The Distance Debate Reignited

[FrogginBullfish]

To be honest I don't really know exactly what he wanted. The conversation quickly went south because he decided to bring in a coach who got incredibly offended when he mistook an analogy I made that involved one of his players as an attack on his player.

But it seemed like he wants them hitting the ball shorter, but also straighter, but he also wanted them to have to shape the ball more and be faced with the original design intent but he doesn't want courses to alter original designs.

So we don't have to change how far the players are hitting the ball,  we just have to change the numbers on the bottom of their clubs?????     I knew we would find a reason loft jacking was bad  

Sent from my Pixel 2 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[THEZIPR23]

12 minutes ago, FrogginBullfish said:

To be honest I don't really know exactly what he wanted. The conversation quickly went south because he decided to bring in a coach who got incredibly offended when he mistook an analogy I made that involved one of his players as an attack on his player.

But it seemed like he wants them hitting the ball shorter, but also straighter, but he also wanted them to have to shape the ball more and be faced with the original design intent but he doesn't want courses to alter original designs.

 

Sent from my Pixel 2 using MyGolfSpy mobile app
 

 

That was you that started that whole thing between Hughes and Fawcett??

[FrogginBullfish]

Between Hughes, Clayton, and myself... Yeah, unfortunately it was me. Scott was semi-involved though.

 

Although, I guess it went on further. I don't really know. Hughes ended up blocking me. It went south fast and I probably shouldn't have even gotten involved in hindsight.

 

That was you that started that whole thing between Hughes and Fawcett??

 

Sent from my Pixel 2 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

 

 

 

 

 

[ejgaudette]

3 hours ago, THEZIPR23 said:

I tend to agree with the freeze everything now approach. My only concern is that the athletes are going to continue to get faster, stronger, whatever. So are we in this same boat in 20 years? (not that I will care then)

I think we are approaching to some extent the upper limit of human ability in this area. I liken it to marathon world record times, they drop by seconds now since athletes are so finely tuned and the body can't go much faster. Sure even with current limits equipment might get a bit longer and players may get a bit longer, but they still need to keep it on the map so long drive swings seem out of the question. Players will get longer sure but by smaller increments IMO.

[Buffly]

I'd like to throw away my two cents:

I am relatively new to golf, I started playing in the last 3 years. I hear the stories of old and, I enjoy watching old matches where the distance was less. 

Givens: the courses are setup with faster/firmer greens now, the ball has much less spin off of driver, driver sizes have about doubled, shaft weights on drivers are nearly halved with graphite, irons are stronger lofted with launchpad faces available, and the players are more athletic as a whole. 

I can see both sides of limiting equipment, course design, and how older/shorter courses are not as challenging for the modern game. 

I would like to see players play both the older courses that helped shape the game and modern courses that are setup with current distances in mind. I would propose that the tour include shorter courses to ignore the distances the boys hit the ball and let the score fall where it may about 1-2 times a month. 

I think it would also be fun to have exhibition matches with older equipment as well. 

I am also a fan of limits on equipment in the effect of a sort of bifurcated rollback that could only be used occasionally or on those shorter courses. It could look like a balata ball, persimmon woods, less clubs, or limited flight modern balls that haven't been designed yet. If this is the route, it could only be either for 2 months a year at the beginning of the season, only the once a month at the short/retro courses, or as an invitation only exhibition match (could be sponsored by one of the big three?). 

I like watching Seve, Nicklaus, Tiger, Trevino, and the new breed of DJ, Rory, Bryson, and Wolff. It would be fun to see them do what they do with different sets of equipment and with the latest in the same year. Even then, what would it look like if Thursday uses old equipment, Friday is new equipment, Sat is old equipment, and Sunday is new equipment? Wow could be entertaining!!

[Buffly]

54 minutes ago, Buffly said:

I'd like to throw away my two cents:

I am relatively new to golf, I started playing in the last 3 years. I hear the stories of old and, I enjoy watching old matches where the distance was less. 

Givens: the courses are setup with faster/firmer greens now, the ball has much less spin off of driver, driver sizes have about doubled, shaft weights on drivers are nearly halved with graphite, irons are stronger lofted with launchpad faces available, and the players are more athletic as a whole. 

