Jump to content
TESTERS WANTED! ×

USGA coming after Phil & Bryson


Londo

Recommended Posts

43 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

My main issue is the ruling bodies doing stuff that doesn’t fix any perceived issue.

Have you read the results from the Distance Insights project?  You may not agree that there's any problems related to increasing distance, but many people definitely PERCIEVE it to be an issue, for a significant number of reasons..

Edited by DaveP043

:titleist-small: Irons Titleist T200, AMT Red stiff

:callaway-small:Rogue SubZero, GD YS-Six X

:mizuno-small: T22 54 and 58 wedges

:mizuno-small: 7-wood

:Sub70: 5-wood

 B60 G5i putter

Right handed

Reston, Virginia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

Have you read the results from the Distance Insights project?  You may not agree that there's any problems related to increasing distance, but many people definitely PERCIEVE it to be an issue, for a significant number of reasons..

Perception doesn’t equal reality. Reality is that long hitters are always going to be long and short hitters will always be short and that both win on tour. The other reality is that scoring average hasn’t changed in decades. So longer drivers aren’t equaling lower scoring. 
 

Numbers can and usually are manipulated to tell whatever story people want them to tell. 
 

So other than designers like Tiger, Jack and a few others who are complaining about distance when it comes to course design distance imo is a on issue. Maybe if they got creative like Dye and others they wouldn’t have to rely on long courses and more properly to build them. The funny thing about them two complaining is they were perfectly content being the longest off the tee during their prime and not saying they needed to be throttled back.

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

The other reality is that scoring average hasn’t changed in decades. So longer drivers aren’t equaling lower scoring. 

But courses have gotten longer at the top level, yet scoring hasn't increased.  Its fair to surmise that increasing distance and the increased length of the courses are offsetting each other.  If courses hadn't gotten longer, I think we'd probably have seen lower scoring.

But again, you said the Ruling Bodies weren't addressing any perceived issue, I merely pointed out that there IS a perception among many that future distance increases are undesirable.  Limiting driver length to about the length commonly used now limits one potential equipment-related mechanism for increasing distance.  They are taking a small step towards doing what they said was their goal over 18 months ago.

:titleist-small: Irons Titleist T200, AMT Red stiff

:callaway-small:Rogue SubZero, GD YS-Six X

:mizuno-small: T22 54 and 58 wedges

:mizuno-small: 7-wood

:Sub70: 5-wood

 B60 G5i putter

Right handed

Reston, Virginia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

But courses have gotten longer at the top level, yet scoring hasn't increased.  Its fair to surmise that increasing distance and the increased length of the courses are offsetting each other.  If courses hadn't gotten longer, I think we'd probably have seen lower scoring.

But again, you said the Ruling Bodies weren't addressing any perceived issue, I merely pointed out that there IS a perception among many that future distance increases are undesirable.  Limiting driver length to about the length commonly used now limits one potential equipment-related mechanism for increasing distance.  They are taking a small step towards doing what they said was their goal over 18 months ago.

Designers have created the issue of longer courses because that’s their perception of where design is going based off a perceived increase in distance that may or may not be there. Now that they created the problem they want the ruling bodies to save them. 

I haven’t seen it anywhere but I would be surprised at the courses that are deemed short of the scores have gone down at those events. Riviera is a perfect example of a shorter course that has withstood the distance game
 

Again perception isn’t reality so doing anything based on perceived issues is silly IMO. People need to look at reality and get out of the perception world. Facts>feelings

Like many other topics on forums this is one where the two sides of the story aren’t going to change the mind of the other side so I’m bowing out for now 

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

My main issue is the ruling bodies doing stuff that doesn’t fix any perceived issue

 

31 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

Again perception isn’t reality so doing anything based on perceived issues is silly IMO.

Which is it?  Are they doing something that doesn't address any perceived issue, or is it silly to address perceived issues?

:titleist-small: Irons Titleist T200, AMT Red stiff

:callaway-small:Rogue SubZero, GD YS-Six X

:mizuno-small: T22 54 and 58 wedges

:mizuno-small: 7-wood

:Sub70: 5-wood

 B60 G5i putter

Right handed

Reston, Virginia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

My main issue is the ruling bodies doing stuff that doesn’t fix any perceived issue. Other than Phil winning 3 of his 4 champions tours events and one major with the longer driver. His overall results with it in the bag are terrible. The major was the only success he had on the pga tour last season. 
 

