distance debate

[milesgiles]

7 hours ago, clevited said:

 

When you have confidence in your ability, it is uncanny how it seems to show up under pressure.  As I said before, if your mental stability can't repeat a motion you have demonstrated confidence in and exceptional skill at performing, no club is going to fix that.  That is part of what makes or breaks people on tour, mental strength.  They seem to do just fine with 3w off the tee as I have said before, don't see them whipping out the driver because it is so easy to hit and control when 3w is the play.

 

When are you going to provide your quotes and list of hundreds that back up your idea of making drivers the size of 3w to tackle the distance "problem"?  I am starting to think you aren't a very honest person and at the very least, the most prideful and disingenuous person I have ever met online. 

 

I challenge you to set aside your pride and be honest for once. Admit your flawed vision and just revise it.  Detail those couple of maybes you gave me when I gave you that list of variables you could add to your idea.  I promise you, if you revise it, I will be happy to tell you I agree once you have thought it out more and come up with a better and more realistic fix to the "problem".  A more realistic and acceptable way to implement it would be a bonus as well cause just "try it" on the tour is daft imo. 

 

put 'pros hit persimmon' into youtube, thousands of results come up, and every single one ive seen comes to the same conclusion.

 

So for the fourth time of asking, just post one who says anything akin to 'yeah doesnt make much difference' because at the moment, this is you:

 

 

[clevited]

32 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

put 'pros hit persimmon' into youtube, thousands of results come up, and every single one ive seen comes to the same conclusion.

 

So for the fourth time of asking, just post one who says anything akin to 'yeah doesnt make much difference' because at the moment, this is you:

 

 

 

Wrong again, already answered this position of yours.  Give them a persimmon to practice with, let them get used to it then get back to me.

 

Once again though, you are deflecting to a different subject entirely.  Do you know how to argue a point of view or not?  You keep bringing up a completely different subject that doesn't support your position at all.  Round and round and round we go.  I press you for answers, you deflect and bring up a different subject.  I can do this for a pretty long time (I will get bored eventually), but until that happens I will keep trying to get an actual conversation from you and keep pressing you to better formulate a plan of attack on "distance".  

 

Comon miles, give it an honest go.  What ya say?

[milesgiles]

6 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

Wrong again, already answered this position of yours.  Give them a persimmon to practice with, let them get used to it then get back to me.

 

Once again though, you are deflecting to a different subject entirely.  Do you know how to argue a point of view or not?  You keep bringing up a completely different subject that doesn't support your position at all.  Round and round and round we go.  I press you for answers, you deflect and bring up a different subject.  I can do this for a pretty long time (I will get bored eventually), but until that happens I will keep trying to get an actual conversation from you and keep pressing you to better formulate a plan of attack on "distance".  

 

Comon miles, give it an honest go.  What ya say?

 

 

alright, find one who says 'as long as it was fitted to my specs and optimised for me, id be totally fine to take it out on tour next week..'

[clevited]

16 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

 

alright, find one who says 'as long as it was fitted to my specs and optimised for me, id be totally fine to take it out on tour next week..'

 

You aren't making any sense man.  Let me restate the problem since you seem to be pretty terrible at keeping track of your own argument.

 

You want 3w sized heads on the tour and think that will "fix" distance.  I have given you reasons why that alone won't work.  In otherwords, I am asking you to elaborate and fix the holes in your idea.  

 

You keep bringing up persimmon for some strange reason.  Is it because you don't understand the difference in design between an old wooden and heavy club and a modern graphite, steel, and titanium club?  

 

Because you keep bringing up persimmon,maybe you ought to change your idea to bringing back a club with the same size and performance characteristics as persimmon. Maybe elaborate and say it would need to be x inches max, x degrees of loft max, x weight, etc etc.  Or even just say bring back persimmon to fix the "problem" that is still a much more effective idea than shrink the driver to 3w size, done. 

 

I want you to have an effective idea I really do, but so far all I have seen from you is a hot load of garbage that you cannot defend and refuse to admit is flawed and needs more thought.  

 

Give me some thought.  What would it really take to bring the game back to ye olden era you miss so much?  Be as specific as you can with the details and lets discuss.

