USGA and R&A announce proposal to limit golf ball performance for elite level competition

[Golfnutgalen]

2 hours ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

It works for Scottie cause he’s good tee to green.  Some players aren’t as good as him around the greens and approaching the greens, therefore hitting it farther is more advantageous for them.

 

Shane lowery and Colin Morikowa are close to as long off the tee as him and more accurate.  They aren’t seeing the same results consistently 

 

They aren't quite as long. The PGA Tour's driving distance stat can be super misleading.

 

SG off the tee takes into account all tee shots on par 4s and 5s and Scottie Scheffler has about 10 yards on both of those players. It's why he gains 0.953 on his tee shots compared to Colin's 0.439 or Shane's 0.316. 

 

You can also look at their clubhead speeds to confirm that distance advantage:

 

Scheffler: 118.76

Morikawa: 113.83

Lowry: 114.93

[Pnwpingi210]

3 minutes ago, Golfnutgalen said:

 

They aren't quite as long. The PGA Tour's driving distance stat can be super misleading.

 

SG off the tee takes into account all tee shots on par 4s and 5s and Scottie Scheffler has about 10 yards on both of those players. It's why he gains 0.953 on his tee shots compared to Colin's 0.439 or Shane's 0.316. 

 

You can also look at their clubhead speeds to confirm that distance advantage:

 

Scheffler: 118.76

Morikawa: 113.83

Lowry: 114.93

I don’t disagree they are close.  Thats subjectively close in my opinion.  
 

My point was that strategy works for Scottie, cause he’s a leader in about 10 other categories.  Him leading in those other categories is not just cause he’s in the fairway, since Morikowa and lowery are in the fairway more often than him, albeit 10 or whatever yards behind.   
 

 

[NPVWhiz]

48 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

No. Just physics and math.

I was tempted to cut and paste the title of my last peer-reviewed journal article along with a few T scores but thought better of it.  Pearls before the madding rabble and all that.  

Edited May 22 by NPVWhiz

[clevited]

1 hour ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

Why did you use 3 year old data with someone that’s not on tour anymore. And who I have been assured geared back some, diminishing returns and all that.

Arguing against your own interests is disqualifying and arguing for them is also disqualifying. Interesting.

 

Nothing you said made any sense whatsoever.

[Golfnutgalen]

8 minutes ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

I don’t disagree they are close.  Thats subjectively close in my opinion.  
 

My point was that strategy works for Scottie, cause he’s a leader in about 10 other categories.  Him leading in those other categories is not just cause he’s in the fairway, since Morikowa and lowery are in the fairway more often than him, albeit 10 or whatever yards behind.   
 

 

 

I mean they're all pretty good off the tee we'll agree with that. But Scheffler's lead of 0.5-0.6 over those players is fairly significant.

 

It's just that his lead is even larger in the approach and short game categories.

[GoGoErky]

1 minute ago, clevited said:

 

Nothing you said made any sense whatsoever.

He uses a lot of confused emojis so that kind of matches 

[Pnwpingi210]

Just now, Golfnutgalen said:

 

I mean they're all pretty good off the tee we'll agree with that. But Scheffler's lead of 0.5-0.6 over those players is fairly significant.

 

It's just that his lead is even larger in the approach and short game categories.

We agree on this

[clevited]

14 minutes ago, NPVWhiz said:

I was tempted to cut and paste the title of my last peer-reviewed journal article along with a few T scores but thought better of it.  Pearls before the madding rabble and all that.  Perhaps swine was too harsh. 

 

This has nothing to do with knowing more about a subject than another person. Your journals etc don't impress me, what would impress me is your analytical thought and confidence in what you say.  This is also golf, not some kind of difficult to grasp discipline.   It's just one of those things that if you obsess about it alot, you tend to accumulate more knowledge about it than the average joe.  I've debated this subject for years for instance. 

 

Point again is, don't pick a fight with someone about something you clearly haven't researched.  Go research it, and then come back and debate.

[Golfnutgalen]

6 minutes ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

We agree on this

I know. 🙂

[NPVWhiz]

14 minutes ago, clevited said:

 

This has nothing to do with knowing more about a subject than another person. Your journals etc don't impress me, what would impress me is your analytical thought and confidence in what you say.  This is also golf, not some kind of difficult to grasp discipline.   It's just one of those things that if you obsess about it alot, you tend to accumulate more knowledge about it than the average joe.  I've debated this subject for years for instance. 

 

Point again is, don't pick a fight with someone about something you clearly haven't researched.  Go research it, and then come back and debate.