Just like the whole distance issue they claim to have on the Pga tour IMO is more about influence from the big money developers that want to host event at their new courses but feel that longer courses is the only way to build them these days. Like @PMookie said talk to me when scoring average year after year has a significant change. 

That's a valid point, and I don't disagree. I think the ruling bodies are simply trying to control what they can and prevent the possibility of an arms race. Is it the best move? No, absolutely not IMHO. However, the alternative is that they begin to heavily regulate course design and setup and I don't think that's something we want either. In fact, I think we want that a whole lot less.

I think the USGA & R&A ultimately have the right to try and lock things down where they stand, but should not do any sort of rollback. The real issue lies with the professional tours (not even all of them) and that's something they either need to accept, or start having serious conversations about with those tours.

Driver: :mizuno-small: ST190 9.5* Fujikura Atmos Blue 5S
Fairway Wood: :mizuno-small: ST190 15* Fujikura Atmos Blue 6S
Hybrid: :mizuno-small: CLK 17* Fujikura Speeder EVO HB
Irons: :bridgestone-small: J40 CB (3-PW) Dynamic Gold Tour Issue X100
Wedges: :taylormade-small: Milled Grind 2 54* & 58* Dynamic Gold S200
Putter: :odyssey-small: Tri-Hot 5k Two 34"
Bag: :titleist-small: Players 5 Stand Bag
Ball: Maxfli Tour

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, TR1PTIK said:

However, the alternative is that they begin to heavily regulate course design and setup

The USGA and R&A do have authority over Equipment Rules, but they really don't have any authority over course design and maintenance practices.  As you say, they're trying to control the things they have authority to control.  I don't have a problem with their stated intentions, I'm happy that they have said they won't try to decrease distance for all players.  This step seems to me to be in line with the previous releases, it should have come as no surprise to anyone who's been paying attention.

:titleist-small: Irons Titleist T200, AMT Red stiff

:callaway-small:Rogue SubZero, GD YS-Six X

:mizuno-small: T22 54 and 58 wedges

:mizuno-small: 7-wood

:Sub70: 5-wood

 B60 G5i putter

Right handed

Reston, Virginia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Headhammer said:

Rocky Thompson rolling over in his grave. Google it kids. 

I remember the Killer Bee! Crazy. Infomercial club!!!

Driver: Ping G430 Max 9*, Ping Tour 70X

Fairway: Ping G425 15*, Ping Tour 70X

Hybrid: Ping G425 22*, Ping Tour 80X

Irons:  Ping i230 4-GW, TT DG X100

Wedges: :edel-golf-1: SMS 50D/54V/58D:Nippon:Modus 130 stiff, +1”

Putter:  :edel-golf-1: EAS 1.0

Ball: Titleist 2023 AVX

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DaveP043 said:

The USGA and R&A do have authority over Equipment Rules, but they really don't have any authority over course design and maintenance practices.  As you say, they're trying to control the things they have authority to control.  I don't have a problem with their stated intentions, I'm happy that they have said they won't try to decrease distance for all players.  This step seems to me to be in line with the previous releases, it should have come as no surprise to anyone who's been paying attention.

They may not now, but as the governing bodies I could easily see how they could dictate course design to some degree. It's really no different than how they dictate equipment right now and would bring golf more in line with other sports. "If you want to hold a USGA/R&A sanctioned event, the course must be no more than X yards, use X grasses, etc., etc." I'll admit it's a highly improbable scenario, but I don't think it's something we could say with 100% certainty will never happen. 

All I'm really saying is that if they currently have control over how the game is played, and what equipment is used, then they can certainly extend that control to where the game can be played - at least as far as sanctioned events. What that scenario would end up creating is not unlike what we see elsewhere in sports and would really be worst case. Perhaps the biggest flex golf has on other sports is the ability for recreational players to play on many of the same venues with much of the same equipment as tour pros.

