'll objectively find golf more enjoyable to watch, I promise 

[llewol007]

I believe distance at the point it is now is where it needs to be. Manufacturers can only squeeze so much more in terms of materials they use while staying in what is allowable. Even with longer drivers, there is something to be said about sacrificing accuracy the longer your driver gets. With no offense towards Bryson, he too can only swing a driver in such a great force without it affecting other aspects of his game. Just like John Daly, golf shows us that distance can give you an advantage but that is probably 1/3 of what is need to be really successful at golf. Tiger is a clear example of having distance off the tee but also being a great iron striker and a great putter. So for me we are right where the game needs to be.

[clevited]

15 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

no offense but its been posted many times in every thread of this type along with video evidence.  Rory himself was around 270 carry if I recall on course, at best 

 

You still aren't making any point here.  270 carry with a 3 wood?  A 3 wood is shorter, and spins much more typically.  Look at ball speed and swing speed to get an idea of how your idea would play out, not how far they hit 3 woods.  

[clevited]

Just for fun...

 

 

 

[kasting333]

No rollback would ever be enough for the crowd pushing it the hardest. 
 

I like that people on here are largely regular Joes concerned with the well-being of the game.
I think Mike Davis/USGA, former players and many others have an agenda. It’s not about what’s best for the game it’s self serving and about their old money country clubs or their course designing business. 
 

I actually think the 460 drivers are harder to learn to hit for ams. Face size hasn’t increased all that much it’s mainly been stretched out front to back. I don’t think shrinking head size would make much of a difference for pros either. 

[Pastit]

28 minutes ago, llewol007 said:

I believe distance at the point it is now is where it needs to be. Manufacturers can only squeeze so much more in terms of materials they use while staying in what is allowable. Even with longer drivers, there is something to be said about sacrificing accuracy the longer your driver gets. With no offense towards Bryson, he too can only swing a driver in such a great force without it affecting other aspects of his game. Just like John Daly, golf shows us that distance can give you an advantage but that is probably 1/3 of what is need to be really successful at golf. Tiger is a clear example of having distance off the tee but also being a great iron striker and a great putter. So for me we are right where the game needs to be.

Your view is honourably held I can see but I disagree. Though I must say how much I enjoyed seeing BdC hit that Bay Hill shot last year. Even though he’s probably now the most perfectly ruptured pro in history so its a self-correcting problem perhaps. 
 

Too many Chinese fakers would lose their jobs if equipment were changed too much. So amateurs and pros can play the same courses, and traditional ones at that, we either have a new ball for pros and/ or make “ fake “ islands of penal rough between 300 yds and 350 yds out from tees and don't cut grass at all in those sections. This is broadly what happens now where holes can’t be lengthened. We can’t go on lengthening courses or we would end up with 2 games eventually anyway.

Edited March 2, 2022 by Pastit

[dmecca2]

13 minutes ago, kasting333 said:

No rollback would ever be enough for the crowd pushing it the hardest. 
 

I like that people on here are largely regular Joes concerned with the well-being of the game.
I think Mike Davis/USGA, former players and many others have an agenda. It’s not about what’s best for the game it’s self serving and about their old money country clubs or their course designing business. 
 

I actually think the 460 drivers are harder to learn to hit for ams. Face size hasn’t increased all that much it’s mainly been stretched out front to back. I don’t think shrinking head size would make much of a difference for pros either. 

The most vocal group isn't always right, or the majority.

[kasting333]

1 minute ago, Pastit said:

Your view is honourably held I can see but I disagree. Though I must say how much I enjoyed seeing BdC hit that Bay Hill shot last year. Even though he’s probably now the most perfectly ruptured pro in history is its a self-correcting problem perhaps. 
 

Too many Chinese fakers would lose their jobs if equipment were changed too much. So amateurs and pros can play the same courses, and traditional ones at that, we either have a new ball for pros and/ or make “ fake “ islands of penal rough between 300 yds and 350 yds out from tees and don't cut grass at all.

Bifurcation doesn’t work in golf. The am game is way too tied to the pro game. 

[Nard_S]

Modern tech of ball & gear, widens fairways, enlarges greens, speeds up fairways & quiets the wind. Good for me, good for you, not so good for big boy tour where the game has been about spin control. It's now bowling with gutter guards up. Distance gain is a resultant of that. When Tiger put into play a 2-piece and won, the next year everybody adopted it. People forget that Nick Price was the best for 2 years in mid 90's. He was using a 2-piece Precept at the time too. "Rollback" is about re-establishing the foul lines in golf. They've been opened up a lot. You might think it's great but it was better before. "Lowest score in, wins" is meat head mentality and bull dozes the layers the game moves on. May as well flatten the fairways & greens or better yet go all SIM and get off on launch/spin & ball speed.

[Pastit]

28 minutes ago, kasting333 said:

No rollback would ever be enough for the crowd pushing it the hardest. 
 

I like that people on here are largely regular Joes concerned with the well-being of the game.
I think Mike Davis/USGA, former players and many others have an agenda. It’s not about what’s best for the game it’s self serving and about their old money country clubs or their course designing business. 
 

I actually think the 460 drivers are harder to learn to hit for ams. Face size hasn’t increased all that much it’s mainly been stretched out front to back. I don’t think shrinking head size would make much of a difference for pros either. 