I can see both sides of limiting equipment, course design, and how older/shorter courses are not as challenging for the modern game. 

I would like to see players play both the older courses that helped shape the game and modern courses that are setup with current distances in mind. I would propose that the tour include shorter courses to ignore the distances the boys hit the ball and let the score fall where it may about 1-2 times a month. 

I think it would also be fun to have exhibition matches with older equipment as well. 

I am also a fan of limits on equipment in the effect of a sort of bifurcated rollback that could only be used occasionally or on those shorter courses. It could look like a balata ball, persimmon woods, less clubs, or limited flight modern balls that haven't been designed yet. If this is the route, it could only be either for 2 months a year at the beginning of the season, only the once a month at the short/retro courses, or as an invitation only exhibition match (could be sponsored by one of the big three?). 

I like watching Seve, Nicklaus, Tiger, Trevino, and the new breed of DJ, Rory, Bryson, and Wolff. It would be fun to see them do what they do with different sets of equipment and with the latest in the same year. Even then, what would it look like if Thursday uses old equipment, Friday is new equipment, Sat is old equipment, and Sunday is new equipment? Wow could be entertaining!!

These laminated maple woods had perimeter weighting with an epoxy filled cavity in the middle but, it is still made of wood. This is the Ping ISI Tour driver and fairway woods last used in the PGA tours in 1996/7. 

I actually love hitting my 3 wood of the same style. 

Part of the rollback line of thinking could be: woods have to be wood, limit driver/wood head size, increase minimum driver/wood head weight, decrease maximum shaft length, or increase minimum shaft weight. (Again, I like modern tech so, this is just thinking about exhibition and/or select events only)

* I found these images on eBay

[storm319]

8 hours ago, Buffly said:

These laminated maple woods had perimeter weighting with an epoxy filled cavity in the middle but, it is still made of wood. This is the Ping ISI Tour driver and fairway woods last used in the PGA tours in 1996/7. 

I actually love hitting my 3 wood of the same style. 

Part of the rollback line of thinking could be: woods have to be wood, limit driver/wood head size, increase minimum driver/wood head weight, decrease maximum shaft length, or increase minimum shaft weight. (Again, I like modern tech so, this is just thinking about exhibition and/or select events only)

* I found these images on eBay

Regulating the materials that a piece of equipment is made of is ridiculous. What if  there end up being complications with a particular resource? (why do you think OEMs started using maple over persimmon on the first place? the answer is availability which impacted cost). If the goal is to limit some measurement of the final product, just do that (which consequently the USGA has already done on basically every attribute related to universal distance and the flatting of distance gains at the elite level was apparent after that point).

[Quigleyd]

14 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

 

I'm guessing you didn't read far enough back, what I'd support is essentially freezing equipment-related distance gains where they are now.   To me, that's "no change", to stop things where they are now..  

I did skim through but admit I didn't read everything. Sounds like we basically agree then. 

[KurtActual]

Anybody thought to add drug testing tour players?

There were plenty of accusations after Bryson won the RMC. Sure would put an end to this recent distance debate if someone manufactured distance with steroids. (Not making the claim, just offering another solution)

[Middler]

How a golf course could ‘Bryson-proof’ itself, according to Bryson DeChambeau.

https://golf.com/news/bryson-dechambeau-bryson-proof-course/

[cnosil]

Anybody thought to add drug testing tour players?
There were plenty of accusations after Bryson won the RMC. Sure would put an end to this recent distance debate if someone manufactured distance with steroids. (Not making the claim, just offering another solution)

Pretty sure they have a drug testing policy. Several players have been suspended for failing.

[cnosil]

How a golf course could ‘Bryson-proof’ itself, according to Bryson DeChambeau.

https://golf.com/news/bryson-dechambeau-bryson-proof-course/

That and tall trees that can’t be carried over. Force players to play the layout and not cut corners.

[Quigleyd]

12 minutes ago, cnosil said:

That and tall trees that can’t be carried over. Force players to play the layout and not cut corners.

Honestly, for someone that thinks he is as smart as Bryson is. Thats stupid... The only way to challenge these guys is very firm fast conditions. I am not speaking specifically greens. Those need to be receptive enough to hold incoming shots. 

 

Soft conditions challenge no one.. 