[oikos1]

33 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

 

alright, find one who says 'as long as it was fitted to my specs and optimised for me, id be totally fine to take it out on tour next week..'

Lol.  You're the guy who goes on and on about toasters on a stick, and then tees it up with a toaster on a stick so you can be "competitive". 

 

 

[milesgiles]

15 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

You aren't making any sense man.  Let me restate the problem since you seem to be pretty terrible at keeping track of your own argument.

 

You want 3w sized heads on the tour and think that will "fix" distance.  I have given you reasons why that alone won't work.  In otherwords, I am asking you to elaborate and fix the holes in your idea.  

 

You keep bringing up persimmon for some strange reason.  Is it because you don't understand the difference in design between an old wooden and heavy club and a modern graphite, steel, and titanium club?  

 

Because you keep bringing up persimmon,maybe you ought to change your idea to bringing back a club with the same size and performance characteristics as persimmon. Maybe elaborate and say it would need to be x inches max, x degrees of loft max, x weight, etc etc.  Or even just say bring back persimmon to fix the "problem" that is still a much more effective idea than shrink the driver to 3w size, done. 

 

I want you to have an effective idea I really do, but so far all I have seen from you is a hot load of garbage that you cannot defend and refuse to admit is flawed and needs more thought.  

 

Give me some thought.  What would it really take to bring the game back to ye olden era you miss so much?  Be as specific as you can with the details and lets discuss.

 

since you dont, and wont ever concede there is a problem, why ask me for a solution?

 

if you think it makes you look smart, Ive got some bad news 

[milesgiles]

5 minutes ago, oikos1 said:

Lol.  You're the guy who goes on and on about toasters on a stick, and then tees it up with a toaster on a stick so you can be "competitive". 

 

 

 

already answered itt read it 

[clevited]

2 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

since you dont, and wont ever concede there is a problem, why ask me for a solution?

 

if you think it makes you look smart, Ive got some bad news 

 

I don't need to look smart lol.  

This is a golf forum, if I want to "look smart" I would stay out of forums completely!

 

I appreciate well thought out ideas, I absolutely despise poorly thought out ones.  Its the principle of it more than anything.  I am all about discussing this.  Yes, I am ultimately against any change because I don't agree that there is a problem.  

 

I have tried to offer ideas that could be common ground.  One of which is to do a couple of tour stops that pay handsomly but requires throw back equipment only.  Or it could require USGA/RA "test" equipment only as part of their distance mission.  If they put on decidedly more entertaining tourneys with the old stuff, then you might see it as a seed planted that blossoms into a retro fad that ushers in new equipment specs that bring your vision to reality.

 

I just want to see you swallow your pride first, and then discuss your solution with a better, more thought out plan.  You are a traditionalist golfer,  I am a nerdy new age golfer.  Two completely different sides of the coin.  Formulate and idea, discuss and revise.

 

Heck, critique my throw back tourney idea.  Lets see if we can find something that makes sense and caters to both sides.

 

You are up big shooter.  Elaborate on your 3w idea.  

[oikos1]

12 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

already answered itt read it 

It wasn't a question.

[milesgiles]

7 hours ago, oikos1 said:

It wasn't a question.

 

Fine it was a statement based on a misconception that I corrected a long time ago 

[milesgiles]

7 hours ago, clevited said:

 

I don't need to look smart lol.  

This is a golf forum, if I want to "look smart" I would stay out of forums completely!

 

I appreciate well thought out ideas, I absolutely despise poorly thought out ones.  Its the principle of it more than anything.  I am all about discussing this.  Yes, I am ultimately against any change because I don't agree that there is a problem.  

 

I have tried to offer ideas that could be common ground.  One of which is to do a couple of tour stops that pay handsomly but requires throw back equipment only.  Or it could require USGA/RA "test" equipment only as part of their distance mission.  If they put on decidedly more entertaining tourneys with the old stuff, then you might see it as a seed planted that blossoms into a retro fad that ushers in new equipment specs that bring your vision to reality.

 

I just want to see you swallow your pride first, and then discuss your solution with a better, more thought out plan.  You are a traditionalist golfer,  I am a nerdy new age golfer.  Two completely different sides of the coin.  Formulate and idea, discuss and revise.

