Average PGA Tour Driving Distance Genie for 2015 .........

[Jason Thurman]

Kalen, it's obvious that players are longer today than they were 20 years ago. The data bears this out. The introduction of 460cc titanium drivers, the widespread adoption of longer graphite shafts, and the technology of multi-piece balls all contributed to a significant jump in distance between 1995 and 2003, to say nothing of a greater emphasis on player fitness.


The data also shows that distance has been essentially consistent since 2003. The governing bodies regulated ball speed, COR, MOI, and clubhead size, and the results show that the distance explosion has plateaued. It's debatable whether they acted soon enough, and debatable whether the current distance that the ball travels is acceptable. But to suggest that the leveling of the data is largely being driven by players hitting layups off the tee on measured holes, and to act like it's almost impossible to identify a hole where the big boys are going to hit driver, is more than a little silly.


I hear and read complaints all the time about how course management is dead, and that players just bomb it over everything and either find the fairway or gouge it out. Now those same people want us to believe that master tacticians like Dustin Johnson and Bubba Watson are laying back for position on the long par 5s where measurements are taken and thus skewing the numbers. Bullshit. These guys who are great at hitting drivers hit their drivers.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Over the years, I have worked with some pretty good tour pros.  I can recall three (Larry Nelson, Notah Begay and Jim Colbert) who have had me widen the opening on 540 yards par 5 holes so they can run it up with a fw metal.  They did acknowledge that the Greg Norman or Bubba Watson could hit that same, front covered, green with a lofted iron.  But only a limited few are hitting those 600 yard holes easily in two.

The media drive on the PGA Tour is still 289.  The top15 or so top 300 on a regular basis.  Even the college kids, supposed to hit it much longer, not so much.  Working with the University of Illinois golf team (multiple times Big 10 Champ and NCAA runner up a few years ago, and constant contender, they have (had a year ago anyway) 2 out of 10 average over 300, one maybe 310 and the other just barely 300.  The K State golf team ten years ago didn't have a single 300 yard driver.  The NCAA sets up courses at about 7250 most years, to protect the bottom of the field from a very bad day.

For every stat (usually based on seeing the top 10 distance drivers in the world week after week on TV) that says its a huge problem, there are others that do suggest the driving distance has leveled off.

As to Tom Doak's theory that the PGA Tour is finagling the stats to keep the numbers low, I would suggest the opposite - that they like the idea of the players hitting it 300, because lets face it, golf fans love it.

[DMoriarty]

It's hilarious to read these guys who apparently think Bubba Watson and Dustin Johnson only hit drivers once or twice a year and thus skew the statistics dramatically with all their 7-iron layups on the measured holes.

Jason,  Not sure what you think this snarky comment ads to the discussion, but against by better judgment I'll try to address it.

A few years ago (using stats from 2013) I tried to get a handle on how often the longest hitters were hitting drivers on the measured holes by comparing the number of advanced stat, launch monitor readings, which were recorded once per round for drivers presumably on one of the measured holes where players were likely to hit drivers.

Assuming that the advanced driving stats were recorded on one of the two measured holes where players were "likely" to hit drivers, we can get an idea of how often the pros actually hit driver by comparing their number of rounds with their number of advanced stats driver readings.  If the assumptions are correct, then in 2013 Bubba Watson only hit driver 68% of the time on such holes, while Dustin Johnson only driver on 56% of the holes that year. (2013 was the year that Mickelson was experimenting with not using driver, and he appears to only have hit driver on 33% of such holes.)  On average, the top 10 longest drivers seem to have hit driver on only about 2/3 of such holes.  Obviously, this will skew the statistics.

It looks to me like that big hitters are leaving their drivers in the bag more often, even on long holes which were traditionally driver holes. Or at least this seems to have been the case for 2013.  This makes sense to me.  Even on many long holes, if one can hit it 290-300 yards with a three wood, it just doesn't make sense to try and drive it 330-340.

[Jason Thurman]

As to Tom Doak's theory that the PGA Tour is finagling the stats to keep the numbers low, I would suggest the opposite - that they like the idea of the players hitting it 300, because lets face it, golf fans love it.