Driver: :mizuno-small: ST190 9.5* Fujikura Atmos Blue 5S
Fairway Wood: :mizuno-small: ST190 15* Fujikura Atmos Blue 6S
Hybrid: :mizuno-small: CLK 17* Fujikura Speeder EVO HB
Irons: :bridgestone-small: J40 CB (3-PW) Dynamic Gold Tour Issue X100
Wedges: :taylormade-small: Milled Grind 2 54* & 58* Dynamic Gold S200
Putter: :odyssey-small: Tri-Hot 5k Two 34"
Bag: :titleist-small: Players 5 Stand Bag
Ball: Maxfli Tour

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/14/2021 at 11:32 AM, DaveP043 said:

The USGA and R&A do have authority over Equipment Rules, but they really don't have any authority over course design and maintenance practices.  As you say, they're trying to control the things they have authority to control.  I don't have a problem with their stated intentions, I'm happy that they have said they won't try to decrease distance for all players.  This step seems to me to be in line with the previous releases, it should have come as no surprise to anyone who's been paying attention.

To be fair, the only real authority these organizations have is over their hosted events and they even have a history of not aligning on rules. While regulating course conditions is unprecedented, there really is nothing to stop the USGA from adding it in the rulebook although it is highly unlikely given that they have historically been one of the worst offenders when it comes to unsustainable conditioning (especially fairway height). Setting a good example at the US Open could potentially go a long way. 

This first new local rule is a reasonable change since adoption above 46” is almost non-existent. The second proposal of lowering the upper CT tolerance is reasonable as well but again will have minimal impact. The third proposal is incredibly ambiguous which is concerning and opens the door for a potentially sizable rollback of the ODS which has clearly been the target all along. Ultimately the USGA has had a poor track record when it comes to equipment regulation so it is reasonable for stakeholders to be skeptical and want to push back against any proposal. 

Edited by storm319

:titelist-small:  TS2 9.5

:titelist-small:  909F2 15.5

:titelist-small:  690.CB 3-PW

:titelist-small:  Vokey SM5 50, 56

image.png.e50b7e7a9b18feff4720d7b223a2013d.png   Works Versa 1W

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yet another case of too little too late. For those with shorter memories, it wasn't that long ago when the average driver length was 42" and the average shaft weight was 100g+ and the average driver size was sub 370cc.

Just like any other sport where strict guidelines where pushed to their logical extremes in their search for a competitive edge, shafts gained length and dropped in weight, with head sizes maxing out at 460cc once the RB's cottoned on to the dramatic shift in efficiency.

Had the RB's enough foresight to see how the pro game changed with these rapid advances in tech, then restrictions could have been put in place a lot sooner to control distance and negate the need to make courses ridiculously long for the average golfer.

Combine that tech with subtle changes in ball construction, course agrimony that encourages superior roll out and the golfers themselves who are no slouches either and you have a recipe for disaster for the vast majority of amateur golfers who struggle to make any advance in handicap index.

Long story short - why stop at 46"? get it down to 45" or less and restore a bit of sanity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/14/2021 at 7:47 AM, PMookie said:

It’s all so dumb… When actual SCORES start going down by 10-15 strokes ON AVERAGE year-over-year, let’s think about it, but otherwise it’s ridiculous.

Whatever. 

Regularly having winning scores at -20 or better on ever-lengthened courses nowadays isn't significant? Basically making par-5s not a thing anymore isn't significant?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LICC said:

Regularly having winning scores at -20 or better on ever-lengthened courses nowadays isn't significant? Basically making par-5s not a thing anymore isn't significant?

How many studies need to be published that, ACROSS THE BOARD, scores have NOT gone down significantly over the last 20 years. So, to answer your question, no…. You can cherry pick scores all you want, but when evaluating data on overall scoring one doesn’t cherry pick.

Look, I know you’re going to continue to argue. It’s what you do, but simple research proves my point.

Driver: Ping G430 Max 9*, Ping Tour 70X

Fairway: Ping G425 15*, Ping Tour 70X

Hybrid: Ping G425 22*, Ping Tour 80X

Irons:  Ping i230 4-GW, TT DG X100

Wedges: :edel-golf-1: SMS 50D/54V/58D:Nippon:Modus 130 stiff, +1”

Putter:  :edel-golf-1: EAS 1.0

Ball: Titleist 2023 AVX

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/14/2021 at 11:28 AM, RickyBobby_PR said:

Designers have created the issue of longer courses because that’s their perception of where design is going based off a perceived increase in distance that may or may not be there. Now that they created the problem they want the ruling bodies to save them. 