 

Heck, critique my throw back tourney idea.  Lets see if we can find something that makes sense and caters to both sides.

 

You are up big shooter.  Elaborate on your 3w idea.  

 

The compromise from me was ONLY adjusting head size. Whilst I don’t support the ridiculous tech and don’t like the F1 aspect, I’m pragmatic.. it’s not worth butting heads with manufacturers over.

 

Hence, only adjust the head size. You know if we went back in time they would never have allowed 460s. Very likely traditional size only 

[clevited]

4 hours ago, milesgiles said:

 

The compromise from me was ONLY adjusting head size. Whilst I don’t support the ridiculous tech and don’t like the F1 aspect, I’m pragmatic.. it’s not worth butting heads with manufacturers over.

 

Hence, only adjust the head size. You know if we went back in time they would never have allowed 460s. Very likely traditional size only 

 

I maintain that it won't solve anything due primarily to the fact that I don't know of a single touring pro or elite golfer in general that has any issue hitting their 3 wood off a tee or off the deck.  I Also maintain that most all tour pro's have no issue swinging proportionately as fast with their 3w vs their driver.  

 

We can make a couple of likely conclusions from the above.  Either the players today are much better ball strikers than you give them credit for, or today's 3 woods aren't hard enough hit to get your vision out of it.  I maintain that it is mostly the first, and a little of the second.

 

The tweaks I think you would need to make in order for your idea to be viable would be to require the length of the 3 wood sized driver to be no longer than 43.5 inches, much like the common length of a persimmon driver of ye olden days, and the width of the head/face to be shrunk to roughly 3/4 what it tends to be today. 

 

On top of those I would seriously consider some forward thinking elements like limiting overall weight of the club such that it cannot continue to get lighter in future years, I would even consider putting a loft limit on it such that behaves more like the drivers you remember (a guess would be no more loft than 8 degrees).  This would make it a tad tougher to elevate the ball and make it much more squirrely off the tee.

 

Mind you, I don't advocate for any of this but the above are things I think would need to exist in order for your idea to actually make a dent in the "problem".  Shrinking drivers to a modern 3w head with all its current performance capabilities and while considering the performance of the average elite golfer, I maintain that you absolutely have to do more otherwise this "problem" comes right back a few years down the road.  I am not a fan of attempting to fix a "problem" half arsed.  If you are going to insist on fixing it, actually fix it.

[milesgiles]

11 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

I maintain that it won't solve anything due primarily to the fact that I don't know of a single touring pro or elite golfer in general that has any issue hitting their 3 wood off a tee or off the deck.  I Also maintain that most all tour pro's have no issue swinging proportionately as fast with their 3w vs their driver.  

 

We can make a couple of likely conclusions from the above.  Either the players today are much better ball strikers than you give them credit for, or today's 3 woods aren't hard enough hit to get your vision out of it.  I maintain that it is mostly the first, and a little of the second.

 

The tweaks I think you would need to make in order for your idea to be viable would be to require the length of the 3 wood sized driver to be no longer than 43.5 inches, much like the common length of a persimmon driver of ye olden days, and the width of the head/face to be shrunk to roughly 3/4 what it tends to be today. 

 

On top of those I would seriously consider some forward thinking elements like limiting overall weight of the club such that it cannot continue to get lighter in future years, I would even consider putting a loft limit on it such that behaves more like the drivers you remember (a guess would be no more loft than 8 degrees).  This would make it a tad tougher to elevate the ball and make it much more squirrely off the tee.

 

Mind you, I don't advocate for any of this but the above are things I think would need to exist in order for your idea to actually make a dent in the "problem".  Shrinking drivers to a modern 3w head with all its current performance capabilities and while considering the performance of the average elite golfer, I maintain that you absolutely have to do more otherwise this "problem" comes right back a few years down the road.  I am not a fan of attempting to fix a "problem" half arsed.  If you are going to insist on fixing it, actually fix it.

 

you need to get out and actually watch professional golf in person, as Ive told you several times. Would have saved you hours of typing this stuff out 

[clevited]

4 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

you need to get out and actually watch professional golf in person, as Ive told you several times. Would have saved you hours of typing this stuff out 

 

Seen it plenty man.

