The state of the game, 2010-or a caddie shack discussion run wild...

[JMEvensky]

It's not so much a lack of benefit,IMO.It's more that the lesser players haven't gotten the commensurate benefit compared to better players.Technology helps bad players a little but good players a lot more--especially distance off the driver.

Everyone benefits from less clanky off-center hits that perimeter weighting provides.

The conclusion that I'd draw is that golf has always been > 50% chipping and putting and technology hasn't really helped much there.

[Mike Wagner]

Joe,

The problem with the scoring stats is you don't have course lengths.  I would guess the average tour course played 6600-7000 yards in 1980 vs. 7200-7700 now days.

[Pete Lavallee]

Joe,

Don't forget that in the 80's the Tour used the 6-6-6 policy of 6 easy, 6 medium and 6 hard pin locations. Today they just use 18 hard! Pins are also cut closer to the green edge than they were in the 80's; it was unheard of to have the cup 6 feet from the edge of the green in that era. It would seem impossible to compare era's only 20 years apart scoring wise.

[Joe Bentham]

Joe,
The problem with the scoring stats is you don't have course lengths.  I would guess the average tour course played 6600-7000 yards in 1980 vs. 7200-7700 now days.

Mike
Doesn't the fact that they are driving it further account for the added length they are playing?

Joe,
Don't forget that in the 80's the Tour used the 6-6-6 policy of 6 easy, 6 medium and 6 hard pin locations. Today they just use 18 hard! Pins are also cut closer to the green edge than they were in the 80's; it was unheard of to have the cup 6 feet from the edge of the green in that era. It would seem impossible to compare era's only 20 years apart scoring wise.

Pete
how bout the advancements in agronomy?  The green surfaces that the players putt today are consistently perfect.  I don't think you could say the same for the greens on tour even as recently as 1980.  I would say that this fact at least counteracts your easy/medium/hard pin argument.
I'd say that today's players are presented with playing conditions vastly superior to those of yesteryear.  From fairways to bunkers, to the ruff and the greens todays players simply aren't asked to deal with as many variables as those of yesteryear.
 

Joe,
I'd look at those stats another way.

In 1980- the #11 player's scoring avg. would earn him 116th place in 2009.
In 1980- the #3 players scoring avg. would earn him 83rd place in 2009.

That's a sizeable difference.

Not as sizable as Dan Pohl's leading driving distance in 1980 placing him 176th this last year.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Richard,

If COR wasn't an issue below 16 degrees of loft there woudn't be any guidelines.

A titanium driver/graphite shaft is lighter, and larger. It allows the grip it and rip it crowd(everybody who puts one in their hands)  to do so with abandon because much more of the face is usable, and hot, and impossible to miss.

Notice the heights of the balls, there is only one yard separating them, yet there is a 900 RPM difference, a factor of where the weight is located in a persimmon head.

Look at the yardage Campbell got with a balata/persimmon combo and then the mulitlayer/persimmon combo. There is only a 7 yard difference.
Look at the difference between the persimmon/multi and the ti/multi, there's a 37 yard difference. The ball is a small part.

You can't make a persimmon driver work like a new titanium driver.
If it was possible to do so we'd still be hitting them.
If they added the yardage that ti/ball/shaft/reckless abandon adds we'd still be hitting them.

They don't, we're not. End of story, for me at least. I'm not even going to get into the hundreds of people who I've seen gain impressive distance. 


edit: I don't know anyone, period, who hit the ball longer with a persimmon driver. I don't care what you shaft one with and what loft you put on the face, and how much weight transferring you do by corking, etc., persimmon/laminate wood heads are never going to give the kind of consistent performance that titanium can.

[Mike Wagner]

Joe,

That's what I'm saying....added distance from the clubs + longer courses = roughly same scoring average.

If you take today's technology on older set-ups, I promise the scoring average will go down.

[Mac Plumart]

Mike...

I can't see how any rational person would disagree with your comment.  If that is not the case, why are we continuing to lengthen the courses? 

[Richard Choi]

If COR wasn't an issue below 16 degrees of loft there woudn't be any guidelines.

COR could have been an issue before the current limitations were set, but based on the smash factor numbers, I just don't see it. If you have some other data that shows that there is significant difference, I would love to see it. But I have not seen any to indicate that this is a big issue.

As Garland has implied, all substance have COR. It is wrong to say that persimmon does not have COR. It is just a question of how much. And the smash factor number says that difference in COR between the current generation of titanium head and persimmon drivers are negligible.

