Walter Driver/USGA comments

[Matt_Cohn]

Many of you read geoffshackelford.com so this won't be news to you. But the transcript of Walter Driver's answers to some recent questions regarding golf ball regulation were pretty alarming.

http://tinyurl.com/n8cgx

[ForkaB]

You should all know that Walt Driver is a BIG hitter.  Bigger maybe even than the Lama.  He was hitting 300+ yard drives with persimmon heads and steel shafts in the 60's.  No wonder he thinks that things haven't changed.

[Garland Bayley]

You know Tom Paul likes to get on my case when I question the USGA, but after listening to the Enron folks, the mutual fund folks (Putnam, etc.), Arthur Anderson, etc. I can't find any difference between what they sounded like and reading this babble from Walter Davis.

Sorry Tom.

[Craig Sweet]

It should be noted that someone posted at the Shackleford site the "facts" about driving distance since the early 1990's on three tours, and the numbers supported Driver and his comments.

I do not think it is wrong to say that given the strength of many of todays golfers, and the availablitiy of swing monitors to fine tune equipment, that and average increase of 15-20 yards over the last 15 years is unreasonable...and that is what the increase in average driving distance has been.

[Garland Bayley]

Craig,

How do you get your numbers 15-20 over the last 15 years? The "facts" posted, did not cover the full range of years that distance has been on the increase.

[Michael Simes]

I think using the tour average distance to determine whether or not there has been any significant increase is the wrong metric.

If the average on date X is 278 and the average on date Y is 288, there are two ways to reach that number on date Y.  The first is for the exact same players to all hit the ball ten yards further.  The second, and -- before I did research -- I would have thought more likely in this instance, is for there to be more players hitting it the same distance as the longer players, which would push out some of the shorter hitters, and raise the average that way.

Look at Jim Furyk's driving distance numbers from 2003 through 2006.

2006 - 281.9
2005 - 280.0
2004 - 278.5
2003 - 281.3

Very flat.  I would have thought that the increase, based on those numbers (and the fact that most of the tour players have similar patterns between 2003-2006), that it was an influx of big hitters and corresponding change of the sample group that created at least a chunk of the 10 yard increase.  For that reason, I thought that the proper metric would have been to look not at the tour average, but to look at the individual players and check to see the increases in their distance.

But, my research showed that -- at least in this instance -- looking at the tour average gets you to almost exactly the same place.  

If you go back to 2002, the driving distance for virtually every single player in the top 10 was between 10 and 15 yards shorter.  Furyk was at 271.8, a full 9.5 yards shorter than 2003.  Love went from 288.7 to 299.2.   Singh from 285.6 to 301.9.

The worrisome increase was obviously from 2002 to 2003.  Not surprising.  I think that's when the latest generation of ball was released.  Soon, there will be a new generation of ball, and the ball will fly 10 yards further still.  That's what the USGA needs to prevent.  Based on Driver's comments, I'm not sure they will.

[Craig Sweet]

Garland...this is what was posted in a comment to the Shackleford piece:

 "Looking at all three tours for the past 9 seasons is surely a broader and more balanced comparison than looking at a single tour using a single 2002-2006 type of statistic.

Year PGAT EURO NATW AVGE

1998 270.5 267.4 278.5 272.1
1999 272.5 269.7 279.0 273.7
2000 273.2 273.5 279.0 275.2

2001 279.4 280.6 285.3 281.8
2002 279.8 281.9 287.8 283.1
2003 286.6 286.5 292.7 288.6

2004 287.2 287.2 290.9 288.4
2005 288.6 285.2 294.3 289.4
2006 289.6 282.1 287.1 286.3"

Using this data, the average driving distance for all three tours increased 14 yards since 1998....

[Garland Bayley]

Craig,

If you take the premise that throwing in stats from a couple of minor league baseball leagues will help you determine what is going in in the majors, then I guess it would be ok to add the other tours.

And why did the poster choose 9 years? The increase in distance has been going on longer than that.

[Craig Sweet]

Garland, I think many let emotion get the better of them and make outlandish statements...such as Pat Mucci claim that he knows many 55 year olds hitting it 300-350 yards...