[milesgiles]

58 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

Seen it plenty man.

 

you havent been to a pro tourney

[clevited]

10 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

you havent been to a pro tourney

 

I have watched them on tv which I understand, doesn't show all the bad shots, I have talked with friends that go to them frequently and picked their brains extensively, I seek out bad shots on youtube all the time, I read articles about this whole subject wherever I can find them.  Yes, guys have bad days, bad outings, so does everyone.  They aren't competing to win if they aren't firing on all cylinders contrary to your belief.  Even with the "toasters on a stick".  There is way more to the game than the driver which you seem to completely forget.

 

In other words, I don't need to frequent pro tournaments to know what goes on, things called cameras, and youtube and articles discussing this subject and these things called friends are pretty handy in that regard.

Edited May 2, 2022 by clevited

[milesgiles]

7 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

I have watched them on tv which I understand, doesn't show all the bad shots, I have talked with friends that go to them frequently and picked their brains extensively, I seek out bad shots on youtube all the time, I read articles about this whole subject wherever I can find them.  Yes, guys have bad days, bad outings, so does everyone.  They aren't competing to win if they aren't firing on all cylinders contrary to your belief.  Even with the "toasters on a stick".  There is way more to the game than the driver which you seem to completely forget.

 

In other words, I don't need to frequent pro tournaments to know what goes on, things called cameras, and youtube and articles discussing this subject and these things called friends are pretty handy in that regard.

 

70 wasted pages 

[clevited]

5 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

70 wasted pages 

 

Yes, because you refuse to admit you have holes in your idea and refuse to add anything to attempt to fill those holes.  300 almost worthless posts by you alone.

[milesgiles]

1 hour ago, clevited said:

 

Yes, because you refuse to admit you have holes in your idea and refuse to add anything to attempt to fill those holes.  300 almost worthless posts by you alone.

 

70  pages of you telling me how the pro's dont miss the sweetspot, and it transpires youve never watched a pro in person. Just some other bloke told you so.

 

Brilliant 

Edited May 2, 2022 by milesgiles

[holmes0412]

🍿🍿🤺🤺

[clevited]

22 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

70  pages of you telling me how the pro's dont miss the sweetspot, and it transpires youve never watched a pro in person. Just some other bloke told you so.

 

Brilliant 

 

Misrepresent much?  Desperately dismiss someone that disagrees with you because it is inconvenient to you?  Your pride is a huge flaw man.  You need to suck it up like a big boy.  Lets discuss your idea and fix it.

[Titleist99]

As I recall the 460cc came out approx. 2004 and was advertised for the higher handicapper. At that time, it was debated that the touring pros would never use them because the head was too big and swing speed would slow down, beside they were pros and didn't need anything that humongous but go ahead and let the club golfers have some fun.....tha's why it wasn't stopped twenty years ago. I remember seeing the first one on the range and saying to myself.....those things are gigantic, they'll never catch on.

 

As far as graphite shafts go, it was invented in the sixties but didn't catch on until the mid 90s or so. Tiger kept his steel shafted 3 wood for the longest and was one of the last pros to go to grafite.....

guess they thought steel was better than anything else, boy were they wrong on both counts.

Edited May 2, 2022 by Titleist99

[Simpsonia]

Have course conditions, especially green speeds, ever been brought up in these roll back debates? I mean if Miles really wants to roll back to persimmon only, would he also advocate rolling back greens to what they were like in the 70s and prior? Back then the average green speed on tour events was 6.5, as compared to modern tour setups that average about 12 now. I imagine you'd have to pair those shag rug looking greens with the equipment rollback right?  At least as the counter-balance, with the spin they generate, modern pros wouldn't ever have to worry about not sticking the green. 

[Titleist99]

20 minutes ago, Simpsonia said:

Have course conditions, especially green speeds, ever been brought up in these roll back debates? I mean if Miles really wants to roll back to persimmon only, would he also advocate rolling back greens to what they were like in the 70s and prior? Back then the average green speed on tour events was 6.5, as compared to modern tour setups that average about 12 now. I imagine you'd have to pair those shag rug looking greens with the equipment rollback right?  At least as the counter-balance, with the spin they generate, modern pros wouldn't ever have to worry about not sticking the green. 

