[David_Tepper]

The current issue of Golf World has a good article on the relentless changes in golf equipment through the years. Among a number of interesting anecdotes, Walter Travis played with a 50 inch driver in 1905 in an attempt to gain more distance!

http://www.golfdigest.com/golfworld/columnists/2009/12/gwar_fields_1228

[Mac Plumart]

David...

I found that article to be excellent and educational. 

[Tom_Doak]

Have not seen Golf World this week ... and I'm off to another continent tomorrow.

Whose byline is on the piece?

And don't forget where Golf World gets most of its advertising dollars.  They can't afford to bite the hand that feeds them.

[David_Tepper]

Tom D. -

The article is by Bill Fields.
Regarding biting the hand that feeds, one could probably make the same comment about The Wall Street Journal!  

DT

[Tom_Doak]

Tom D. -

The article is by Bill Fields.
Regarding biting the hand that feeds, one could probably make the same comment about the Wall Street Journal! 

DT

No duh.

[Melvyn Morrow]

History, more a modern story with the odd reference to the early 20th Century. Again we are looking more to the mark and attitude of the modern golfer. No I did not think much about the article, 3 out of 10 because I liked the photo of the ball

Melvyn

[Matt Vandelac]

I'd have to rate the article a bit higher for the attempt.  The Ross quote is a great one that should have been bold and in quotes.  For Rugge and his cool aide drinking buddies to blow the 'groove thing' by us to pacify is a joke.  Since the balata ball improvements and Taylor Made started the metal woods, I've hit it further and straighter every year.  As a golf pro, I would try to encourage the at least occasional use of a limited flight ball if it was available and let my customers tell me if they like what they've been missing.  I miss bearing down on a 3 or 4 iron into the 440 yard monster par 4! 
(Thinking about that, if I choose to take out a hybrid from there is that o.k.?)
Do all the horses have to be out of the barn before someone notices golfers are declining (in part) because it's too expensive and maybe a little more boring?  Don't get me wrong, the game still and always will be close to the top favorite things for me, but I do notice the extra walk it takes to get to my second shot, and it's in play more often than not, thanks to the huge driver heads and perfect shafts.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Matt

Apparently its called progress, yet those who worship at the feet of technology are responsible for the progressive decline of a game once known in Scotland as Golf.

The shame is that it’s the golfer who is the real loser, instead of controlling technology for the good of the game, it’s used to enhance the performance of the player, who under normal circumstances would never achieve these distances or score. It does not stop there, it encourages the player to switch off his brain and minimises effort or exercise. The very things that have been at the heart of the game of golf for centuries. 

Welcome to progress, the progress of decline, of the great game of golf.

Melvyn   

[Jim_Kennedy]

.

[Mike Sweeney]

I am actually surprised that more golf instructors of very good amateurs don't use old persimmon and my old Wilson Staff (small) clubs as a swing improvement tool. Clearly the old sweet spot was smaller and the golfer really has to concentrate to hit it on the button. Thus the old Hogan quote that he would typically only hit 2-3 pure shots per round.

My 14 year old son has now leaped over me in squash and he is actually the one that grabs the old small wooden racket when he plays me to even things up. Clearly he missed a few strokes on the small wooden racket but the funny thing is, the old small wooden racket has more strings and more give so his front wall game (short game) is much better when he plays with the wooden racket.

Golf's revolution of the last 20 years is not even close to what has gone on in squash. David Tepper and a few other real squash players here could speak more specifically, but the move in squash (especially US squash) from hard to soft ball and from narrow to wide courts has completely changed the game for the better, IMO. Unfortunately to make a court wider in a 100 year old building is always expensive and sometimes impossible depending on the infrastructure of the building.

While the tennis racket has changed, the court has not.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()