distance debate

[Titleist99]

21 minutes ago, Pastit said:

He can join us any Sunday morning. We don’t exclude hackers where I play.

Hacker, you say!?! Brendon Todd is a three-time champion on the pgatour......

[Titleist99]

The PGA Championship use to have a long drive championship at its event. In 1963 Jack Nicklaus won the contest with a 341 yard drive with a persimmons club and a wound balata ball. 

 

No one was calling for a golf ball reduction then.....so stop it now........

[milesgiles]

3 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

Oh you know, 120+ mph club speed plus capper at my local club.  More than a few of those.  Ex collegiate player is one of my work big wigs and I have seen him play plenty.  Good mechanics are good mechanics, there is nothing magical about seeing your idols in person, great swing is a great swing.

 

plus one or plus six?

[TLUBulldogGolf]

41 minutes ago, Titleist99 said:

The PGA Championship use to have a long drive championship at its event. In 1963 Jack Nicklaus won the contest with a 341 yard drive with a persimmons club and a wound balata ball. 

 

No one was calling for a golf ball reduction then.....so stop it now........

 

This is about as valuable as valuable as me saying DJ hit one 413 at Austin CC and concluding it should be rolled back.

 

For somewhat of an actual dataset, the longest player in 1980 (oldest stats available) would be dead last in driving distance in 2022, with tour avg. being 20 yards longer than the longest player.

[Titleist99]

1 minute ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

 

This is about as valuable as valuable as me saying DJ hit one 413 at Austin CC and concluding it should be rolled back.

 

For somewhat of an actual dataset, the longest player in 1980 (oldest stats available) would be dead last in driving distance in 2022, with tour avg. being 20 yards longer than the longest player.

Well, you had one player win one major championship with bomb and gouge and now RBs want to change the game as we know it and Jack is the biggest proponent of changing the golf ball.....if you don't see the correlation then you should just keep it moving....

[TLUBulldogGolf]

1 minute ago, Titleist99 said:

Well, you had one player win one major championship with bomb and gouge and now RBs want to change the game as we know it and Jack is the biggest proponent of changing the golf ball.....if you don't see the correlation then you should just keep it moving....

 

They have been talking about the distance problem for quite a while now, care to address anything in my post?

 

And the correlation being Jack sees it as a threat to his records or what? No one in the current crop is touching his records. 

[Titleist99]

8 minutes ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

 

They have been talking about the distance problem for quite a while now, care to address anything in my post?

 

And the correlation being Jack sees it as a threat to his records or what? No one in the current crop is touching his records. 

I thought that I addressed your failure to see the relevance of Nicklaus long driving during his prime and his advocating rollback now....seems hypocritical to me. Just a tad......

[MUNIGRIT]

1 hour ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

 

What is went down? Tiger was never a super accurate driver of the ball and was prone to foul balls (hence the stinger), and was consistently top 10 in strokes gained with bigger drivers until he started fighting injuries and changing his swing. 

 

Tiger was hitting high 60 percent and 71 percent in 99 and 2000. 

[TLUBulldogGolf]

25 minutes ago, Titleist99 said:

I thought that I addressed your failure to see the relevance of Nicklaus long driving during his prime and his advocating rollback now....seems hypocritical to me. Just a tad......

 

Jack isn't playing anymore, and technology remained largely unchanged throughout his career, I just don't see how these are at odds. Relative length would still exist with a roll back, long hitters would still have that advantage. 

[clevited]

Can someone tell me if Miles is a bot?  He has to be a bot.  All he does with his posts are attempt to insult and stir the pot.

[Titleist99]

13 minutes ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

 

Jack isn't playing anymore, and technology remained largely unchanged throughout his career, I just don't see how these are at odds. Relative length would still exist with a roll back, long hitters would still have that advantage. 

I still see no need for a rollback......Optics is not a reason to me. Even if they hit it 400 yards off the tee, still got to get it in the hole......Lowest score win. That's been the object of the game since 15th century Scotland.

[TLUBulldogGolf]

37 minutes ago, Titleist99 said:

I still see no need for a rollback......Optics is not a reason to me. Even if they hit it 400 yards off the tee, still got to get it in the hole......Lowest score win. That's been the object of the game since 15th century Scotland.

 

You've already stated optics is an issue for you, you just prefer the current ones. I hope we get a calm week at St Andrews this year so we can see how it's received. 

Edited May 11, 2022 by TLUBulldogGolf

[Golferpaul]

3 hours ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

 

What is went down? Tiger was never a super accurate driver of the ball and was prone to foul balls

Actually, he was not even an average accurate driver.

 

Tiger's FIR rankings;

2001 145th

2002 107th

2003 142nd

2004 182nd

2005 191st

2006 139th

 

etc.