Most of the traditionalist isn't interested in course defense. Roll backers just don't like the clubs that the modern player hit into the greens. They tend to think that if the golf ball and clubs were somehow harder to hit that their favorite old courses will miraculously become the favorite for a PGATOUR event or a major championship.....

 

I don't think that they should hold their breath.

[milesgiles]

55 minutes ago, Simpsonia said:

Have course conditions, especially green speeds, ever been brought up in these roll back debates? I mean if Miles really wants to roll back to persimmon only, would he also advocate rolling back greens to what they were like in the 70s and prior? Back then the average green speed on tour events was 6.5, as compared to modern tour setups that average about 12 now. I imagine you'd have to pair those shag rug looking greens with the equipment rollback right?  At least as the counter-balance, with the spin they generate, modern pros wouldn't ever have to worry about not sticking the green. 

 

it was a better game, unless you want to see a putting contest 

[Simpsonia]

35 minutes ago, milesgiles said:

 

it was a better game, unless you want to see a putting contest 

 

So to distill your opinion down, you'd rather see pros struggle with difficult to use equipment rather than difficult course design and conditions? I mean fair enough, it's certainly an opinion. It's not one I agree with personally. Would turn the game into measuring who is purely the best ball-striker rather than who can be the best in all aspects of the game, both off the tee, approach, and short game. 

 

I do like watching the pros putt, especially in difficult conditions/design. It takes such skill and mental fortitude to reliably read ultra fast greens and the consistency to hit your pace every time. I was never a fan of watching the putting in some of the old Shell's specials like Nicklaus v Sneed. It always just looked like they had to lag putt everything then took the tap-in. Beyond putting, there is so much strategy that goes into the rest of the short game approach too, predicting roll out on slopes, clearing plateaus. Personally I prefer watching a more strategic and difficult approach game rather than just whomever is the most consistent ball-striker on any given day. 

Edited May 2, 2022 by Simpsonia

[milesgiles]

22 minutes ago, Simpsonia said:

 

So to distill your opinion down, you'd rather see pros struggle with difficult to use equipment rather than difficult course design and conditions? I mean fair enough, it's certainly an opinion. It's not one I agree with personally. Would turn the game into measuring who is purely the best ball-striker rather than who can be the best in all aspects of the game, both off the tee, approach, and short game. 

 

I do like watching the pros putt, especially in difficult conditions/design. It takes such skill and mental fortitude to reliably read ultra fast greens and the consistency to hit your pace every time. I was never a fan of watching the putting in some of the old Shell's specials like Nicklaus v Sneed. It always just looked like they had to lag putt everything then took the tap-in. Beyond putting, there is so much strategy that goes into the rest of the short game approach too, predicting roll out on slopes, clearing plateaus. Personally I prefer watching a more strategic and difficult approach game rather than just whomever is the most consistent ball-striker on any given day. 

 

I DO want to see the best all round player.. that includes being long and straight off the tee..not just crash it over the top of all the trouble with a high ss and massive sweetspot.

 

You wont see another dominant player after Woods. There isnt enough all round skill required to separate the top players, and thats a shame 

[Trippels]

There's lots of forecaddies and volunteers all round the course in pro tournaments, just make it a rule that if anyone hits a drive over 300 yards, the ball gets picked up and moved back 20 yards.

So the really good players would control their distance to be 295, and be rewarded for both distance and accuracy.

Problem solved.

[farmer]

This thread will live until some mod shuts it down because it has become a pissing contest.  That said, the RB's will not attempt to upend an entire industry because a tiny percentage of players are deemed to hit it "too far".  Pro golf is at the intersection of sport and entertainment, people like to see a ball hit really hard and really long.

[Titleist99]

12 minutes ago, farmer said:

This thread will live until some mod shuts it down because it has become a pissing contest.  That said, the RB's will not attempt to upend an entire industry because a tiny percentage of players are deemed to hit it "too far".  Pro golf is at the intersection of sport and entertainment, people like to see a ball hit really hard and really long.

Somehow the traditionalist thinks that hitting meatballs 250 yards off the tee will generate the excitement to grow the game........I strongly disagree.

 

To change the game as we know it, at the height of its popularity would be totally irresponsible.