Everyone is entitled to believe what they will about this issue, and I base my belief on the "facts" that I have seen, and far less on stories and antedotel evidence. I have never seen any distance stats that show average driving distance jumping from 250 yards to 350 yards (which is what many people actually believe has happened)....

You only have to listen to, or read what the old timers say,that nobody ever worked out when they played the game....to see that getting stronger and fine tuning equipment to match swing speed etc...will give you 20 yards more distance right there...

I just wish if people want to argue this issue that they get some facts regarding distance, look at the physical changes golfers have made, look at maintinence practices (HOC in fairways) and look at the effect swing monitors have had on the game before they jump all over the ball and clubs...

And lastly, Garland, what goes on in the "majors" is a far cry from what is happening at the local golf club.

[Matt_Cohn]

The scary part to me is Driver seems to be saying that the USGA doesn't need to act because distances are flat since 2003, so everything is fine.

Well, distances may be flat since 2003, but not everything is fine.

I wonder if it's possible that the guys really are hitting it further, but as a result they're hitting more 3-woods/hybrids/long irons, too, lowering the averages. I guess if everyone does it once a round that's maybe a 2 yard overall difference in the average. Maybe not.

Still, I don't like where Driver's going with his canned quotes.

[Craig Sweet]

Matt...I think he is saying the sky isn't falling so don't panic and make wild assumptions based on emotion.

[Garland Bayley]

...
And lastly, Garland, what goes on in the "majors" is a far cry from what is happening at the local golf club.

Well, my club wants to spend significant money to do silly things like move a green back 8 yards to gain more distance as we appear to be distancely challenged. Never mind that no one even shoots par in the club championship!

[Mike Benham]

I wonder if it's possible that the guys really are hitting it further, but as a result they're hitting more 3-woods/hybrids/long irons, too, lowering the averages. I guess if everyone does it once a round that's maybe a 2 yard overall difference in the average. Maybe not.

Matt -

The Tour only uses two drives per round to measure distance even though they have the technology to measure all 14 or so.

That is like CBS News using an exit poll to declare the winner 5 minutes after the polls close.

Mike

[Jason Topp]

I think this data is a pretty solid indicator of the distance issue.

2004 (Difference 16.9)  5.       Chris Smith          304.0    100 Steve Elkington    287.1
1999 (Difference 19.1)  5.   Harrison Frazar    290.5   100.Rocco Mediate    271.4
1995 (Difference 17.  5.   Kelly Gibson        280.2   100. Chris Demarco    262.4
1989 (Difference 16.0)  5.   Bill Sander       276.9     100. Jim Benepe    260.9
1980 (Difference 14.9)  5.   Joe Hager       270.4  100. Tom Jones    255.5


The data from tour driving distance stats demonstrates that in the last 25 years, driving distance has increased 30-35 yards, or around 12%.  In general, there has been a consistent 1-2 yard increase per year with spikes in the years of significant technological innovation.  

The gap between a long hitter and a relatively short hitter on the US PGA Tour has been relatively constant at around 17 yards.

A 7000 yard course in 1980 would now need to be around 7800-7900 yards to effectively play the same distance for tour pros of today.  By contrast, during the same time period, an average player's driving distance has only changed marginally.

I also believe that accuracy has increased significantly over this time period.  Dave Pelz had a study (in the Short Game Bible) showing that the average error for a tour player was 6-7 percent measured by the distance away from the target divided by the distance from the shot.  Thus for a 200 yard shot, a tour player would on average miss the target by 12-14 yards.  I believe that current accuracy on iron shots is much higher, probably more in the 5% range.  I doubt that the average player's accuracy has increased at all during this time period.

Thus, to be challenging for the tour pro, target areas need to be narrowed.  A 35 yard wide fairway at the time of Pelz study would now need to be about 25 yards wide to present the same challenge.  Major Championship setups reflect this trend.

 These changes make it extremely difficult for a course to meet the traditional ideal of being a challenging venue for a championship play while still being playable for the average player.  A 7900 yard course with 25 yard wide fairways equates to torture for the average golfer. In fact, a 6500 yard course with 25 yard fairways equates to torture for the average player, unless the rough is kept short enough to essentially be meaningless.

