- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: 62 is the new 66. Does the PGA need an overhaul?
Posted on 1/17/21 at 9:37 pm to Paul Allen
Posted on 1/17/21 at 9:37 pm to Paul Allen
Until the USGA and R&A get together and do something about the ball the pros use, this will continue to be an issue.
1
Posted on 1/17/21 at 9:47 pm to 9Fiddy
quote:
Until the USGA and R&A get together and do something about the ball the pros use, this will continue to be an issue.
What are you talking about?
The aerodynamics are limited by dimple geometry. The ball speed is limited by swing speed * 1.5.
They have limited ball physics and manufacturers are left to play games with nothing more than softness/hardness and spin characteristics. If you want to limit distance, you’ll have to tell the players to swing slower.
Like mentioned in my previous post. Viewers are turning out in droves to watch Bryson release the Kraken.
Posted on 1/18/21 at 6:01 am to CoachChappy
quote:
Look at the average golfer in Jacks day vs today. Golfers are athletes now.
There were a few good athletes back then.
Sam Snead, Jack, etc.
The expansion of the purses has contributed.
How many guys could make a living playing tournament golf before WW2? Maybe 24 or so.
From 1946-1960? Maybe a few more.
TV gets involved with Arnold and then Jack. So maybe by 1970, 50 guys can try to make a living strictly playing golf.
When Tiger Woods comes along the number is probably 125.
Purses explode and now worldwide there are maybe 250 golfers making a living playing tournament golf.
Equipment, instruction, courses, everything has improved. Except me!
So now each week on tour, there may be 40 guys who can win that week. In 1970, there were probably only 10 who could win that week.
Posted on 1/18/21 at 9:58 am to makersmark1
The number is higher than 250, I bet.
You have 125 on tour with full status. Then you have the major medical, etc. I bet you have 175 guys who make a living on the PGA Tour alone.
You make a living on the Korn Ferry, just not a millionaire.
Add in the euro tour guys, the senior pga tour guys, probably a few guys playing on PGA Canada or the Narcos Tour. I bet some minor leauge golf tour guys make a living doing that.
I'm thinking you're at 450 golfers, or more.
You have 125 on tour with full status. Then you have the major medical, etc. I bet you have 175 guys who make a living on the PGA Tour alone.
You make a living on the Korn Ferry, just not a millionaire.
Add in the euro tour guys, the senior pga tour guys, probably a few guys playing on PGA Canada or the Narcos Tour. I bet some minor leauge golf tour guys make a living doing that.
I'm thinking you're at 450 golfers, or more.
Posted on 1/18/21 at 10:24 am to The Johnny Lawrence
Ok.
In general, there are somewhere between 250 and 500 players capable of making a living playing tournament golf.
In 1930, it was probably 20 or 30.
With Palmer/Nicklaus TV, etc probably 100.
Tiger took the purses up to where as many as 500 people can make a legitimate living playing tournament golf.
I think the skilled players of the past would still be great, but the large purses have expanded the game at the high end along with equipment.
Whether people want “bifurcation” or not; it has happened in reality. I can’t play 500 yard par 4s and have fun. I’m not asking for a green jacket. It is a leisure activity. The best players in the world will always hit it longer and straighter, but the ones who win still win with putting, chipping, pitching, course management, etc.
In general, there are somewhere between 250 and 500 players capable of making a living playing tournament golf.
In 1930, it was probably 20 or 30.
With Palmer/Nicklaus TV, etc probably 100.
Tiger took the purses up to where as many as 500 people can make a legitimate living playing tournament golf.
I think the skilled players of the past would still be great, but the large purses have expanded the game at the high end along with equipment.
Whether people want “bifurcation” or not; it has happened in reality. I can’t play 500 yard par 4s and have fun. I’m not asking for a green jacket. It is a leisure activity. The best players in the world will always hit it longer and straighter, but the ones who win still win with putting, chipping, pitching, course management, etc.
Posted on 1/18/21 at 10:52 am to Paul Allen
Lol Jack made his living crushing driver and hitting short irons.
Posted on 1/18/21 at 10:56 am to makersmark1
quote:The amateur players who should be tipping out courses are few and far between. Pretty much none of us should be playing anything over 7400 yds and expect "good" results. Course have multiple tee options for a reason. Golf is one of those rare sports/competitions where two people of completely different skills can fairly go against each other using tees and handicaps. It's a remarkable thing if you stop and think about it.
Whether people want “bifurcation” or not; it has happened in reality. I can’t play 500 yard par 4s and have fun. I’m not asking for a green jacket. It is a leisure activity. The best players in the world will always hit it longer and straighter, but the ones who win still win with putting, chipping, pitching, course management, etc.
Posted on 1/18/21 at 11:27 am to ell_13
I disagree with only a small fraction of what you said. I don't think it is putting, chipping, pitching and course management at the top level. At one point in time, people chased distance and weren't exactly sure if it was the right move. Now, with data golf, it has been shown that chasing distance is the most advantageous way to play golf. You gain more strokes by hitting it far and spraying it some than you do hitting it shorter and straighter.