A titanium driver/graphite shaft is lighter, and larger. It allows the grip it and rip it crowd(everybody who puts one in their hands)  to do so with abandon because much more of the face is usable, and hot, and impossible to miss.

I am afraid you are reading too much into a typical marketing jargon. While it is true that lighter drivers allow you to swing faster, most tour players use heavier (and shorter) shafts and driver heads (they are pretty strong guys). And we are talking about 5 or 6 mph difference, and less if Chad used a longer steel shaft. And I do agree that the shaft makes a significant difference. I am just not convinced that the titanium head does. And the data you are referring to certainly does not.

Notice the heights of the balls, there is only one yard separating them, yet there is a 900 RPM difference, a factor of where the weight is located in a persimmon head.

That could be true. But you have to also remember that a typical driver used by a pro has been customized over many many hours of customization sessions with radar and a team of engineers. For this test, they just grabbed an available persimmon driver and let Chad go. While you many not get the spin to go away completely, but with proper customization, you can get the 900 RPM difference down to 200 or 300.

Look at the yardage Campbell got with a balata/persimmon combo and then the mulitlayer/persimmon combo. There is only a 7 yard difference.
Look at the difference between the persimmon/multi and the ti/multi, there's a 37 yard difference. The ball is a small part.

I think that is because Chad is getting a ton of spin with the multilayer ball. If he got that down you will see more difference. He is know for hitting a low ball and he probably has a natural swing that puts a ton of spin. If you tested it with someone with more upsweep swing (Adam Scott for example), I think you will see a much bigger difference.

This is just one test, not a very scientific one either. It seems like they only put a single data point in the chart and not average. We have no idea how many balls Chad hit in what condition. Adam Scott did a much thorough test hitting many balls and there was only 3 or 4 mph difference in swing speed with about 5% difference in the distance. But he lost a lot (+10%) of distance when hitting with old balatas. Adam actually hit longer with the persimmon and the new ball vs titanium with the old balata.

I have seen other tests where ball plays a much bigger difference. Again, I would refer you to the Smash Factor. Persimmon was able to transfer just as much energy as Titanium, even in this small sample.

You can't make a persimmon driver work like a new titanium driver.

The Smash Factor numbers say otherwise. Again, the real difference between titanium and persimmon is MOI. You will lose much more distance if you hit off-center with persimmon compared to titanium. But if you hitting square, you are not going to see that much difference.

They don't, we're not. End of story, for me at least. I'm not even going to get into the hundreds of people who I've seen gain impressive distance.  

True, but most likely those gains are coming from balls and shafts rather than the driver head, if hitting on the sweetspot. What most people notice with the titanium head is how little distance is lost when hit outside of the sweetspot.

With the pros, the fact that the today's metal heads are much more customizable is probably the main benefit since they hit the sweetspot so consistently.

[Garland Bayley]

...
Robert Garrigus led the pga tour in average driving distance last year at 312 yards, the average for the whole tour was 287.9.  In 1980 Dan Pohl lead the tour with an average of 274.3 which would have made him 176th this last year.
Now I'm curious if Garland thinks that RGarrigus just found the sweet spot that much more then Dan Pohl did or if the difference can be attributed to the advancements in technology?
...

I attribute it mostly to the ball. There were two significant discontinuities in the recent distance gains. The first one occurred after the new ball was introduced, the second one occurred after they learned to optimize equipment for use with the new ball. I believe that additional gains were made by lighter weight (titanium and graphite) allowing more club head speed from the same effort, and a few other reasons. However, these additional factors did not show nearly as significant an increase, and although they may show some effect for tour caliber players, they really do next to nothing for the average golfer (approx 18 hcp). For example, the COR of persimmon is .79 and is limited at .84 for all clubheads. (I know, the reg say .83, but it also allows .01 tolerance, and all the tour players are going to be using .84.) When this change was made as I recall, the research said it made about a 3 yard difference for tour caliber players and almost no difference for the average guy.

[Melvyn Morrow]

Mac

We keep allowing distance and the financial burden of lengthening all our courses, why simply for the sake of a small percentage of players.

It has become the standard format for the modern man. The Few, the very, very few control the life and pleasure of the vast majority. It’s the old divide and rule, throw in a curved ball (I think that’s how you say it over there) and it keeps the debate going by dividing and ruling. Get the ordinary players arguing among themselves taken the spotlight of those really responsible and they have what they want.