[Quigleyd]

22 minutes ago, cnosil said:

Pretty sure they have a drug testing policy. Several players have been suspended for failing.

Nothing Bryson has done speaks to steroids' at all. He dirty bulk got big.. He is young so it will work. He is drinking 30 gallons of protein a day. This will be a relative short term gain. I honestly do not think this can last all that long.. I give it over under 2 years before injury or swing fail him. 

[KurtActual]

43 minutes ago, cnosil said:

Pretty sure they have a drug testing policy. Several players have been suspended for failing.

I see that they do have a policy, but it is unclear how many guys are tested, how often, and whether or not it is only during the season or could include off season.

I'd suggest anyone interested in Steroid abuse in sports to watch the Netflix dramamentary "Icarus"

[cnosil]

I see that they do have a policy, but it is unclear how many guys are tested, how often, and whether or not it is only during the season or could include off season.
I'd suggest anyone interested in Steroid abuse in sports to watch the Netflix dramamentary "Icarus"

This should provide you with most of the details.


https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/pdf/2018/2017-2018_Anti_Doping_Manual.PDF

[KurtActual]

2 hours ago, cnosil said:

This should provide you with most of the details.


https://www.usga.org/content/dam/usga/pdf/2018/2017-2018_Anti_Doping_Manual.PDF

Who conducts the testing and who will be tested? Drug Free Sport will conduct the actual testing on behalf of the PGA TOUR. Drug Free Sport currently provides drug testing and/or education services for the NFL, MLB, NBA, NCAA and hundreds of colleges and universities. The PGA TOUR and Drug Free Sport will select who is tested and when the tests are conducted based on the approved International Standards for testing, and based on the TOUR’s overall objectives for the Program. Testing may be done through collection of blood or urine, as the PGA TOUR deems appropriate. You may be selected for testing at any time or place, both inside and outside of tournament competition. All testing is without prior notice. Specially trained and accredited drug testing personnel will perform all tests. The collection process is designed to ensure a confidential and expedient testing experience for the player.

Pretty vague if you ask me.

[DaveP043]

6 minutes ago, KurtActual said:

Pretty vague if you ask me.

Much like fines for behavior, the PGA Tour probably chooses to keep those details out of the public eye.

[chisag]

3 hours ago, Quigleyd said:

Nothing Bryson has done speaks to steroids' at all. He dirty bulk got big.. He is young so it will work. He is drinking 30 gallons of protein a day. This will be a relative short term gain. I honestly do not think this can last all that long.. I give it over under 2 years before injury or swing fail him. 

 

... Bryson causes quite a few different reactions due to his game, style and personality. But I don't think anyone can deny he is a mad genius and approaches the game from a unique scientific perspective we have never seen. I think he is the last guy that would take any kind of performance enhancing drugs because they all have some negative effects not only on your game, but on your life and I just think that is something Bryson would never even consider. 

[Quigleyd]

14 minutes ago, chisag said:

 

... Bryson causes quite a few different reactions due to his game, style and personality. But I don't think anyone can deny he is a mad genius and approaches the game from a unique scientific perspective we have never seen. I think he is the last guy that would take any kind of performance enhancing drugs because they all have some negative effects not only on your game, but on your life and I just think that is something Bryson would never even consider. 

There is too much money out there to "not" consider it. I just think claims based on changes made are dumb. I would not put it past anyone, including me to think about or look for some type of advantage... The reward far outweighs any risk in my mind.. 

[chisag]

4 minutes ago, Quigleyd said:

There is too much money out there to "not" consider it. I just think claims based on changes made are dumb. I would not put it past anyone, including me to think about or look for some type of advantage... The reward far outweighs any risk in my mind.. 

 

... Then we just see things completely differently. My son needed max strength and speed to play college DE (1st team all conference) and never even considered steroids because he is highly intelligent and knows the risks faaaar out weigh the rewards. His major was kinesiology based and his minor nutrition based and knew a combination of exercise and diet was the key to not only performing his best, but avoiding injury which is one of the huge drawbacks of using steroids. He saw it time and time again with the kids that "cheated" and thought they were idiots to risk their futures. Bryson is no idiot. 