Many options exist for dealing with the issue:

1.  Defend 7000 yard courses more tightly at the greens in tournament play with pin positions and maintenence practices.  

2.  Allow scores to go lower in top events, with the result that tour players will use shorter and shorter clubs into greens.  

3.  Disregard the traditional ideal, create tournament courses and leave the rest of the courses as is.

4.  Reign back equipment. (OGA)

5.  Bifurcate equipment

6.  Maintain wide fairways but have the penalty for being in the wrong part of the fairway increase (Sand Hills).

Each of these options have plusses and minuses.  With the OGA experiment, all have now been tried.  I believe that bifurcation of equipment or reducing ball flight by 10-15% are the most painless options, but I kind of like trying them all and seeing what works the best.  In reality that is what is taking place today.

     

[Jerry Kluger]

It wouldn't be that hard to answer the question of whether there has been a substantial change in whatever number of years.  However, those who are making claims that there has not been such a change would never allow such tests.  For example, take a few touring pros and have them hit 10 drives with today's balls and drivers and 10 with balls and drivers from whenever and compare the results - any bets on the results?  I still believe in play it like baseball - make the pros use drivers with wood heads and steel shafts.

[TEPaul]

"You know Tom Paul likes to get on my case when I question the USGA, but after listening to the Enron folks, the mutual fund folks (Putnam, etc.), Arthur Anderson, etc. I can't find any difference between what they sounded like and reading this babble from Walter Davis.
Sorry Tom."

You should be sorry, Garland, because basically that's nothing much more than a bullshit statement.

Geoff Shackelford is a good old friend of mine at this point (I hope) but he knows as I do that we don't see eye to eye on how best to approach this problem, and we basically never have---which I most certainly do admit is a problem--eg excessive distance in the last decade or so amongst elite players.

Obviously GeoffShac doesn't think the USGA ever intends to do anything about this problem, and I disagree, I think they do and I think they will.

It appears we will just have to wait and see. I hope we don't have to wait too long and I hope they won't disappont me on this because there's little question they've already disappointed Geoff Shackelford, and perhaps quite some time ago---and the fact is he isn't alone at all on this point.

I've watched the USGA very carefully on a number of issues for many years now and the fact is they usually act a number of years after some think they should on various things but they do act in their own good time, and I, for one, believe there are legitimate reasons for that which most on here don't seem to care about or appreciate.

But one thing is for sure---eg this issue and definition of what constitutes a 'significant distance increase' (which they have said will initiate their response and action) is getting to be the "$64,000 question".  

[Patrick_Mucci]

Garland, I think many let emotion get the better of them and make outlandish statements...such as Pat Mucci claim that he knows many 55 year olds hitting it 300-350 yards...[size=4x]

Craig,

And, you should learn to tell the truth.

I never quantified the number by saying MANY, that's your disengenuous attempt to deny the facts, and the existance of a distance problem.

If you're going to reference my comments or my position, try to be HONEST about it.[/color][/size]

[Bob_Huntley]

Pat,

You are right. I saw Mike Austin when he was much older than 55, hitting shots of 300 yards plus with a 43 inch persimmon headed driver. However, he was a one off. Today  they can be found just about anywhere.

Bob

[Geoff_Shackelford]

In May, 2002, the USGA issued a Joint Statement of Principles declaring that any significant increase in distance from the point forward would likely result in action.

Mr. Driver is currently saying that distance increases have flatlined the last three years. Fine. True. However, this is 2006, which, minus three years, equals 2003. So I naturally look to the 2002 PGA Tour Driving Distance average as a barometer because the USGA looks to the same number. The 2002 number is 279 something, nearly 10 yards shorter than the current average. The alarming jump from 1999-2002 was in the 7-yard neighborhood I believe.

Tom Paul has long believed that the USGA will come to their senses and he has always pointed to the Joint Statement as a sign of their determination to do the right thing. In the ESPN.com chat, however, Mr. Driver appears to be translating the Statement in a most interesting, and I believe, duplicitous manner, by selecting the last three years and ignoring the fourth year, which happens to be the "benchmark" (David Fay) year.

[Phil_the_Author]

Tom, you wrote something that caused me to look at this issue a bit differently. You stated, "which I most certainly do admit is a problem--eg excessive distance in the last decade or so amongst elite players."