In the end it is purely an ego trip for the minute few, who care not a little for the game or the vast majority of players. Power, Money and Dick size is what its all about, it has nothing to do with what golf needs or wants.

In short we do not need long courses if it’s the challenge that players want – you can get that on 5/6000 yard course by controlling the equipment. But as golf does not come into the equation the harm that is being done not to mention the costs to the ordinary players is of no matter to those who would like to be our Masters.

For a change our Governing Bodies have to grow some large balls and take decisions that are good for the game of golf and not their corporate pockets. However, do they think golf is worth all that effort? Perhaps time will tell, but then if we cannot agree on here that does not bode well for the game of golf.

The choice is down to us the ordinary players, we need to speak with one voice for that to happen. You think that is likely in the near future?  If there is a will there is a way.

Melvyn

[Mike Wagner]

Melvyn,

I love your passion...I really do.  I have a question for you:

At what point in history did golf stop evolving?  When did players and manufacturers STOP everything NOT trying to improve what they were using?  In your opinion, what was the optimum club/ball (maybe just a year would suffice here). 

I agree the ball goes too far (actually too straight), and all this nonsense is for a small percentage of players.  However, I am unaware of just about anything in this world the human race doesn't instinctually try to improve upon. 

So capture that moment in golf history for us - your opinion on when improvement should have stopped.

[Jim_Kennedy]

You're putting too much stock in one number you like, the smash factor, while avoiding all the others. Another obvious distinction: there is no way to make a persimmon driver act like a modern titanium driver and no way to get the extra yardage out of it.

I'm sorry Richard, but you and Garland are only seeing what you want to see in the face of much evidence to the contrary. Earlier you were ready to admit that there was a 5% difference in another test, now you dismiss the reality of one that shows a 10% difference.

When you guys look outside and see that it's raining do you turn on the weather channel so a meterologist can confirm that for you?
My guess is..  

  

[Melvyn Morrow]

Mike

Keep evolving but use technology for the good of the game, to try and keep some of the character not to mention spirit within the modern game.

This is about allowing technology to keep running ahead without control. I am for technology but used to improve consistency not to improve the length of a player’s Tee shot. When the equipment improves the performance of the player then the game needs to go Blue Screen with the warning Fatal Error flashing.

I want to play a game based upon my efforts, I would like a little consistency so when I revisit that course I can judge how my game has faired over the year(s) since I last played that course. Today that course could be 6,500 yds, in a few more years unchecked it may be7/7,500 or even close to 8,000 yards. How in hells name is that good for me, the ordinary players or golf – its not and we all know that its just the testosterone flowing that is creating this problem. Distance does not equate to challenge, I believe those distance worshipers who willing pray at that Alter of Distance are more prone to premature ejaculation due to the intense excitement of the first encounter. After 18 they must be exhausted.

Why do other sports retain the size of their playing fields over the last century, tennis, football cricket, the list goes on, but golf and some of our great designs are compromised for the fun of the few and their followers.

Melvyn  

[RSLivingston_III]

Does anyone else think the improvements in consistancy that the new equipment seems to gives you, contributed to the problems in golf? I seem to remember people dialing back shots to make sure they hit fairways and now it seems like everyone whales away at the ball and rarely seem to get into trouble.

[Adam Clayman]

No Ralph, It is the architecture that resulted from the changes in the way the game has been played that has led to the down turn.

Bandon Dunes is a perfect example of that truth. Would it have been so popular if everyone could go to their local course and play corse with the core values at Bandon Dunes resort? The ocean is a drwa but it ain't that big of one. Especially without decent architecture to go with it. Case in point... Sandpiper in Goleta, ca. Trump in LA. Pelican Hill in Newport, Liberty Nat'l in NJ. etc etc etc.

[Garland Bayley]

You're putting too much stock in one number you like, the smash factor, while avoiding all the others. Another obvious distinction: there is no way to make a persimmon driver act like a modern titanium driver and no way to get the extra yardage out of it.

I'm sorry Richard, but you and Garland are only seeing what you want to see in the face of much evidence to the contrary. Earlier you were ready to admit that there was a 5% difference in another test, now you dismiss the reality of one that shows a 10% difference.

When you guys look outside and see that it's raining do you turn on the weather channel so a meterologist can confirm that for you?
My guess is..  