I haven’t seen it anywhere but I would be surprised at the courses that are deemed short of the scores have gone down at those events. Riviera is a perfect example of a shorter course that has withstood the distance game
 

Again perception isn’t reality so doing anything based on perceived issues is silly IMO. People need to look at reality and get out of the perception world. Facts>feelings

Like many other topics on forums this is one where the two sides of the story aren’t going to change the mind of the other side so I’m bowing out for now 

Riviera has added almost 400 yards since 1999.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, PMookie said:

How many studies need to be published that, ACROSS THE BOARD, scores have NOT gone down significantly over the last 20 years. So, to answer your question, no…. You can cherry pick scores all you want, but when evaluating data on overall scoring one doesn’t cherry pick.

Look, I know you’re going to continue to argue. It’s what you do, but simple research proves my point.

It's not that I just want to argue. I don't think your belief is correct. See this from a 2017 analysis from Adam Chandler Crawford:

... the scoring average in the 1960s (the height of Palmer and Player and the rise of Nicklaus),right at 275. (These numbers are taken only from 72-hole stroke play events.)

In the '70s it dropped slightly to 274.3, but that makes sense because there weren't many significant changes to the game. The '60s saw the Ping Karsten putter that revolutionized how putters would be made for the next 50 plus years, but that was the major innovation of the decade.

However, by the late 1980s, the scoring average had dropped to 273.1, over a full shot lower. The '80s was also the time when we see the first metal woods arrive on tour (Ron Streck was the first player to use a metal wood in a PGA Tour event).

The next leap is much bigger. By the end of the '90s, we see the scoring average drop nearly two full shots to 271.4. The '90s brought huge leaps in technology with the Callaway Big Bertha driver, the Titleist Professional golf ball, Adams Tight Lies and Taylormade Rescue clubs -- the advent of titanium and more graphite.

As the technology changed in the '90s and players began to place new equipment in their bags, the scoring average for the 2000s dipped below 270 for the first time and came in at 269.9. If you're following along, you'll notice that over five full shots since the 1960s. When you're talking about almost 450 tournaments per decade, that's a huge drop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, LICC said:

It's not that I just want to argue. I don't think your belief is correct. See this from a 2017 analysis from Adam Chandler Crawford:

... the scoring average in the 1960s (the height of Palmer and Player and the rise of Nicklaus),right at 275. (These numbers are taken only from 72-hole stroke play events.)

In the '70s it dropped slightly to 274.3, but that makes sense because there weren't many significant changes to the game. The '60s saw the Ping Karsten putter that revolutionized how putters would be made for the next 50 plus years, but that was the major innovation of the decade.

However, by the late 1980s, the scoring average had dropped to 273.1, over a full shot lower. The '80s was also the time when we see the first metal woods arrive on tour (Ron Streck was the first player to use a metal wood in a PGA Tour event).

The next leap is much bigger. By the end of the '90s, we see the scoring average drop nearly two full shots to 271.4. The '90s brought huge leaps in technology with the Callaway Big Bertha driver, the Titleist Professional golf ball, Adams Tight Lies and Taylormade Rescue clubs -- the advent of titanium and more graphite.

As the technology changed in the '90s and players began to place new equipment in their bags, the scoring average for the 2000s dipped below 270 for the first time and came in at 269.9. If you're following along, you'll notice that over five full shots since the 1960s. When you're talking about almost 450 tournaments per decade, that's a huge drop.

Granted I'm not much of a historian, but I don't quite see 5 shots over the span of nearly 60 years being that significant. All sports evolve and change and although I will admit most all of this can be chalked up to equipment and the golf ball I would say the game itself has evolved and has been a contributing factor. Better maintained courses, more knowledge from a players aspect among many other things. I guess a secondary point is do we feel this trend will continue and in another 60 years  scores will be another 5 or 6 shots lower?