Let's consider for a moment that your statement is true, wouldn't it be advisable to do a scientific study on "the elite players" to gain an understanding of why THEY have made such a large distance jump and why the average player hasn't?

Not just stating ideas such as, the ball is livelier or the shafts are more dynamic and impart more energy, because answers like these are vague guesses when there is no factual data that proves an assertion true.

Areas such as workout routines, body fat and muscle mass measurements, body flexibility values, etc... to explain why these young and old men can do what the average are unable to.

Maybe it is time that we stepped back from the precipice of technological advances as the explanation of all that is wrong with the game and instead define how lifestyle changes among the elite from those practiced by their predecessors allow them to take advantage of better technology.

Just a different thought that I'd love to hear some comments on...

[DMoriarty]

Craig Sweet,

It seems to me that you and others insist on ignoring overwhelming facts, and instead repeatedly rely on unsupported anecdote.    

Or maybe I am mistaken.  Let's compare facts and see.  You said:

You only have to listen to, or read what the old timers say,that nobody ever worked out when they played the game....to see that getting stronger and fine tuning equipment to match swing speed etc...will give you 20 yards more distance right there...

These are your facts???  This is exactly the type of anecdote and storytelling you ridicule immediately prior.

Here are the first of my facts, the Top 75 Average Driving Distance Increases, 2003 season averages minus 2002 season averages.

Ernie Els                21.9
Jose Coceres   19.6
Retief Goosen   19.6
Phil Mickelson   17.2
Andrew Magee   16.4
Vijay Singh   16.3
Mike Sposa   13.8
Chad Campbell   13.1
Billy Mayfair   13.1
Neal Lancaster   12.7
Tommy Armour III   12.3
Craig Perks   12.2
Joe Durant   11.9
Esteban Toledo   11.8
K.J. Choi                11.6
Davis Love III   11.5
Peter Lonard   11.4
Brent Geiberger   11.0
Woody Austin   10.9
Corey Pavin   10.8
Heath Slocum   10.6
Sergio Garcia   10.4
Brenden Pappas   10.2
Briny Baird   10.0
Jonathan Kaye   9.8
David Toms   9.6
Jay Williamson   9.5
Jerry Kelly   9.5
Jim Furyk                9.5
Tom Pernice, Jr.   9.2
Craig Barlow   9.2
Mike Weir                9.2
Scott McCarron   9.1
Kent Jones   8.8
Kenny Perry   8.7
Skip Kendall   8.7
Brian Bateman   8.6
Stewart Cink   8.4
Steve Lowery   8.3
Garrett Willis   8.3
Glen Day                8.3
Harrison Frazar   8.2
Dan Forsman   8.2
Hal Sutton   8.2
Jeff Brehaut   8.1
Robert Allenby   8.1
Ian Leggatt   7.9
Jeff Sluman   7.7
David Frost   7.7
Brad Elder   7.5
John Daly                7.5
Nick Price   7.4
Greg Chalmers   7.4
Brett Quigley   7.3
Carlos Franco   7.3
Jay Don Blake   7.2
Cameron Beckman   7.2
Paul Azinger   7.2
Pat Perez                7.0
Scott Verplank   7.0
Brad Faxon   7.0
Brian Henninger   7.0
David Gossett   6.9
Brandt Jobe   6.9
Kirk Triplett   6.8
Paul Stankowski   6.8
Chris Riley   6.6
Pat Bates   6.5
Kenneth Staton   6.3
Tiger Woods   6.2
John Riegger   6.1
Olin Browne   6.1
Jay Haas                5.9
Brian Gay                5.8
Carl Paulson   5.7

So how do your facts jibe with mine?  
-- Exercise?  Some fantastic exersize program which all these pros suddenly discovered in the short off-season between 2002 and 2003??
-- Fine Tuning the Equipment?   A revolution in fine tuning in December 2002?  
-- Maintenance Practices?  Did superindentants suddenly start cementing fairways between these two seasons?  

Fact is, your tired anecdotes dont even come close to explaining the facts.  

Fact is, all the facts are against your untenable position.  

Or maybe I am wrong . . . Do any of your "facts" prove me wrong?