Bingo. The governing bodies may want to see driving distance level off so that they don't hear complaints from guys like us. But the PGA Tour has tickets and broadcasts to sell, and chicks dig the long ball.

[Kalen Braley]

My counterpoint would be Henrick Stenson.
 
I don't know if he's considered one of the longest guys on Tour, but he just finished off the year by leaving the driver in the bag over the last few tourneys while ALSO still managing to compete at the highest levels against the best players in the world and damn near won the whole enchilada.
 
Once again, if memory serves me correctly he never even hit driver in the entire PGA tour playoffs this year.  Why? Because he didn't have to.  And thats the point...many of these guys don't have to hit driver if they really didn't want to and can still compete at the highest levels.

[Jason Thurman]

Sounds a lot like Tiger circa 2003. There's always a guy or two who lays up more often than others. The presence of guys like Stenson doesn't delegitimize the data unless such players have no parallels in prior years. In a pool this size, those aberrations tend to come out in the wash. If anyone can produce real data showing that players in 2015 lay up more frequently than players in 2003 did, that would be compelling. In the absence of that data, though, the consistency of the numbers speaks loudly.

[Garland Bayley]

...

The people that test B&I and write standards are always catching up.


...

Actually the B&I people were ahead of this with ball spin and optimization, but were unable to get the USGA to write the recommended regs.

[DMoriarty]

Sounds a lot like Tiger circa 2003. There's always a guy or two who lays up more often than others. The presence of guys like Stenson doesn't delegitimize the data unless such players have no parallels in prior years. In a pool this size, those aberrations tend to come out in the wash. If anyone can produce real data showing that players in 2015 lay up more frequently than players in 2003 did, that would be compelling. In the absence of that data, though, the consistency of the numbers speaks loudly.

So your theory is that, in 2003, players like Watson and Johnson were leaving drivers in the bag about 1/3 of the time (using the 2013 stats) on the traditional driver holes? This seems highly unlikely to me. Unfortunately there are no stats of which I am aware to test it either way.    Here are some interesting numbers, though, from an old thread:


Ball speed off the driver increased by 3.5 mph from 2009 through 2013, while driving distance stayed constant. Do the laws of physics no longer apply? Or are more non-drivers being used on the driving distance holes?

Edit:  the average driving distance on the measured holes actually decreased from 2009 to 2013.  So they were generating more ball speed with their drivers, yet on measured holes the balls were not traveling as far. It doesn't add up.  I'd suggest it is because they were hitting fewer drivers on the measured holes.

[john_stiles]

...

The people that test B&I and write standards are always catching up.


...

Actually the B&I people were ahead of this with ball spin and optimization, but were unable to get the USGA to write the recommended regs.

Well.......I meant the USGA people testing B&I and writing standards are always catching up........if it was USGA B&I folks where did they get the golf balls to test their theory....if the USGA is batching up new materials, layering, and doing ANSYS or CFD modeling, sending out batches of polymers for micro-analytical lab analysis,  that would be a new one for me.


It is inevitable that USGA is always lagging behind private company B&I manufacturing.


USGA doesn't make anything.

[Jason Thurman]

Sounds a lot like Tiger circa 2003. There's always a guy or two who lays up more often than others. The presence of guys like Stenson doesn't delegitimize the data unless such players have no parallels in prior years. In a pool this size, those aberrations tend to come out in the wash. If anyone can produce real data showing that players in 2015 lay up more frequently than players in 2003 did, that would be compelling. In the absence of that data, though, the consistency of the numbers speaks loudly.

So your theory is that, in 2003, players like Watson and Johnson were leaving drivers in the bag about 1/3 of the time (using the 2013 stats) on the traditional driver holes?

Nope. My theory is that your guesses about what clubs players were using in 2013 based on your review of the flight patterns of a limited set of tee shots using a limited set of data is far from an actionable or meaningful piece of information. The same can be said for a Photobucket picture of a PowerPoint slide. The driving distance data has shown and continues to show remarkably consistent yardages for measured tee shots since 2003, and there's an absence of real data that gives any reason to doubt that driving distances have largely stagnated in the last 12 years.