Because, you know, having confidence in what you say is tantamount to speaking logic and truth. Golf is hard, and complicated I might add.  I’m not trying to distract from the discussion here.  Please, carry on.

Edited May 22 by NPVWhiz

[kiwigolf72]

3 minutes ago, NPVWhiz said:

Because, you know, having confidence in what you say is tantamount to speaking logic and truth. 

especially if you have been doing it for years

[clevited]

3 minutes ago, NPVWhiz said:

Because, you know, having confidence in what you say is tantamount to speaking logic and truth. Golf is hard, and complicated I might add.  

 

Golf as an intellectual subject isn't hard.  Confidence often does display knowledge but some do have a hard time getting along well with confident people and feel the need to "call them out" or attempt to I should say.  It usually says a lot about a person's insecurities but that is a discussion for another time.  Let's move on and talk about the roll back.  

[kiwigolf72]

1 minute ago, clevited said:

 

Golf as an intellectual subject isn't hard.  Confidence often does display knowledge but some do have a hard time getting along well with confident people and feel the need to "call them out" or attempt to I should say.  It usually says a lot about a person's insecurities but that is a discussion for another time.  Let's move on and talk about the roll back.  

I agree, talking about golf is a lot easier than playing it...for some.

[TLUBulldogGolf]

1 hour ago, clevited said:

 

Nothing you said made any sense whatsoever.

No one this year is 10+ MPH faster than Adam Scott. You specifically chose Bryson’s fastest year which led to injury and to gearing back slightly. Either way he’s not on tour and the implication that Adam Scott is being left in the dust (distance-wise) in his old(er) age is laughable.

 

And none of this has any bearing anyway other than an outright refusal to deal with what people say and instead attempt to discredit them in some other way. 

 

 

Edited May 23 by TLUBulldogGolf

[clevited]

8 minutes ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

No one this year is 10+ MPH faster than Adam Scott. You specifically chose Bryson’s fastest year which led to injury and to gearing back slightly. Either way he’s not on tour and the implication that Adam Scott is being left in the dust (distance-wise) in his old(er) age is laughable.

 

And none of this has any bearing anyway other than an outright refusal to deal with what people say and instead attempt to discredit them in some other way. 

 

 

 

Lol, you are completely incorrect in your interpretation of what I said but you do you man. 

[gvogel]

2 hours ago, ThinkingPlus said:

Played SMT heads for awhile. Some were very good.

Nemesis was my favorite.

[ThinkingPlus]

1 hour ago, gvogel said:

Nemesis was my favorite.

I forget all the names. Too many drivers ago.

[m d g]

2 hours ago, TLUBulldogGolf said:

...and the implication that Adam Scott is being left in the dust (distance-wise) in his old(er) age is laughable.

 

Old man strength for the win...

[maamold]

10 hours ago, clevited said:

Edit:  Its seems as though Adam Scott is advocating for gear to put him out of a job.

Yes. Some people, such as Adam, are moral enough to say what is best for the game, not what is best for their self.

Edited May 23 by maamold

[maamold]

9 hours ago, clevited said:

 

Players spun drivers like 3 woods back then.  They hit down, hit them low and with a lot of spin.  If he went lower loft and hit up a bit, he would be very comparable to today's drivers.

According to data just released last week, PGA Average shows players still hit down on the driver, the drivers and balls just don't spin like past equipment.

https://www.trackman.com/blog/golf/introducing-updated-tour-averages

[maamold]

9 hours ago, Ashley Schaeffer said:

 

I would guess he did, but it wasn't great.  I would bet the house that he does now.  That's why it's so puzzling when he says what he says about how it takes less skill now when he hits fewer fairways.  

He hit more fairways in 2024, 2023, 2022 (etc) than in 2004 (first year tracked)

[clevited]

6 hours ago, maamold said:

He hit more fairways in 2024, 2023, 2022 (etc) than in 2004 (first year tracked)

 

You sure about that?  Also, 2024 is yet to be a full season so it really doesn't tell us anything meaningful. 

 

Edit: What stat are you looking at because driving accuracy stats would disagree with you?

Edited May 23 by clevited

[Simpsonia]

6 hours ago, maamold said:

According to data just released last week, PGA Average shows players still hit down on the driver, the drivers and balls just don't spin like past equipment.

https://www.trackman.com/blog/golf/introducing-updated-tour-averages

 

Nothing is ever going to spin like balata, if that's what you're getting at. Or maybe it's more accurate to say that nothing will spin like balata without having the absolutely same terrible durability as balata. Spin is a matter of interaction between the cover and the interior layers, and softness of the cover is what drove balata's crazy high spin rates. I don't know about you, but I don't want to go back to having to replace balls as often as was necessary back then. It was so wasteful. 