[Quigleyd]

16 minutes ago, chisag said:

 

... Then we just see things completely differently. My son needed max strength and speed to play college DE (1st team all conference) and never even considered steroids because he is highly intelligent and knows the risks faaaar out weigh the rewards. His major was kinesiology based and his minor nutrition based and knew a combination of exercise and diet was the key to not only performing his best, but avoiding injury which is one of the huge drawbacks of using steroids. He saw it time and time again with the kids that "cheated" and thought they were idiots to risk their futures. Bryson is no idiot. 

I didnt say he "would" I said "consider".. That is a great story about your son. I commend him for is good decisions. But lets not pretend that if taking something was the difference from saying I was a college football player and saying I was a professional football player. You would not "consider, or think about it" hopefully the same decision would be made. But what that kind of reward it is silly to think it would not cross your mind. 

I was a college athlete once as well (oh too long ago). I also have never in my life taken anything. But I did "think" about it a few times. When you felt you just need a couple % more and you would be at the top.. 

I don't think Bryson "has" taken anything. I don't know if he has "thought" about it. I am simply saying, I would not be surprised if he had "thought" about.. 

That Masters jacket brings with it a lot of perks in life.. 

[chisag]

21 minutes ago, Quigleyd said:

I didnt say he "would" I said "consider".. That is a great story about your son. I commend him for is good decisions. But lets not pretend that if taking something was the difference from saying I was a college football player and saying I was a professional football player. You would not "consider, or think about it" hopefully the same decision would be made. But what that kind of reward it is silly to think it would not cross your mind. 

I was a college athlete once as well (oh too long ago). I also have never in my life taken anything. But I did "think" about it a few times. When you felt you just need a couple % more and you would be at the top.. 

I don't think Bryson "has" taken anything. I don't know if he has "thought" about it. I am simply saying, I would not be surprised if he had "thought" about.. 

That Masters jacket brings with it a lot of perks in life.. 

 

... Oh I get it and agree with you, there are many that do not qualify for Mensa and would take any route possible to increase their chances of getting to where they want to be. We now know the ramifications of repeated head contact and CTE's effect without ever even having a concussion but people still play longer than they should. This was the reason my son turned down an offer from the Colts to become a special teams player with a shot at playing OLB. There are also tons of athletes coming from a poor economic background and this may be their only shot at financial success and think steroids might help them. But as simple as possible my son explained to me the human body is an amazing mechanism and if you put in the right amount of training with the right diet, you give yourself the best chance at not only immediate success, but long term success both on the field of choice and in life. "Cheating" the brain by by passing the natural order of say lifting and becoming stronger naturally so mind and body is in sync, by taking steroids the brain thinks the body is capable of more than it is and one of the main reasons injuries occur with steroids. Sure muscles become stronger but ligaments and tendons bare weakened and susceptible to injury. 

... All that said, my son saw plenty of steroid use in high school and college. Usually the same guys that were eating McDonalds while he was eating grass fed beef/pork and getting the right combination of organic vegetables, limited organic grains and no sugar. But to your "thought about it" coments I completely understand because obviously my son "thought about it" and that's exactly why he did the research to find out the risks and rewards. Many do not do the research. I just don't think Bryson does anything without weight the benefits and drawbacks and I have little doubt he looked into steroids and anything else that may benefit him playing golf, but I think he is much too smart to take a chance with his future. 

[Quigleyd]

3 minutes ago, chisag said:

 

... Oh I get it and agree with you, there are many that do not qualify for Mensa and would take any route possible to increase their chances of getting to where they want to be. We now know the ramifications of repeated head contact and CTE's effect without ever even having a concussion but people still play longer than they should. This was the reason my son turned down an offer from the Colts to become a special teams player with a shot at playing OLB. There are also tons of athletes coming from a poor economic background and this may be their only shot at financial success and think steroids might help them. But as simple as possible my son explained to me the human body is an amazing mechanism and if you put in the right amount of training with the right diet, you give yourself the best chance at not only immediate success, but long term success both on the field of choice and in life. "Cheating" the brain by by passing the natural order of say lifting and becoming stronger naturally so mind and body is in sync, by taking steroids the brain thinks the body is capable of more than it is and one of the main reasons injuries occur with steroids. Sure muscles become stronger but ligaments and tendons bare weakened and susceptible to injury. 