Every club pro I’ve talked to re 460 drivers told me the greatest effects have been to shunt high handicappers to mid range and a slightly similar but lesser effect for lower HCP players. You do know to hit them from the broad side I hope ? They are hard to hit off the semi-circular side. 

Edited March 2, 2022 by Pastit

[smashdn]

21 hours ago, smashdn said:

This doesn't do the intent justice but offers a glimpse > https://www.augusta.com/masters/story/news/2018-04-07/no-13s-challenge-has-faded-recent-years-augusta-national

 

http://theaposition.com/brianmccallen/golf/262/augusta-nationals-alluring-13th-hole

 

You can lay back some off the tee and stay up high and on relatively flat ground to prevent the hanging lie, or bite off more off the tee with a draw and be closer to the green, but at the expense of being on the hanging lie.  Hanging lie with a persimmon 4 wood or 2i is probably no picnic.  Hanging lie with a 8i today who cares?  So you are back there in the fairway with your trusty baffing spoon in hand and contemplating do I go for the green or do i play out short right and pitch on.  Who is laying up with a short or mid iron in hand?

 

Being able to go up over that dog leg has all but killed that hole (from a strategy standpoint), even with 55 yards added.

 

Here is a better description that also quotes RTJJ. > https://www.si.com/golf/travel/feature-2020-10-22-illuminating-the-masters-13th-hole

[smashdn]

19 hours ago, clevited said:

Edit:  Forgot to address one other thing.  Pro's use the big drivers because they give them an advantage over smaller stuff.  One less bad shot a round is huge when they have a misfire with their swing.  They are also the models being pitched to the consumer.  Why would they be using something completely different when sponsors are trying to sell clubs to the masses?  If everyone had to use the same size fairway sized head, then nobody would have the advantage of a shot or two saving bigger head so they still swing hard if the shots gained from distance remains the same, which it would.

 

There that is all I will say about that and agree to disagree.  

 

Isn't that the argument for rolling back those clubs?  An MLB baseball player would have an advantage using an aluminum bat but he cannot seeing as it is against their rules.

 

I am intimately familiar with misfires in swings.  Much personal data.  I can tell you that a slight misfire with a 440cc Titleist driver delivers a very different result than a slight misfire with a Hogan persimmon driver.  Difference in playable rough to looking at dropping a shot or playing from the adjoining fairway (if it actually makes it that far.)  Lost distance on a bad persimmon wood shot is no joke.  Good drive would be 280 or so, catch it low it is low bullet with top spin that might eek out 200 if there is nothing that stops it.  Catch it on the toe or heel and the sidespin and deadness robs it of even more distance.

[subrew]

2 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

no offense but its been posted many times in every thread of this type along with video evidence.  Rory himself was around 270 carry if I recall on course, at best 

 

What the pros carry for their 3/4 woods means nothing to this argument though.  Watch any youtube WITB discussion with the pros and their fitters, and they all target a very specific distance, spin/launch profile with these clubs.  They aren't trying to hit them farther, they are trying to carry say 275 with 3,000rpm spin and a descent angle to hold greens.  As woods have gotten hotter, many have lofted up to 4w or 3HL specs so they don't hit it too far.

 

Taylormade could make a Sim2 Rocket ++++++++ at 8 degrees, and Rory is going to carry it close to his current driver on center strikes.  Bryson's current "3-wood" is at 10.5 degrees, and he carries it over 300.  If they mandated a much smaller 3w sized head, he's going to have a 6deg wood in his bag within a couple months.

[subrew]

I'm not sure if it got mentioned early on in this thread, but a couple years ago when the ball changes were first discussed, TXG did a quick video comparing a very soft compression Wilson Duosoft+ to a ProV1.  Matty is a pretty fast swing speed player, so it is fairly comparable with what some of the tour pros are hitting.  

 

 

They hit shots with a 54* wedge and a 7i.  Even at his higher club head speeds, the softer ball was longer in both of those clubs, mostly because of lower spin (which is a common trait amongst soft compression balls.)

 

When they got to the driver, the Wilson lost 6mph of ball speed, and 12yds of carry.

 

Then they slowed down the driver swing speed to more average male speeds, and the two balls had similar carry.  

 

The argument always seems to be "if they shorten the pros, then it will screw us average guys."  That doesn't have to be the case, if a soft compression ball was introduced.  It's really only going to affect the top 10% of swing speeds, and likely only on the 2-3 longer clubs in the bag.

 

What would be interesting from a tech perspective, would be to see how the manufacturers clawed it back at those very high driver swing speeds.  What changes would we see to lofts, CoG locations, etc. if they designed a driver around a very soft compression ball.

 

 

Edited March 2, 2022 by subrew

[MUNIGRIT]

6 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

let me clarify.. they swung hard (never flat out unless they are telling whoppers) WITHIN the confines of a technique that enabled them to return the club to the ball accurately.. ie no teeing the ball way up and forward, no maximising distance from ball, no hip turn restriction, no overswing etc etc etc

 

expanded sweetspots made all of this and more possible, and made golf one dimensional

You need to watch some old videos. They totally went after it probably more than today's players do. Seriously your argument doesn't make any sense. Go look up wear marks on a 3 wood of today's players. You act like they are all over the face of the club. They have a little more skill than you do and a lot more than you are giving them credit for.