- 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
The evolution of the game in the last 25 years make Tiger and Phil even more impressive
Posted on 6/25/20 at 9:27 am
Posted on 6/25/20 at 9:27 am
When Tiger burst onto the scene in 1997 the average drive on the PGA tour was 267 and the longest (Daly) was right around 300.
When Phil turned pro in 1992 the average was 260 and the longest (Daly again) was 283.
Fast forward to today and the average PGA tour player is driving it around 300 and the longest (Dechambeau) is averaging 321! What’s even more stark of a difference is the fact that they just about all can carry the ball in the air 300 or close to it.
Now technology has helped this obviously but even more so has been the emphasis that these young guys put on distance. The fact that Tiger is still one of the best players on tour, and Phil is still competitive, is crazy impressive. Pretty much all of their contemporaries have been passed by because they just can’t keep up with these guys off the tee (plus they are getting old).
I mean these guys are two of the best ever, but this just adds to how great they are IMO. I also wonder how some of these younger guys will fair when it comes to longevity, a pro golfers career historically can be 30+ years, but if you are so reliant on distance in your game I wonder if their careers will be shorter? I guess we will find out
When Phil turned pro in 1992 the average was 260 and the longest (Daly again) was 283.
Fast forward to today and the average PGA tour player is driving it around 300 and the longest (Dechambeau) is averaging 321! What’s even more stark of a difference is the fact that they just about all can carry the ball in the air 300 or close to it.
Now technology has helped this obviously but even more so has been the emphasis that these young guys put on distance. The fact that Tiger is still one of the best players on tour, and Phil is still competitive, is crazy impressive. Pretty much all of their contemporaries have been passed by because they just can’t keep up with these guys off the tee (plus they are getting old).
I mean these guys are two of the best ever, but this just adds to how great they are IMO. I also wonder how some of these younger guys will fair when it comes to longevity, a pro golfers career historically can be 30+ years, but if you are so reliant on distance in your game I wonder if their careers will be shorter? I guess we will find out
1
Posted on 6/25/20 at 9:31 am to Tiger1242
Tiger would have been more dominant if the solid core ball had never been invented. Yes, guys hit it farther, but its because they can. With a balata, the way a lot of these guys play the ball would never be in play.
Posted on 6/25/20 at 9:45 am to Mingo Was His NameO
quote:
Tiger would have been more dominant if the solid core ball had never been invented. Yes, guys hit it farther, but its because they can. With a balata, the way a lot of these guys play the ball would never be in play.
I disagree with part of this.
A. Yes technology is a big reason guys hit the ball further today but it’s also emphasized a whole lot more now a days. Everyone is trying to bomb it, distance is more important to guys now
B. Tigers best years on tour were using the solid core ball, I would argue the ball helped him more than the average pro actually.
HERE is an article about Tiger switching balls in 2001 and using it to totally dominate the competition
Posted on 6/25/20 at 9:46 am to Tiger1242
quote:
Everyone is trying to bomb it, distance is more important to guys now
Because the ball doesn't spin
quote:
Tigers best years on tour were using the solid core ball, I would argue the ball helped him more than the average pro actually.
Because he was ahead of the game chasing speed and already hit it far
Tiger might still be a top 5 iron player on tour right now, 15 years ago it wasnt an argument. The solid core golf ball takes emphasis off of ball striking because the the ball doesn't spin and foul balls are still in play.
This post was edited on 6/25/20 at 9:51 am
Posted on 6/25/20 at 9:52 am to Mingo Was His NameO
quote:
Because he was ahead of the game chasing speed.
For sure but your argument was that he would have been even more dominate if they never stopped using balata balls, I disagree. Now today maybe so, since as you said the guys now gear their game towards hitting these balls which has somewhat evened the field of play. But 20 years ago the guys on tour were still hitting the ball like it was a balata and Tiger was hitting it like it was a modern golf ball, which gave him an advantage
Posted on 6/25/20 at 9:56 am to Tiger1242
quote:
For sure but your argument was that he would have been even more dominate if they never stopped using balata balls, I disagree. Now today maybe so, since as you said the guys now gear their game towards hitting these balls which has somewhat evened the field of play.
These two sentences don't reconcile.
quote:
But 20 years ago the guys on tour were still hitting the ball like it was a balata and Tiger was hitting it like it was a modern golf ball, which gave him an advantage
This isnt prevalent to the conversation. Tiger is in his 40s, he can't hit it with younger guys. By taking distance away from them that brings shorter hitters back into the game more easily. Guys that can swing hard and hit it straight (like tiger could in the early 2000s) would be miles ahead of the competition.
If you dont believe me, just look into pretty much any respected voice that covers golf, or many of the players old and new
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:04 am to Mingo Was His NameO
Okay I agree with everything you just said, we are arguing two different points now.
You are responding to my original post and saying Tiger would be better off today if the young guys didn’t have the benefit of the new ball, i agree with that.
My second post was responding to this comment you made
Which I disagree with, I do not think peak Tiger would have been more dominant without the solid core ball. Not having that ball would have allowed average pros a chance to keep up with him in the early 2000’s
You are responding to my original post and saying Tiger would be better off today if the young guys didn’t have the benefit of the new ball, i agree with that.
My second post was responding to this comment you made
quote:
Tiger would have been more dominant if the solid core ball had never been invented
Which I disagree with, I do not think peak Tiger would have been more dominant without the solid core ball. Not having that ball would have allowed average pros a chance to keep up with him in the early 2000’s
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:42 am to Tiger1242
quote:
I disagree with part of this.
You can disagree all you want. Many golf tech gurus have said that Tiger would have been even more dominant. As much as the solid core ball helped Tiger, it helped the average Tour pros even more.