I don't know how translative that is to the club game, but for the pros, hitting it longer is how you win.
I don't know how translative that is to the club game, but for the pros, hitting it longer is how you win.
Posted on 1/18/21 at 11:38 am to Paul Allen
Plenty of good athletes in the old days. Snead, Nicklaus, Hogan and all those guys could hit the ball 300 when they wanted to. But in general except in select holes at select times, the risk wasn’t worth the reward.
To me, the biggest difference between anyone who learned the game before about 2000 or so and now is swing speed. In the late 90s driver tech became such that kids learned to swing all out all the time. Players before that had to learn to throttle it back and most people before that built their swings around 85% effort. Any more than that and you would miss the sweet spot too often and end up with horrible results. With the new drivers, the sweet spot is huge and if you do miss it, the results are not that punitive. And thus, the risk/reward equation flipped.
To me, the biggest difference between anyone who learned the game before about 2000 or so and now is swing speed. In the late 90s driver tech became such that kids learned to swing all out all the time. Players before that had to learn to throttle it back and most people before that built their swings around 85% effort. Any more than that and you would miss the sweet spot too often and end up with horrible results. With the new drivers, the sweet spot is huge and if you do miss it, the results are not that punitive. And thus, the risk/reward equation flipped.
This post was edited on 1/18/21 at 1:06 pm
Posted on 1/18/21 at 12:20 pm to Cossatotjoe
I agree. The big, oversized drivers changed everything.
Posted on 1/18/21 at 1:41 pm to Paul Allen
Have them start playing the shitty municipal courses us everyday players play, equipped with hardpan, patchy fairways, bunkers that are often mudholes, and patchy greens full of ballmarks that no one fixes.
Posted on 1/18/21 at 1:54 pm to ell_13
quote:
Pretty much none of us should be playing anything over 7400 yds and expect "good" results
Make that 6400 max for me.
I am not a big hitter.
Posted on 1/18/21 at 2:37 pm to mmmmmbeeer
Posted on 1/19/21 at 12:39 am to Paul Allen
Start putting water 320 yards from the tee and start rewarding shot making with mid irons.
You don’t need 500 yard par 4’s to make it harder.
You don’t need 500 yard par 4’s to make it harder.
Posted on 1/19/21 at 6:15 am to llfshoals
Your goal shouldn't be to punish guys who hit it far. That's a skill and should be rewarded. It's just over rewarded now. That's why I'm not a fan of the "build a creek at 320" in every hole.
Posted on 1/19/21 at 7:17 am to The Johnny Lawrence
Looks like they are doing more “internal OB” to takeaway the rerouting some guys can do now.
Maybe progressively narrowing the fairways starting at 290 would help. A few well placed coffin bunkers as well.
Maybe lengthening the course has been paradoxical. It’s made it where less guys are competing. Some short holes are really tough. Play par 70 with an extra par 3 per side. 4 par 4s, 3 par 3s, 2 par 5s.
Don’t need to make the par 3s 240, make them play like 12 at Augusta or the short one at Merion.
Maybe progressively narrowing the fairways starting at 290 would help. A few well placed coffin bunkers as well.
Maybe lengthening the course has been paradoxical. It’s made it where less guys are competing. Some short holes are really tough. Play par 70 with an extra par 3 per side. 4 par 4s, 3 par 3s, 2 par 5s.
Don’t need to make the par 3s 240, make them play like 12 at Augusta or the short one at Merion.
Posted on 1/19/21 at 8:18 am to The Johnny Lawrence
quote:
Your goal shouldn't be to punish guys who hit it far. That's a skill and should be rewarded. It's just over rewarded now. That's why I'm not a fan of the "build a creek at 320" in every hole.
The goal should be to protect the integrity of the game.
You want to keep the tough courses tough. You can’t let technology turn Augusta National into Webb Park.
The long knockers will still have an advantage as they always have and always will. If the distance keeps getting greater due to technology then how long can Pebble and some of the other great courses survive? It’s one thing for guys to train to hit it farther, but it’s another thing to make the equipment do it for you.
This post was edited on 1/19/21 at 9:05 am
Posted on 1/19/21 at 8:38 am to Paul Allen
This article from Thefriedegg on how courses can discourage bomb and gouge was super interesting. I'm not sure if I completely agree with his assessment of the 30-60 yard shots and the ball's effect on their spin, but thought the article brought other great points nonetheless
LINK /
LINK /
Posted on 1/19/21 at 11:19 am to rouxtab
Lengthening courses plays into the bombers hands.
A drivable par 4 with trouble is very exciting.
At Olympic they usually have one set up for about a 283 yard shot, but the green complex can send the ball to trouble. For every Eagle there are bogeys. It’s risk/reward when players have to make a choice.
A drivable par 4 with trouble is very exciting.
At Olympic they usually have one set up for about a 283 yard shot, but the green complex can send the ball to trouble. For every Eagle there are bogeys. It’s risk/reward when players have to make a choice.
Posted on 1/19/21 at 11:49 am to Strannix
quote:
Lol Jack made his living crushing driver and hitting short irons.
It took a lot more skill with a persimmon driver and the golf balls used then.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News