As far as where I stand on the driver length being rolled back I'm all for it. The majority don't use drivers that length anyway and the players will learn to adapt who are using the longer clubs. If it truly influences their game that much then I believe their are other factors they can look into. 

Take F1 for example and the year over year regulations that change the sport. These are way bigger then what they are doing in golf and the sport is still thriving, teams are adapting and I'm sure progress is still being made to have smaller lap times. 

⛳🛄 as of Nov 6, 2023 (Past WITB
Driver:  :callaway-small: Paradym TD w/ GD ADDI 6X Driver Shootout! 

Wood:    :cobra-small: F7 3 wood 14.5* w/ Motore F1 Shaft

Irons:   :titleist-small: T Series - T200 5 Iron
                                          T150 6-9 Iron
                                          T100 PW/GW

Wedge:  Toura Golf - A Spec 53,37,61 degree 

Putter:  Screenshot 2023-06-02 13.10.30.png Mezz Max!

Balls:     Vice Pro Plus Drip (Blue/Orange)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

Granted I'm not much of a historian, but I don't quite see 5 shots over the span of nearly 60 years being that significant.

Also that is for the whole tournament so on average just the winning score is down 1.2 strokes a round, with the average now at 4 to 5 under a round to win. Does not seem crazy when 60 years ago you needed to be 3 to 4 under a round to win on average. Of course this is just my opinion and I enjoy watch the game now so I am sure others will disagree.

:callaway-small: Epic Max LS 9° :Fuji: Ventus Blue 6X  (2021 Official Review) | :callaway-small:Epic Speed 18° Evenflow Riptide 70g 6.0
:titelist-small: 816 H1 21° Mitsubishi Motors Mitsubishi Chemical Holdings Chemical industry Mitsubishi  Rayon Mitsubishi Chemical Corporation, mitsubishi, blue, company png |  PNGEgg Diamana S+ Blue 70 S | 
image.png.08bbf5bb553da418019f0db13c6f4f9a.png SMS 4-5/SMS Pro 6-PW  image.png.267751aa721ee9cf3944fa2ff070b98c.png  Steelfiber i95 S (2023 Official Review)
:ping-small: Glide 4.0 50°.12°S/54°.14°W/58°.6°T PING Z-Z115 Wedge Flex | :cleveland-small:  SOFT 11S Super Stroke Mid-Slim 2.0
:ping-small: Hoofer Bag | :titelist-small: Pro V1 | Right Handed | Tracked by :ShotScope: V3

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, GolfSpy_APH said:

Granted I'm not much of a historian, but I don't quite see 5 shots over the span of nearly 60 years being that significant. All sports evolve and change and although I will admit most all of this can be chalked up to equipment and the golf ball I would say the game itself has evolved and has been a contributing factor. Better maintained courses, more knowledge from a players aspect among many other things. I guess a secondary point is do we feel this trend will continue and in another 60 years  scores will be another 5 or 6 shots lower?

As far as where I stand on the driver length being rolled back I'm all for it. The majority don't use drivers that length anyway and the players will learn to adapt who are using the longer clubs. If it truly influences their game that much then I believe their are other factors they can look into. 

Take F1 for example and the year over year regulations that change the sport. These are way bigger then what they are doing in golf and the sport is still thriving, teams are adapting and I'm sure progress is still being made to have smaller lap times. 

Statistically, a 2 or even a 1 shot decrease over that many tournaments with that large a group of players is significant. Add the fact that these declines have happened as courses have added hundreds of yards in length and the statistical significance is even greater. 

Now you may think that decreased scoring on longer courses isn't a bad thing or anything that needs to be addressed. But we shouldn't deny that it has happened.

Personally I would prefer to see the pros play in a way that 300 yard drives still mean something, where par-5s are still par-5s where the average length pros have to decide whether to lay up or take a risk and go for it, where most of the par-3s don't have to be 200+ yards, and where long par-4s exist that require long iron shots to get to the green. You rarely see these things anymore and I think as a fan the game would be better to watch.

Edited by LICC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The distance debate has been going on since I've been really around golf. I don't think anyone is denying it is happening. Again over the period of 60 years with how sports (most all sports) evolve and adapt and change I don't see 5 or 6 shots being that bad. 