In the absence of real, meaningful analysis that compares the clubs players are hitting on the measured holes in 2015 (or even 2013) against the clubs players were hitting on the measured holes in 2003 and that finds a statistically significant difference in the distances that groups of players today hit the ball with their drivers vs. their counterparts 12 years ago, and that can attribute the causation of the difference to technological advancements, I remain nonplussed. But don't let me being a party-pooper stop you from cooking up your own ideas or reviewing more Trackman data. I don't find the arguments convincing, but I'm just one guy. Maybe I'm the golf equivalent of a climate change denier.

[DMoriarty]

The stats to which we have access are limited.  Rather than just spout off, I try to work with what we have. Admittedly my approach isn't for everyone.

The "Photobucket picture of a PowerPoint slide" is a screengrab from a pga telecast listing driver distances using trackman data from the pga tour.  Not sure what stats you would prefer over trackman data from the pga tour.

The rest of the analysis has nothing to do with launch angles or any such thing.  But you know that. You are just using your usual rhetorical flourish to dismiss outright information which you'd rather not address.

[Jim Nugent]

On average, the top 10 longest drivers seem to have hit driver on only about 2/3 of such holes.  Obviously, this will skew the statistics.

Assuming the numbers are accurate, do you have any similar figures from 2003 or so? 

[DMoriarty]

Assuming the numbers are accurate, do you have any similar figures from 2003 or so?

Unfortunately I don't.  The figure was extrapolated by looking at the trackman data (number of "attempts" over number of rounds) for 2013.  I believe that the the pga started using trackman data in 2009.  I don't know that such numbers were tracked in 2003.

[BCrosby]

If accurate, a 3.5+ mph increase in ball speed over four years is HUGE.


Bob

[DMoriarty]

If accurate, a 3.5+ mph increase in ball speed over four years is HUGE.


Bob

Unfortunately, I don't know for sure if it is accurate or not.  Padraig Dooley posted it in March of 2004, but I don't know where he got the information.  (I had thought it was a screen grab from a telecast, but looking at it again I am not so sure.)  Anyway here is the link to when he posted it.
http://www.golfclubatlas.com/forum/index.php/topic,57757.msg1357080.html#msg1357080

[James Brown]

As Tim Gavrich points out, the PGA Tour measures its driving stats on just two holes per round.  Would they really pick holes that require or encourage layups, when they are supposedly trying to measure driving distance?  Barring conspiracy theories, I would think the opposite. 

ETA:  according to a research paper by Rutgers economics prof Douglas Coate, "These holes are selected so that they run in opposite directions to control for wind and selected so that players are likely to select driver."

How long do these holes have to be so that Dustin Johnson will likely hit driver?  How many courses feature two such holes running in opposite directions?

While courses have gotten ridiculously long, I don't think they are nearly long enough to force the longest pros to hit driver.  Conspiracy or not, the stats may reflect this.

I don't know that I would discount this factor so easily.  I think it is clubs hit into the green , not driving distance that drives golf course design.  A modern 6 iron by anyone is still stopping a whole lot easier that Jack's 4 iron in 1965.

[Tom_Doak]

Bingo. The governing bodies may want to see driving distance level off so that they don't hear complaints from guys like us. But the PGA Tour has tickets and broadcasts to sell, and chicks dig the long ball.

The Tour is TOTALLY in bed with the equipment companies in this debate.  Who pays the players a generous annual salary?  Who buys a lot of the ads on PGA TOUR telecasts?  Follow the money, Jason.

[Wayne_Kozun]

no one was hitting 200 yard 6 irons just 15 years ago in normal conditions...not even Tiger.  And now you probably have half the PGA tour field hitting these.

The 6 iron that Tiger hit out of the bunker on 18 at Glen Abbey in 2000 was 216 yards and went over the green.

[Garland Bayley]

...