[Titleist99]

Man, roll backers must have a hard time watching the British Open or Open Championship. In that tournament Which is at the home of golf this year you'll see player that their sole ambition is to just get the ball in the hole......with a total disregard of something known as shot value, which is a RBs term.......the only thing that matter in that tournament is what you scored. What you hit off the tee never comes up......

[TLUBulldogGolf]

2 minutes ago, Titleist99 said:

Man, roll backers must have a hard time watching the British Open or Open Championship. In that tournament Which is at the home of golf this year you'll see player that their sole ambition is to just get the ball in the hole......with a total disregard of something known as shot value, which is a RBs term.......the only thing that matter in that tournament is what you scored. What you hit off the tee never comes up......

 

Lol. Already said I hope it's calm. You'll see multiple guys doing what only Tiger did in 2000. If it's typical windy conditions it will require more shotmaking, which is what some want to see more of. 

[GwrxMod]

Topic placed under Moderator Approval while we review posts for forum violations. 

Edited May 11, 2022 by GwrxMod

[gvogel]

4 hours ago, Titleist99 said:

When St. Andrew's was built it only had 12 holes....ask yourself why.

 

The course has double greens....what's up with that?

Actually, there were 22 holes.  But the University took a couple, and the first four or so holes were very short, so Old Tom combined them into the present 1st and 18th.  Voila, 18 holes.

 

It was Prestwick, on the west coast, that had 12 holes when Old Tom laid it out.  The first Open Championship was played 3 times around the 12 holes - 36 hole tournament.  Later it was enlarged when more land was purchased.

 

It is kind of fun reading about the game in the 1800's.  I invite you to do the same.

[MUNIGRIT]

7 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

Actually, he was not even an average accurate driver.

 

Tiger's FIR rankings;

2001 145th

2002 107th

2003 142nd

2004 182nd

2005 191st

2006 139th

 

etc.

Combined with his distance he was up there in SG especially the years leading up to 2004 once they started keeping track of it. 71 percent in 99 and 2000 is fantastic at his length especially. You had a bunch of short knockers woth higher percentages hit. Look where 70 percent puts you in today's game driving the ball. He was a great driver of the ball with a smaller headed driver and steel shaft. 

[clevited]

I don't follow ladies golf all that much admittedly (I do enjoy it when I catch it on tv though, those ladies can play!) but do they play from forward tees or the back tees?  I have a reason for asking this, just curious who knows.

[Golferpaul]

10 hours ago, MUNIGRIT said:

Combined with his distance he was up there in SG especially the years leading up to 2004 once they started keeping track of it. 71 percent in 99 and 2000 is fantastic at his length especially. You had a bunch of short knockers woth higher percentages hit. Look where 70 percent puts you in today's game driving the ball. He was a great driver of the ball with a smaller headed driver and steel shaft. 

You can't compare FIRs 20 years ago to today. But you can compare Tiger to the other pros playing at that time and Tiger had a huge driver accuracy problem.  If you rank 100 - 190th in accuracy, you are not an accurate driver compared to your peers.   

[smashdn]

19 hours ago, Titleist99 said:

I still see no need for a rollback......Optics is not a reason to me. Even if they hit it 400 yards off the tee, still got to get it in the hole......Lowest score win. That's been the object of the game since 15th century Scotland.

 

Why have equipment rules at all then?

 

(I'll answer my own question, how the game is played is also very important.  It is more than just optics.  The How encompasses not just what it looks like, but how you do it, and also the challenges of the game as well.  The course is built to provide certain challenges and riddles for the golfer to figure out mentally and then execute the solution physically.  You fundamentally change the challenges the course can provide if the equipment is not in sync with them.  You can only build so much flexibility into a course design to provide challenge to both spectrums of ability.  The low end of the spectrum is not really moving but when it did (more kids and younger kids getting into the game) they just plopped some tee plates out in the front edge of the fairway for them.  On the other end of the spectrum they have to keep moving the tees back and are running out of real estate (unless you are ANGC).)

[Golferpaul]

It's interesting to look at the golfers with the longest average drives compared to golfers with the lowest scoring average.  The stats don't support "longest drivers are scoring better" argument.

 

Looking at the top ten today in driving distance, their scoring rank is 180, 116, 13, 186, 151, 112, 185, 2, 9, 21.

 

So, six of the ten longest drivers rank 116 to 186 in scoring.  Only two in the top ten for distance are also in the top ten for scoring.

[Titleist99]

8 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

Why have equipment rules at all then?

