cnosil

If it is determined that the hazard is too big of a penalty if they land there, they play short of the hazard - no risk reward or new decision on how to play a shot. Yes, being in the fairway vs being in the rough has more impact the farther you are from the green. But that same difference occurs using todays lengths. All you are doing is making them play a longer club. I understand completely. Player gets on tee box and knows how far they hit the ball and the impact of landing in the various hazards and rough and based on strokes gained they have a predefined strategy on how to play the hole. They hit shot and deal with the results. Move to where the ball is and do the same thing. Your belief is that some players may decide that they are willing to take a chance and see if they can avoid the hazard; basically changing to a more aggressive strategy because they need to make something happen. It seems the root cause of your wanting to change distance is that you want to change the underlying strategy on how players play the game. I personally don't think that players will undergo this change as they better understand the impacts of making poor decisions on the course. The thing I don't understand is why you think decreased distance will make player play a different strategy.

Here is a video that explains the difference but I don't know how accurate the information is. I personally don't care about how a shaft is manufactured I want to know how it performs for me.

First thing you probably will need to realize is that swinging up will change other aspects of your swing. As others have said, can't be too steep coming into the ball. The simplest drill that I found was put a driver cover about a grip length in front of the ball and when swinging avoid hitting the cover.

I think the most interesting comment was that they put wedges in the same category as drivers on how CG can impact performance.

I wasn't referring you to the video for the edison wedge but how CoG impacted performance of the wedge. At the end they compare a mizuno and titleist wedge.

Wasn't implying that you were discounting the testing. By looking at the data can you conclude that it would be the most accurate driver for me if I went and got fit for several drivers? What if I wanted to favor distance over accuracy? I can tell you that pretty much all clubs in the marketplace are good products and if properly fit will perform well.

It would make it more fun for some golf fans. What do you consider a strategic risk reward decision and how would shots be more varied and what do you consider shotmaking? You have said you don't like target golf in another thread. How would it be any different that hit the ball as far as possible off the tee with driver and instead of a short iron hit a mid iron into the green. Maybe you make more par 5s 3 shot holes. I don't see much strategy change other than hitting a longer club into the green.

This may give you some insight. Looks like the answer is CoG location

I don’t think he disagrees that it is part of the discussion today. But as stated the investigation into limiting distance Began before Bryson really started his distance quest. Bryson is the gas being added to the fire to make it seem like a bigger issue.

No one should but they do; that is what happens in golf retail everyday. People buy clubs because player x won last weeks tournament with those clubs. The test isn’t designed for people on golf forums that understand the value of fitting. As I mentioned it is designed for the 80+% of golfers that walk into a shop or buy off the internet and maybe swing the club a few times. As for me I don’t discount any club. I am one of the most wanted testers so I see how each club can and does perform differently for different players. You obviously love the 425 max and it may work great for you, But that doesn’t mean it is the best club for everyone.

We will have to disagree on that point; I am pretty sure shotlink shows hole strategy has evolved for all players in the past few years. You still didn’t answer How do you think your proposed changes will make the game more exciting?

You can always convert one to an armlock.

I’d like to see Kuocho or O’toole get a win.

I think you have to look at more than dispersion. Strokes Gained takes both dispersion and distance into consideration. I saw a couple of the high swing players get less than optimal Results with the 425 due to lower ball speeds. Fitting has always been advocated and no one ever said the top driver was best for everyone especially if you get fit. This test is really geared to people that buy off the rack.

You have said that you want more risk/reward golf. Given how strokes gained works, what does non boring golf look like to you? We have talked about 10 at riviera, given that players hit the ball some distance you look at where to can hit it and hit it as far as you can. Distances will change but strategies won’t. I know you don’t like Scott Fawcett but if you ignore the person and look at the methodology that is how golf is played. Decisions are based on facts and not emotion or where the player is positioned in a field.

It is on the list. I asked the other day and it will be after iron testing.

Like you, I used to watch it all the time. Even had moments where I wanted to be a pro.

I’d look into just netting and hang it from you garage rafters if that is possible. This is what my instructor has in his garage and it is very effective. You can set if up to take down completely or use some kind of wire System to slide it out of the way.

That’s total distance. Total distance is influenced by course conditions. We see with majors and the Ryder cup that course conditions can significantly impact the players performance. If distance is truly a problem why not start with the course and mandate how pga courses are setup. Why does it have to be a rules or equipment change?

Just looked up pga stats from 2020. Only 7 players had an average carry over 300 in 2020, 6 in 2019, and if you want to look at 2021 there are 6. https://www.pgatour.com/content/pgatour/stats/stat.02409.y2020.html The tour average has been around 280. What do you think carry should be as total distance is influenced by course conditions?

was it hot?

Quick google search; here is one article. https://www.golfmonthly.com/videos/gear-video/truth-rusty-wedges#:~:text=TaylorMade says%2C and it has,grooves for longer-lasting spin.

Here is the rule regarding gloves: https://www.usga.org/equipment-standards/equipment-rules-2019/equipment-rules/part-6-rule-3.html Gloves have pictures and markings out of the box; there are no rules that specify you can't write on your gloves.

I am pretty sure it has been shown that rust isn't the reason for the additional spin. The lack of plating makes the grooves a bit sharper which generates the additional spin.

Seem like you have changed from serious amateur/college to all tours to just the professional male tours. I don’t think the strategy of golf really changed in the late 90s. Equipment and other factors enabled players to hit the ball farther. The strategy of golf started changing when stroke gained became understood. Even if equipment was rolled back, to some point players wouldn’t change strategy, they would still hit the ball as far as possible with the available equipment. It won’t matter at that level that they are hitting 6 iron instead of wedge. The rules already have elements of bifurcation so I am not against that. I just don’t think you will get the pre strokes gained strategy on how to play the “classic” courses.