However going back to the original post with terms of driver length, I don't see issue with it as stated in my above response. The players will adapt to the rules and changes and I don't think it is a bad thing with what they are doing. I don't see it changing distance as a whole, but maybe this is what slowly starts leading to other changes?

⛳🛄 as of Nov 6, 2023 (Past WITB
Driver:  :callaway-small: Paradym TD w/ GD ADDI 6X Driver Shootout! 

Wood:    :cobra-small: F7 3 wood 14.5* w/ Motore F1 Shaft

Irons:   :titleist-small: T Series - T200 5 Iron
                                          T150 6-9 Iron
                                          T100 PW/GW

Wedge:  Toura Golf - A Spec 53,37,61 degree 

Putter:  Screenshot 2023-06-02 13.10.30.png Mezz Max!

Balls:     Vice Pro Plus Drip (Blue/Orange)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, LICC said:

Riviera has added almost 400 yards since 1999.

And yet is still short by pga tournament standards and a lot shorter than what many of the designers these days are claiming the need to build a courses

Also had a winning score of -12 last season won by a guy who ranked 100 in driving distance.

 

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

And yet is still short by pga tournament standards and a lot shorter than what many of the designers these days are claiming the need to build a courses

Also had a winning score of -12 last season won by a guy who ranked 100 in driving distance.

 

Because of unusually bad weather and 35mph winds. I would hate to rely on that to keep scores down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, LICC said:

Statistically, a 2 or even a 1 shot decrease over that many tournaments with that large a group of players is significant. Add the fact that these declines have happened as courses have added hundreds of yards in length and the statistical significance is even greater. 

Now you may think that decreased scoring on longer courses isn't a bad thing or anything that needs to be addressed. But we shouldn't deny that it has happened.

Personally I would prefer to see the pros play in a way that 300 yard drives still mean something, where par-5s are still par-5s where the average length pros have to decide whether to lay up or take a risk and go for it, where most of the par-3s don't have to be 200+ yards, and where long par-4s exist that require long iron shots to get to the green. You rarely see these things anymore and I think as a fan the game would be better to watch.

Yes technology in drivers has resulted in allowing increased distance when there are slight miss hits, but increased swing speed by players has also added to that distance increase.  I’d personally say that increased swing speed and better understanding if the swing is a bugger contributor to that increase.  

you also talked about scoring average for tournaments going down even though course lengths have increased.  Is there any any data that totally separates the equipment from the quality of the players playing in the events?  Meaning are tournament fields comprised of better overall golfers?  While the advertised distance of courses are increasing what is the actual played distance of the courses on each tournament day.  
 

can’t believe I am taking this side but everyone talks about jacked lofts and how the 5 iron from the 70s and 80s has become the 7 iron of today.   So maybe they still are hitting that long iron into the green, it is just that the number on the bottom doesn’t equal what you want to see.   
 

Even if we somehow rolled back the distance I believe your hope for risk/reward type play is also a thing of the past as playing strategy has changed.  Played now have access to detailed stats that show hitting the ball as far as possible on every shot is what should be done.  Looking at course architecture, they are mostly built based a formula that supports that strategy.   Players coming up through the playing ranks are simply better when looked at as a complete group.   Like it or not, I think strategies founded from stroke gained metrics will cause scoring averages to continue to go lower.   
 

Golf has changed over time and some people like it and others don’t.  

Driver:  :ping-small: G400 Max 9* w/ KBS Tour Driven
Fairway: :titelist-small: TS3 15*  w/Project X Hzardous Smoke
Hybrids:  :titelist-small: 915H 21* w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
                :titelist-small: 915H  24*  w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype        
Irons:      :honma:TR20V 6-11 w/Vizard TR20-85 Graphite
Wedge:  :titleist-small: 54/12D, 60/8M w/:Accra iWedge 90 Graphite
Putter:   :taylormade-small:TM-180

Testing:   SPGC_logo.jpg

Backups:  :odyssey-small: Milled Collection RSX 2, :seemore-small: mFGP2, :cameron-small: Futura 5W

Member:  MGS Hitsquad since 2017697979773_DSCN2368(Custom).JPG.a1a25f5e430d9eebae93c5d652cbd4b9.JPG

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, cnosil said:

Yes technology in drivers has resulted in allowing increased distance when there are slight miss hits, but increased swing speed by players has also added to that distance increase.  I’d personally say that increased swing speed and better understanding if the swing is a bugger contributor to that increase.  

you also talked about scoring average for tournaments going down even though course lengths have increased.  Is there any any data that totally separates the equipment from the quality of the players playing in the events?  Meaning are tournament fields comprised of better overall golfers?  While the advertised distance of courses are increasing what is the actual played distance of the courses on each tournament day.  
 

can’t believe I am taking this side but everyone talks about jacked lofts and how the 5 iron from the 70s and 80s has become the 7 iron of today.   So maybe they still are hitting that long iron into the green, it is just that the number on the bottom doesn’t equal what you want to see.   
 

Even if we somehow rolled back the distance I believe your hope for risk/reward type play is also a thing of the past as playing strategy has changed.  Played now have access to detailed stats that show hitting the ball as far as possible on every shot is what should be done.  Looking at course architecture, they are mostly built based a formula that supports that strategy.   Players coming up through the playing ranks are simply better when looked at as a complete group.   Like it or not, I think strategies founded from stroke gained metrics will cause scoring averages to continue to go lower.   
 

Golf has changed over time and some people like it and others don’t.  

We have discussed this plenty and I respectfully entirely disagree. I've posted plenty showing that the predominant cause of distance increases are equipment advances. Here is another thing that I posted a while back in another thread:

Here is more data to support my view that distance gains are predominantly from equipment technology. Here is the same person, same balls, using different drivers from different years from the same company. There are substantial distance gains from the 2004 version to the 2013 version, and again significant increase from the 2013 version to 2021. 

https://golf.com/gear/drivers/how-far-has-distance-increased-5-drivers-from-different-years/

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, cnosil said:

can’t believe I am taking this side but everyone talks about jacked lofts and how the 5 iron from the 70s and 80s has become the 7 iron of today.   So maybe they still are hitting that long iron into the green, it is just that the number on the bottom doesn’t equal what you want to see.

The equipment is hard to compare because lofts aren't the only thing affecting the ball. Today's 7 iron may have the same loft at the 4 iron from the 1970s, but today's club also has a different weighting and produces a loft far unlike the old 4 irons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, LICC said:

Because of unusually bad weather and 35mph winds. I would hate to rely on that to keep scores down.

2019 winner -14 by a guy ranked 209 in driving distance. Scoring is always low at that course

Driver: PXG 0811 X+ Proto w/UST Helium 5F4

Wood: TaylorMade M5 5W w/Accra TZ5 +1/2”, TaylorMade Sim 3W w/Aldila rogue white

Hybrid: PXG Gen2 22* w/AD hybrid

Irons: PXG Gen3 0311T w/Nippon modus 120

Wedges: TaylorMade MG2 50*, Tiger grind 56/60

Putter: Scotty Caemeron Super Rat1

Ball: Titleist Prov1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, LICC said:

We have discussed this plenty and I respectfully entirely disagree. I've posted plenty showing that the predominant cause of distance increases are equipment advances. Here is another thing that I posted a while back in another thread:

Here is more data to support my view that distance gains are predominantly from equipment technology. Here is the same person, same balls, using different drivers from different years from the same company. There are substantial distance gains from the 2004 version to the 2013 version, and again significant increase from the 2013 version to 2021. 

https://golf.com/gear/drivers/how-far-has-distance-increased-5-drivers-from-different-years/

 

 

While it is an interesting test,  few metrics were provided to show contact locations and swing numbers.  I have also shown “tests” of older clubs that show no significant distance differences that you dismissed as being invalid.  provide all the data that can be captured on a GC Quad and it would be a more compelling story.   
 