[Pnwpingi210]

38 minutes ago, Simpsonia said:

 

Nothing is ever going to spin like balata, if that's what you're getting at. Or maybe it's more accurate to say that nothing will spin like balata without having the absolutely same terrible durability as balata. Spin is a matter of interaction between the cover and the interior layers, and softness of the cover is what drove balata's crazy high spin rates. I don't know about you, but I don't want to go back to having to replace balls as often as was necessary back then. It was so wasteful. 

For context we were talking about Adam Scott in 2003 and the equipment Adam was playing.  He was playing a prov1x which was urethane as of 2000.  That is not balata, nor was there any mention of balata.

 

it was being stated that players hit down on their drivers in 2003, which is likely true.  The  data you are responding to was to says players are still down on driver according to trackman using current data.

Edited May 23 by Pnwpingi210

[Simpsonia]

31 minutes ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

For context we were talking about Adam Scott in 2003 and the equipment Adam was playing.  He was playing a prov1x which was urethane as of 2000.  That is not balata, nor was there any mention of balata.

 

it was being stated that players hit down on their drivers in 2003, which is likely true.  The  data you are responding to was to says players are still down on driver according to trackman using current data.

 

No, I bolded what I was responding to in the quote, which was, and I quote, "...balls just don't spin like past equipment." Since I don't think Maamold was asserting that the ProV1s of 2003 spin a crazy amount more than the ProV1s of today, I don't think it's crazy to presume that he was speaking of balata.  

[Pnwpingi210]

3 minutes ago, Simpsonia said:

 

No, I bolded what I was responding to in the quote, which was, and I quote, "...balls just don't spin like past equipment." Since I don't think Maamold was asserting that the ProV1s of 2003 spin a crazy amount more than the ProV1s of today, I don't think it's crazy to presume that he was speaking of balata.  

Thats fair!  I stand corrected!

[Ashley Schaeffer]

10 hours ago, maamold said:

He hit more fairways in 2024, 2023, 2022 (etc) than in 2004 (first year tracked)

You must be talking about raw number of fairways, because his driving accuracy was better in 2003 than it was in 2023.  I just don't understand why he can't hit it straighter now if it's so easy.

[clevited]

10 minutes ago, Ashley Schaeffer said:

You must be talking about raw number of fairways, because his driving accuracy was better in 2003 than it was in 2023.  I just don't understand why he can't hit it straighter now if it's so easy.

 

Exactly.  This is why I say his opinion is means a little less than it would otherwise.  

 

Most will assume he said such a thing because he himself (like Tiger and Rory) feel like they are better than others and that the equipment has made them stand out less.  This is a common theme. Regardless of this being a right or wrong assumption about his intentions with what he said, his stats seem to contradict what he is saying to a significant degree.

 

I am sure there are players out there that show the opposite to be true but you would expect a player like Adam Scott, who is voicing his opinion about this, and has spanned the transition from smaller heads to the now 460 heads that are more forgiving, to show obvious stats to back up his opinion. 

 

Also back to what he played in 2003.  I have clubs spanning many generations and you can indeed mitigate a ton of spin by going lower in loft and hitting up on the ball.  Also tending to catch it just above equator helps a lot.  This was absolutely not common practice back then, and largely still isn't today, but the point is, he was definitely not maximizing anything back then due in large part to swing technique.  He may have changed nothing today swing technique wise, but clubs have been design to fit many different swings and attack angles and can be adjusted to fit YOU, rather than you adjust to the club.

Edited May 23 by clevited

[Ashley Schaeffer]

3 hours ago, Pnwpingi210 said:

For context we were talking about Adam Scott in 2003 and the equipment Adam was playing.  He was playing a prov1x which was urethane as of 2000.  That is not balata, nor was there any mention of balata.

 

it was being stated that players hit down on their drivers in 2003, which is likely true.  The  data you are responding to was to says players are still down on driver according to trackman using current data.

Just for clarification, the ProV1x didn't exist in 2000.  It was released in 2003. 

[clevited]

1 minute ago, Ashley Schaeffer said:

Just for clarification, the ProV1x didn't exist in 2000.  It was released in 2003. 

 

Actually, I believe it was available to tour players as early as 2000.