The people that test B&I and write standards are always catching up.


...

Actually the B&I people were ahead of this with ball spin and optimization, but were unable to get the USGA to write the recommended regs.

Well.......I meant the USGA people testing B&I and writing standards are always catching up........if it was USGA B&I folks where did they get the golf balls to test their theory....if the USGA is batching up new materials, layering, and doing ANSYS or CFD modeling, sending out batches of polymers for micro-analytical lab analysis,  that would be a new one for me.


It is inevitable that USGA is always lagging behind private company B&I manufacturing.


USGA doesn't make anything.

The USGA had TopFlite and other balls that they knew would exceed their standards if optimizations were used. The USGA's head B&I man invented optimization, not the manufacturers. He quit after the USGA would not adopt his recommendations.


All the new ball technology did was provide TopFlite ball performance to the balls the top players would use. So the USGA did not have to make anything!

[A.G._Crockett]

Not to get all factual or anything like that, but the average carry distance for a 6 iron on Tour is 169 yds. 

I have no doubt that there are players that are hitting 6 irons 200 yds, and I have no doubt that there a LOT of players who COULD hit a 6 iron 200 yds if they wanted to.  But the word AVERAGE is a pretty powerful word, I think. 

As others have said, try not to get hung up on the number on the bottom of an iron today vs. 10 years ago or more.  Even comparing degrees of loft isn't perfect, though it's better.  And beyond that, try not to be deceived by what you see the leaders doing on Saturday or Sunday afternoon; as with their putting, their distances are deceptive, even for that one player.

It doesn't seem at all complex to me that distance has leveled off.  There are limitations to what the human body can do, and equipment is now pretty effectively capped.  The gains now are for individual players getting the correct equipment for them and reaching their limits.  Just like nobody has figured out how to hit a baseball 600' or throw it 125 mph, or pole vault 30', or run 100 meters in 7 seconds, nobody is going to figure out how to hit a golf ball 400 yds, either.  In every sport, there comes a point where the improvements are very, very, VERY slight and often serendipitous (eg, Bob Beamon).  Golf is no different.

But keep those conspiracy theories coming!  It's entertaining for the rest of us!

[Joe Zucker]

Not to get all factual or anything like that, but the average carry distance for a 6 iron on Tour is 169 yds. 

AG, what is the source of your 169 yard number?  I certainly agree with you that tour players are capable of hitting their 6 irons at widely varying distances, but 169 on average seems pretty short to me for normal conditions.  Your point on the number on the bottom of the club is a good one to me.  I'm not old enough to comment on life before metal woods, but I've heard a lot of people say that new irons are a full club stronger than irons from 20-30 years ago.


I found some trackman data from 2010 that shows 6 irons with an average carry of 183 yards.  I have no idea if this data is a fair sample that is representative of the tour, but it is another data point to consider.  This stat (or any other) is only one piece of evidence, which should be considered with all others.  Without knowing the lofts of a 6 iron, a fair comparison is tough to get to.





http://www.andrewricegolf.com/andrew-rice-golf/2010/10/trackman-definitive-answers-at-impact-and-more

[Peter Pallotta]

AG - very good post.

I've long had the feeling (just a guess) that the 'limit' when it comes to driver swing speed is and has been relatively 'fixed'. What I mean is, I think there is something about the act and motion of swinging a stick at a ball that has its own built-in limits (just as in the act of hitting mammoth home runs). Folks talk about bigger and better conditioned athletes today, and sure, perhaps in football it's true that we've never before seen, on average, today's remarkable combination of size, speed and strength. But in golf: well, I wish there was a technology to measure driver swing speed only from old film and video. I would love to see what the swing speeds were for, say, Bobby Jones in 1930, Sam Snead in the early 40s, Arnold Palmer in the late 50s, Jack Nicklaus in the mid 60s (you know, around the time he was able to hit that 265 yard 1 iron at Baltustrol, uphill, into the wind), Tom Weiskopf in the 70s, Greg Norman in the 80s, Davis Love in the 90s, and Tiger around 2000.  Very different eras, very different athletes, very different conditioning regimes and notions of being an 'athlete' -- and yet my guess would be that the top speed these golfers were able to generate are not all that different. (Just like I'd venture to guess that, their dissolute lifestyles notwithstanding, Babe Ruth and Mickey Mantle generated as much bat head speed as anyone today.) Needless to say, swing speed is today not synonymous with club head speed or ball speed, as the former is increased by longer, lighter shafts and heads and the latter increased by hot faces -- i.e. the very "technology" that we're discussing.
Peter