I don’t disagree that equipment has helped players more consistent hit longer shots.  But there are other factors that contribute to lower scores and longer distances.  As technology has advanced manufacturing processes have improved as well making clubs more consistent.  
 

but here are some other tests of old technology:
 

https://golf.com/gear/drivers/paul-casey-persimmon-driver-modern-golf-ball/

 

https://www.golfmonthly.com/news/tour-news/dj-hits-nicklaus-persimmon-driver-163339

 


 

 

Driver:  :ping-small: G400 Max 9* w/ KBS Tour Driven
Fairway: :titelist-small: TS3 15*  w/Project X Hzardous Smoke
Hybrids:  :titelist-small: 915H 21* w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype
                :titelist-small: 915H  24*  w/KBS Tour Graphite Hybrid Prototype        
Irons:      :honma:TR20V 6-11 w/Vizard TR20-85 Graphite
Wedge:  :titleist-small: 54/12D, 60/8M w/:Accra iWedge 90 Graphite
Putter:   :taylormade-small:TM-180

Testing:   SPGC_logo.jpg

Backups:  :odyssey-small: Milled Collection RSX 2, :seemore-small: mFGP2, :cameron-small: Futura 5W

Member:  MGS Hitsquad since 2017697979773_DSCN2368(Custom).JPG.a1a25f5e430d9eebae93c5d652cbd4b9.JPG

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, RickyBobby_PR said:

2019 winner -14 by a guy ranked 209 in driving distance. Scoring is always low at that course

Results from any one tournament mean pretty much nothing when evaluating long-term trends.  @LICC is right when he says that equipment advances have contributed significantly to increasing driving distance at the top levels.  I don't necessarily agree that equipment is the primary factor, its nearly impossible to separate the influence of any one change over the years.  

Its interesting to read those who say the Ruling Bodies should have done more sooner, that they should have been able to "crystal ball" the impact of some of the equipment advances, and limit them before they occurred.  Its hard to argue that, really, I don't know that its really possible to predict the impact of changes.  But in the recent action, the Ruling Bodies ARE looking at a trend towards longer drivers, and ARE taking an action to limit further distance increases at the top levels of golf.  The rule will impact an extremely small percentage of those top players, but it will eliminate one mechanism for distance increases in the future.  

:titleist-small: Irons Titleist T200, AMT Red stiff

:callaway-small:Rogue SubZero, GD YS-Six X

:mizuno-small: T22 54 and 58 wedges

:mizuno-small: 7-wood

:Sub70: 5-wood

 B60 G5i putter

Right handed

Reston, Virginia

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. Scoring average from 2000 has gone down .1, and a grand total of 1.6 down over 30 years for winner scoring average.

So much for all of these “-20” winning scores….

 

Data.

ABBBD5F6-958C-4DA2-8982-BC23043FC214.jpeg.547e16d918ee590a29dab510ab89f871.jpeg

 

 

Driver: Ping G430 Max 9*, Ping Tour 70X

Fairway: Ping G425 15*, Ping Tour 70X

Hybrid: Ping G425 22*, Ping Tour 80X

Irons:  Ping i230 4-GW, TT DG X100

Wedges: :edel-golf-1: SMS 50D/54V/58D:Nippon:Modus 130 stiff, +1”

Putter:  :edel-golf-1: EAS 1.0

Ball: Titleist 2023 AVX

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, cnosil said:

While it is an interesting test,  few metrics were provided to show contact locations and swing numbers.  I have also shown “tests” of older clubs that show no significant distance differences that you dismissed as being invalid.  provide all the data that can be captured on a GC Quad and it would be a more compelling story.   
 

I don’t disagree that equipment has helped players more consistent hit longer shots.  But there are other factors that contribute to lower scores and longer distances.  As technology has advanced manufacturing processes have improved as well making clubs more consistent.  
 

but here are some other tests of old technology:
 

https://golf.com/gear/drivers/paul-casey-persimmon-driver-modern-golf-ball/

 

https://www.golfmonthly.com/news/tour-news/dj-hits-nicklaus-persimmon-driver-163339

 


 

 

I'm not sure why you think these support your argument. Fowler carried it 275 with modern balls. Take at least another 10 yards off for the ball, and that is substantially shorter than he hits it with modern equipment. Same with DJ. He hit it 290 with a modern ball. Take back more yardage based on the ball and he hit much shorter than he hits it with modern equipment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, PMookie said:

So much for all of these “-20” winning scores….

John Feinstein, 2018: The average winning score in 46 individual stroke-play events during the 2017-'18 season was 16.56 under par. Twelve of those events were won with at least 20 under par and 41 were won with a double-digit total. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...