  

Jim,

You remind me of the Dean of Engineering that was desirous of extracting the computer science department from the School of Science so that it could be located in the School of Engineering. He sent a memo to the President of the University that I paraphrase, to protect the innocent or not so innocent as the case may be, as the other university in town just moved their computer science department from the School of Science to the School of Engineering. I see this as indicative of a national trend that will take place. My response to the President was that last night Miss Sweden was chosen as Miss Universe. I see this as indicative of a trend that future Miss Universe contests will be dominated by Sweden.
 

[Richard Choi]

Jim, I am putting "too much stock" in smash factor because that is the ONLY stat in your article that is directly attributable to the driver head. The other factors like swing speed and spin are too much influenced by shaft and ball.

You are the one who insisted that COR was a huge factor, but even the stat you provided does not support it. And we are still waiting on why you believe so.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Even one of the last remaining makers of persimmon heads relaize that Ti has an advantage in many categories, including distance.

I find it telling that they have been calling for Pers vs.Ti testing that is on a equal footing, yet they haven't taken the endeavor on themselves. Any data they produced would either be believed outright, or challenged accordingly. I think they know their product very well, and are happy with their sideline stance.

Why? because they know that persimmon could never approach the performance of titanium in many categories, including size and stabillity through the hitting area.

It's also telling that this same company has tried marrying titanium face plates to persimmon bodies.

When I see titanium drivers with persimmon face plates I'll know you and Richard are onto something. 


Richard,
Same people as above give COR about 5 yards of credit in the distance equation, and go along with the premise that another 3 points, to 86, would add up to another 5 yards.   
 

 

[Richard Choi]

Richard,
Same people as above give COR about 5 yards of credit in the distance equation, and go along with the premise that another 3 points, to 86, would add up to another 5 yards.   

Why would you care what non-conforming driver performance is? I can get another 25 yards with a 60 inch shaft, but what does that matter? Even if there is 5 yards difference between persimmon and titanium based on COR, that is less than 2% difference in distance. Not very significant...

I just don't see why people like Melvyn advocate halting all progress in equipment just to deal with top 2 or 3 hundred players on the planet. There is a very simple solution for keeping shorter courses relevant - just use a special tournament ball that flies less!!! Why do hundreds of million players have to suffer just to appease several hundred? Talk about an overkill...

[Garland Bayley]

... Why do hundreds of million players have to suffer just to appease several hundred? ...

 
How would these hundreds of million players suffer?

[Richard Choi]

How would these hundreds of million players suffer?

Rolling back to balata/gutta, hickory shaft, persimmon head driver would dramatically change the game for worse for less skilled players. The pro may only lose 30 or 40 yards. The high handicapper may lose 60 or 70 average yards.

[Bill_McBride]

How would these hundreds of million players suffer?

Rolling back to balata/gutta, hickory shaft, persimmon head driver would dramatically change the game for worse for less skilled players. The pro may only lose 30 or 40 yards. The high handicapper may lose 60 or 70 average yards.

Who said anything about those kind of rollbacks?  

The only rollback that's needed is the competition ball.  The rest of us aren't helped enough to keep up with added length in courses.

[Jim_Kennedy]

Richard,
I don't care about the COR of a nonconforming driver, but if you read what I wrote you'd see that little tidbit came from the persimmon company, not me (The same guys who put titanium faces on their persimmon woods to increase COR).

The fact remains that huge titanium heads offer performance characteristics that aren't found with persimmon, and even the niche market producers of persimmon heads know this.

[Garland Bayley]

How would these hundreds of million players suffer?

Rolling back to balata/gutta, hickory shaft, persimmon head driver would dramatically change the game for worse for less skilled players. The pro may only lose 30 or 40 yards. The high handicapper may lose 60 or 70 average yards.

I think if you read Melvyn carefully, he is not for rolling back to any of those things. He is for technology that improves consistency and durability. Therefore, an improvement of balata to a ball that does not cut, and is more round, etc. An improvement to metal heads is OK, pushing them to produce COR is not. Steel shafts are fine, and graphite make it easier for old men. I doubt he would object to any of these.

The rollback for the ball would be to return the spin (which is what the USGA is trying to do indirectly) would narrow the difference in distance not increase it.

[Garland Bayley]

...
The fact remains that huge titanium heads offer performance characteristics that aren't found with persimmon, and even the niche market producers of persimmon heads know this.

Link or reference please.