[A.G._Crockett]

Not to get all factual or anything like that, but the average carry distance for a 6 iron on Tour is 169 yds. 

AG, what is the source of your 169 yard number?  I certainly agree with you that tour players are capable of hitting their 6 irons at widely varying distances, but 169 on average seems pretty short to me for normal conditions.  Your point on the number on the bottom of the club is a good one to me.  I'm not old enough to comment on life before metal woods, but I've heard a lot of people say that new irons are a full club stronger than irons from 20-30 years ago.


I found some trackman data from 2010 that shows 6 irons with an average carry of 183 yards.  I have no idea if this data is a fair sample that is representative of the tour, but it is another data point to consider.  This stat (or any other) is only one piece of evidence, which should be considered with all others.  Without knowing the lofts of a 6 iron, a fair comparison is tough to get to.





http://www.andrewricegolf.com/andrew-rice-golf/2010/10/trackman-definitive-answers-at-impact-and-more

Joe,
Here's the link.
http://golftips.golfsmith.com/average-yards-per-club-pro-golfer-20585.html

I wish I could find something from 2014, but I just don't care enough to spend the time.  I've got Broadie's book; it may be in there, but I've recently moved and that's among the many parts of my life that's still in a box somewhere.  And I'm perfectly willing to go with the numbers on your table anyway; I have no problem believing a 183 carry number for a 6 iron.  It is important to remember, though, that if the average distance is 183, for every 200 yd carry there is either a 166 yd. carry OR a large number that are slightly shorter; that's just math. 

There is an widespread ethic on this board that believes that current distances are not only a disaster for GCA, but ever-increasing.  I don't believe either of those things, and never have. 

[Joe Zucker]

Not to get all factual or anything like that, but the average carry distance for a 6 iron on Tour is 169 yds. 

There is an widespread ethic on this board that believes that current distances are not only a disaster for GCA, but ever-increasing.  I don't believe either of those things, and never have.

Thanks for posting that link.  It's definitely true that there are still guys out there hitting 169 yard 6 irons.  Zach Johnson winning on what was supposedly a bombers course was a lot of fun to watch.  It's good to see that can still happen from time to time.  The increasing distances pros hit it can be mind boggling, but I can't decide if I should care.


I suppose I care in the way that it's a shame when courses are changed or built with only a few hundred of the best players in the world in mind. But as it relates to me and my experience with GCA, longer pro golfers are inconsequential because 99% of us can't carry the bunkers pros do, so courses remain interesting.  I think Tom Doak said it here or somewhere else, the Tour is in the entertainment business and that's fine by me.  It's fun to watch 330 yard drives.


If tour player distance is not factored in to the equation of a course, longer pros would have no impact on me.  Unfortunately, ensuring a proper 7,200 yard tee is a much higher priority than it should be.  That has hampered modern GCA and probably will continue to.  It's awesome to see guys like Mike Keiser fund courses that are too short for tour events, but perfect for us.

[James Brown]

Tour 6-irons at 169...  Really?


Here are a few other data points on iron distance from the What's in the Bag feature of Golf Digest.


6-iron distances from some 2014-2015 tour players:


David Lingmerth:  190
Jason Kokrak: 206
Brooks Koepka:  195
Hideki Matsuyama:  200
Matt Kuchar:  190
Jonas Blixt:  182
Sergio Garcia:  192
Erik Compton: 188
Miquel Angel Himenjez:  177
Ernie Els:  192
Billy Horshel: 190


Granted, this is self reported info, but it tracks with other data that are available.