 

(I'll answer my own question, how the game is played is also very important.  It is more than just optics.  The How encompasses not just what it looks like, but how you do it, and also the challenges of the game as well.  The course is built to provide certain challenges and riddles for the golfer to figure out mentally and then execute the solution physically.  You fundamentally change the challenges the course can provide if the equipment is not in sync with them.  You can only build so much flexibility into a course design to provide challenge to both spectrums of ability.  The low end of the spectrum is not really moving but when it did (more kids and younger kids getting into the game) they just plopped some tee plates out in the front edge of the fairway for them.  On the other end of the spectrum they have to keep moving the tees back and are running out of real estate (unless you are ANGC).)

What you have to realize is that your statement above is just one mans view....because you think that's how the game should be played, doesn't mean that there isn't other ways to play the game. For some, the only strategy is to get the ball in the hole as quick as possible even if that entails putting it for the lowest score.....the game is not how, but how many. It's not a complicated game.

 

Tournament golf is a totally different animal than leisure golf.    IMO

[Titleist99]

6 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

It's interesting to look at the golfers with the longest average drives compared to golfers with the lowest scoring average.  The stats don't support "longest drivers are scoring better" argument.

 

Looking at the top ten today in driving distance, their scoring rank is 180, 116, 13, 186, 151, 112, 185, 2, 9, 21.

 

So, six of the ten longest drivers rank 116 to 186 in scoring.  Only two in the top ten for distance are also in the top ten for scoring.

Yep, in tournament golf ....It's all about the scoring and not what club you hit into the green.    IMO

[TLUBulldogGolf]

8 hours ago, Golferpaul said:

It's interesting to look at the golfers with the longest average drives compared to golfers with the lowest scoring average.  The stats don't support "longest drivers are scoring better" argument.

 

Looking at the top ten today in driving distance, their scoring rank is 180, 116, 13, 186, 151, 112, 185, 2, 9, 21.

 

So, six of the ten longest drivers rank 116 to 186 in scoring.  Only two in the top ten for distance are also in the top ten for scoring.

Strokes gained is a better stat, but it’s more about the overall trend of distance on tour.

[MUNIGRIT]

On 5/12/2022 at 9:27 AM, Golferpaul said:

You can't compare FIRs 20 years ago to today. But you can compare Tiger to the other pros playing at that time and Tiger had a huge driver accuracy problem.  If you rank 100 - 190th in accuracy, you are not an accurate driver compared to your peers.   

He was gaining strokes on them off the tee though. Driving accuracy is a poor stat really.

[MUNIGRIT]

On 5/12/2022 at 11:47 AM, Golferpaul said:

It's interesting to look at the golfers with the longest average drives compared to golfers with the lowest scoring average.  The stats don't support "longest drivers are scoring better" argument.

 

Looking at the top ten today in driving distance, their scoring rank is 180, 116, 13, 186, 151, 112, 185, 2, 9, 21.

 

So, six of the ten longest drivers rank 116 to 186 in scoring.  Only two in the top ten for distance are also in the top ten for scoring.

If you want to see who isn't winning much on tour look up the driving accuracy leaders. Driving accuracy percentage is probably the most useless stat in correlation to winning on tour.

[ThinkingPlus]

On 5/12/2022 at 7:54 AM, clevited said:

I don't follow ladies golf all that much admittedly (I do enjoy it when I catch it on tv though, those ladies can play!) but do they play from forward tees or the back tees?  I have a reason for asking this, just curious who knows.

Typically the LPGA will play whatever tees gets them between 6300 to 6700 yards or so.  Majors are always at the long end of the range.  Mostly par 72, but some of the shorter courses will be par 71.  They never play forward tees.

 

As an aside, our state level women's events are typically 6000 - 6300 yards.  Only the senior women's events play forward tees or close to them (5200 - 5600 yards).  I play the white tees at my club which are 6150 yards without much stress, but they play firm and fast.

[clevited]

2 hours ago, ThinkingPlus said:

Typically the LPGA will play whatever tees gets them between 6300 to 6700 yards or so.  Majors are always at the long end of the range.  Mostly par 72, but some of the shorter courses will be par 71.  They never play forward tees.

 

As an aside, our state level women's events are typically 6000 - 6300 yards.  Only the senior women's events play forward tees or close to them (5200 - 5600 yards).  I play the white tees at my club which are 6150 yards without much stress, but they play firm and fast.

 

Good to know, thank you for that.  The reason I was asking was I wanted to know if the women's game is more appealing to the rollbackers being as their driving distance is more similar to the 80s mens tour.  Wonder if they played the men's tees how they would feel as it would basically be equivalent to what I think would be the desired distance rollback needed to address the "problem" on tour.

[munichop]

I have commented before on the fact that I prefer the women’s game to the pga tour. One of the reasons is the distances they play and the approach they use to score is more in line with my own game. So the design of the course matches more closely the intent the architect had in mind when a skilled player takes the design on.

They can still shoot low scores but do it differently than the men.

They can be crazy good from 130 yards to 75 yards.