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:45 am to Tiger1242
quote:
Not having that ball would have allowed average pros a chance to keep up with him in the early 2000’s
Tiger was at the top of the field in driving with the old ball. When the new ball came out the other guys started to catch up distance wise.
The older ball was harder to control because it spins more. You don’t think that gives an advantage to the best iron player of all time?
ETA. The new ball gave Tiger an advantage for a few months until everyone else started playing it
This post was edited on 6/25/20 at 10:47 am
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:46 am to Tyga Woods
I'm just basing my opinion on what Tiger himself thought 
What you are saying makes sense, but to me the difference is that Tiger embraced the new technology and adapted his game to it earlier than almost anyone else. This gave him a huge advantage for several years until other guys followed suit
What you are saying makes sense, but to me the difference is that Tiger embraced the new technology and adapted his game to it earlier than almost anyone else. This gave him a huge advantage for several years until other guys followed suit
This post was edited on 6/25/20 at 10:47 am
Posted on 6/25/20 at 10:52 am to Tiger1242
quote:
Tiger embraced the new technology and adapted his game to it earlier than almost anyone else.
I completely agree with this.
quote:
This gave him a huge advantage for several years
It wasn’t several years. The new Nike ball was pushed out a little early in an attempt to beat the Pro V1 to the market. Also, Tiger was one of the last guys to take the steel shaft out of his driver and fairway woods.
Posted on 6/25/20 at 11:01 am to Tiger1242
quote:
I'm just basing my opinion on what Tiger himself thought
Link?
quote:
What you are saying makes sense, but to me the difference is that Tiger embraced the new technology and adapted his game to it earlier than almost anyone else.
He was already a top 5 driver of the ball with balata. Shotgun Start has a really good podcast on it, but I wasn't able to find it quickly.
Posted on 6/25/20 at 11:08 am to Mingo Was His NameO
quote:
Link?
Already posted it but here it is again LINK
Here's some quotes for you
quote:
In 2000, Tiger Woods put a new Nike golf ball into play and then won the U.S. Open by a record 15 strokes. Here’s the full story behind the ball.
quote:
Kel Devlin was just sitting down to dinner at home in Portland, Ore., when the phone rang that Sunday. It was Tiger Woods. “If I had my ball this week, I’d have won by five,” Devlin recalls Woods saying. Thirty-one calendar days later, Woods did have his ball, and he used it to destroy the record book and obliterate the status quo.
quote:
The Titleist Professional that Woods played at the 2000 Byron Nelson was the go-to ball on the PGA Tour in those days. Its liquid-filled core and wound construction closely resembled the venerable brand’s Tour Balata, but an Elastomer cover reduced the excessive wear and tear that the balata-covered version suffered at the hands of the world’s fastest impact speeds. Players routinely used a balata ball for only three holes before discarding it because of all the scuff marks, rotating three new balls per nine holes. The Titleist Professional was the best of both worlds.
quote:
The prototype of the Nike Tour Accuracy, like the player pushing its development, was a tiger of a different stripe—a three-piece ball of solid construction, with a molded rubber core injected with synthetic material, and a multilayer, urethane cover. In the prototype phase, the goal was to create a ball that offered the feel and performance Tour players were accustomed to, but with substantially less spin and more speed than a wound ball.
quote:
"I won four straight majors with that ball, and the rest is history because wound-ball technology is gone. Everyone switched."
Posted on 6/25/20 at 11:24 am to Tiger1242
None of those quotes indicate Tiger said he wouldn't have been more dominate if the ball hadn't changed.
In fact, hes said the opposite in the last year. He talked about how the equipment has made it less about consistency and about trying to really go low in one week and win.
In fact, hes said the opposite in the last year. He talked about how the equipment has made it less about consistency and about trying to really go low in one week and win.
Posted on 6/25/20 at 11:45 am to Mingo Was His NameO
Now I think you’re just arguing with me for the sake of arguing. He literally says in one of the quotes that I quoted that he would’ve won by five if he had his ball. And then in that last quote he said he won four majors with the ball and then it changed the game because everybody switched to match him.
So saying that the article doesn’t indicate that the ball helped him it’s just ludicrous and exactly the opposite of what tiger himself said in the article
So saying that the article doesn’t indicate that the ball helped him it’s just ludicrous and exactly the opposite of what tiger himself said in the article
Posted on 6/25/20 at 11:47 am to Tiger1242
quote:
So saying that the article doesn’t indicate that the ball helped him
Of course it did, but it helped everyone else more hence him being less dominant
Posted on 6/25/20 at 11:55 am to Mingo Was His NameO
I mean we are all entitled to our opinion, but that is the exact opposite of what tiger himself says in the article. Again I agree that overall it has helped even the playing field. But since he was one of the first guys to embrace the new ball, and he’s the best player in the world... The ball gave him a big advantage until everyone else switched after he won a ton with it
Posted on 6/25/20 at 12:07 pm to Tiger1242
quote:
I mean we are all entitled to our opinion, but that is the exact opposite of what tiger himself says in the article.
No its not
quote:
But since he was one of the first guys to embrace the new ball, and he’s the best player in the world... The ball gave him a big advantage until everyone else switched after he won a ton with it
So less than a year. You can't see the trees through the forrest. He would have won those tournaments anyway. The ball has made him less dominant over his career. 4 weeks in one year aren't what we are talking about.
Posted on 6/25/20 at 12:11 pm to Mingo Was His NameO
Okay you just want to argue got it. It’s all good man 
He’s Tiger he would have been dominate playing with a goose feather ball
He’s Tiger he would have been dominate playing with a goose feather ball
Posted on 6/25/20 at 12:16 pm to Tiger1242
quote:
Okay you just want to argue got it.
I don't want to, you are just in a minority opinion that almost everyone respected in the game disagrees with you on to the point that its almost not an opinion at all
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News