I just wish if people want to argue this issue that they get some facts regarding distance. . .

I agree.  So where are your facts??

[Matt_Cohn]

Mis-hits go a lot further than they did even a couple of years ago thanks to all of the 460cc heads.

Do any of the USGA distance tests account for off-center hits? Or are only solid shots tested?

Does anyone have data on solid shots v. mis-hits, or just an overall average?

[TEPaul]

Phii Young:

When it comes to who 'elite players' are who have appeared to benefit from a distance spike in the last decade or so I'd say they are good players who have consistent swing speeds around 105mph and above.

Is this also (a consistent swing speed of 105mph and above) a result of better conditioning? I hardly think so as I do see a number of players I've known for years who are in no better condition now than when they were younger even if their swing speed appears to have remained consistent.

So, in my opinion, it really isn't that factor at all.

What's happened that has created most of this distance spike, in my opinion, since I see so many elite players (swing speeds of 105mph and above) all the time in officiating, is that the lower spin rate balls they are all using now compared to the far higher spin rate balls they virtually all used a decade and more ago fly so much higher in a general sense (trajectory) than the balls they used to use.

What has happened here amongst high swing speed players is that the trajectory of particularly their drivers has changed immensely in the last decade.

A decade and more ago a high swing speed player using a high spin rate ball had a trajectory, particularly with his driver, that started out low and flat for maybe a hundred yards or so and then climbed into the air like a Lear jet. That trajectory basically doesn't exist anymore---eg I haven't seen it in about ten years amongst high swing speed players. The new trajectory amongst these players is where the golf ball launches very high off the face and stays high.

I'm told by the Tech Center that a trajectory like that compared to the old trajectory might gain a high swing speed player app 25-30 yards more carry distance compared to the old high spin rate balls hit at the same swing speed.

That should give you some idea why there has been a distance spike, amongst high swing speed players in app the last decade.

But there appears to be more to it than that such as what it is exactly that disallows lower swing speed players from generating that really high trajectory with lower spin rate balls (the same kind that the elite players use)?

There seem to be legitimate answers now to that question and a few others.

Later...

[TEPaul]

As for the 2002 R&A/USGA Joint Statement of Principles and Walter Driver's interpretations of parts of it such as the contention that he might be misinterpreting it somehow, I'd say that probably isn't very likely, particularly since it seems to be fairly common knowledge that essentially Walter Driver wrote that 2002 R&A/USGA Joint Statement of Principles.

Nevertheless, even if that were so, the question of what precisely the USGA (or R&A) view as 'a significant increase in distance' which is wording contained in that Joint Statement has to date gone unanswered.

Do they have some number in mind that they for some reason aren't admitting to right now? That really is the "$64,000 question", isn't it?

Personally, I think so, but believe me noone within or without the USGA has attempted to confirm that.

What I think that Joint Statement really is intended to do, and to be, is a pretty obvious legal warning to the manufacturers (that can hold up in court in something like future restraint of trade lawsuits) that the R&A/USGA has put them on notice in 2002 that they feel they have the ability to act on distance for any reason at all. Before that Joint Statement of Principles in 2002 nothing like that was ever publicly said before by the USGA, at least not with the basic message of 'for any reason'.

I think the R&A/USGA are basically going to try to control and probably rollback distance perhaps app 25 yards at the elite player level and I think they, and the manufacturers, are going to try to fly the whole thing well under the radar screen. I think the manufacturers have been well aware of this for about four years now.

Some might ask why would they try to fly this whole thing well under the radar screen? How much thought does it really take to figure that one out?  

One also wonders, if this is not true why the USGA has asked the manufacturers to produce prototype golf balls for them (at the USGA's expense) to test that go 25 yards less far and the manufacturers have now complied with that USGA request.

If they both didn't intend to do something about distance then what the hell was that request on the part of the USGA and that compliance on the part of the manufacturers for?  

[Craig Sweet]

Mr. Moriarity...I posted stats from 3 Tours going back to 1998....the average drive on all three tours increased about 15 yards over that span of time.

As for conditioning of todays golfers vs. those of 15-20 yeras ago...are you really going to argue that yesterdays golfers were as conditioned as todays?

And I wonder how old Jack was when he first hit with a swing monitor?