... All that said, my son saw plenty of steroid use in high school and college. Usually the same guys that were eating McDonalds while he was eating grass fed beef/pork and getting the right combination of organic vegetables, limited organic grains and no sugar. But to your "thought about it" coments I completely understand because obviously my son "thought about it" and that's exactly why he did the research to find out the risks and rewards. Many do not do the research. 

!00% agree with everything you said. That is the same conclusion I came to after I thought about it some. 

[gavinski91]

The game will always advance, and players will change the way that they play based on the new regulations and the evolution of skill, athleticism, and statistics.

I think that's an important point to consider - with modern statistical analysis, we are seeing strategies that previously were believed to be poor, to actually be very effective. We all know that "Drive for show, putt for dough" isn't actually true. Earlier in this thread someone mentioned basketball adding the 3-point line. Many years later, people are complaining about that because you end up with Harden playing iso-ball and chucking up a 3-pointer on every possession because the analysis says that's the best way to win.

The leagues are in the business of providing entertainment, but the player's aren't - they're in the business of winning and making money. The ones who are the most serious about winning will do whatever the analytics say will improve their odds, regardless of what other players or fans think.

[FrogginBullfish]

Without getting too off-track, I kind of feel like the issue with Harden playing iso-ball is less to do with tossing up 3 pointers constantly than him taking advantage of the NBA's refusal to enforce traveling to a insane degree. Many of his step-back motions are textbook travels but the NBA refuses to enforce them. There's also the leaning into fouls thing.

I suppose people can make the same argument regarding Bryson and the Tour's refusal to enforce slow play, but suffice it to say, both are using advanced stats to play their respective sports at extremely high levels. I don't think either would struggle too long if their respective sports decided to actually enforce the rules the pair of them are straddling the line of.

The game will always advance, and players will change the way that they play based on the new regulations and the evolution of skill, athleticism, and statistics.
I think that's an important point to consider - with modern statistical analysis, we are seeing strategies that previously were believed to be poor, to actually be very effective. We all know that "Drive for show, putt for dough" isn't actually true. Earlier in this thread someone mentioned basketball adding the 3-point line. Many years later, people are complaining about that because you end up with Harden playing iso-ball and chucking up a 3-pointer on every possession because the analysis says that's the best way to win.
The leagues are in the business of providing entertainment, but the player's aren't - they're in the business of winning and making money. The ones who are the most serious about winning will do whatever the analytics say will improve their odds, regardless of what other players or fans think.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using MyGolfSpy mobile app

[silver & black]

"If" things are kept just as they are... what good is new equipment if there is nothing to gain from it? What will manufacturers of golf equipment market new product on if things are kept just as they are?  I have no problem with it as far as distance goes. That only leaves dispersion/accuracy as the only "improvements" for equipment manufacturers, as far as I can see. Am I missing something? Thoughts?

[fixyurdivot]

2 hours ago, silver & black said:

"If" things are kept just as they are... what good is new equipment if there is nothing to gain from it? What will manufacturers of golf equipment market new product on if things are kept just as they are?  I have no problem with it as far as distance goes. That only leaves dispersion/accuracy as the only "improvements" for equipment manufacturers, as far as I can see. Am I missing something? Thoughts?

My thought is that  a LOT of players could use dispersion/accuracy improvement every bit as much as distance... so still plenty of meat on the bone.  

[silver & black]

11 minutes ago, fixyurdivot said:

My thought is that  a LOT of players could use dispersion/accuracy improvement every bit as much as distance... so still plenty of meat on the bone.  

I agree. I wish the focus was more on this than distance.

[TR1PTIK]

On 10/2/2020 at 5:39 PM, silver & black said:

"If" things are kept just as they are... what good is new equipment if there is nothing to gain from it? What will manufacturers of golf equipment market new product on if things are kept just as they are?  I have no problem with it as far as distance goes. That only leaves dispersion/accuracy as the only "improvements" for equipment manufacturers, as far as I can see. Am I missing something? Thoughts?

The point of keeping things the way they are is simply that. Current drivers have to meet a CT requirement (among many other specifications), but companies are increasing distance by building more forgiveness (ball speed retention) into their products. Let them continue down this path until it's tapped, but don't roll back current limits and restrictions; keep them as-is and let the chips fall. There are other ways to challenge the professional and elite amateur ranks without diminishing the experience for recreational golfers.