Firm and fast as defence against distance

[Josh Stevens]

Bit early in the morning for Americans, but you may have noted old Peter Senior winning the Australian Masters at the age of 56.

Ok it wasn't greatest field in the world, but how does short, fat, old man win against today's youth?

Course is ok without reaching anything remotely resembling architectural heights.  It is narrower than most other sandbelt courses, but not as narrow as it once was, but was very very firm and fast with the entire course cut to fairway height with essentially no rough.  Driver was effectively taken out of the hands of the big hitters as anything even marginally off line scuttled into the scrub.  Adam Scott was one who spent most of the week hacking out of the woods.

Not sure it was great golf, but it was nice to see the kids being completely done in by short grass.

[jeffwarne]

Congratulations to Peter Senior-was great to watch.
Coincidentally booking my first trip down under while I watched


A shame we have to defend against distance though.
Used to think we had governing bodies that did that


No doubt a firm course or a links requires ball control, and it's definitely my favorite kind've golf to watch and play-my only slight quibble is i hate to see driving with a driver not tested as many players simply don't need it on a fast course with modern equipment.(didn't watch enough of the event to comment properly though)

[Josh Stevens]

Or perhaps it is because the average modern tour pro isn't that good with a driver?
I watched Norman around this course in the 80's with a little lump of wood when it was downright ugly off the fairway, and he was simply astounding.

So in that sense firmness and narrowness was the ultimate test of driving skill.

[Adrian_Stiff]

Same thing nearly happened in the 2009 OPEN at Turnberry.


Bring the game back to 6700 yards anyone can win. Take it to 7400 many can't. It is the 580 yard par 5 holes where the big hitters are getting up with irons over 72 holes you can't give the big hitter an eight shot start.

[jeffwarne]

Or perhaps it is because the average modern tour pro isn't that good with a driver?
I watched Norman around this course in the 80's with a little lump of wood when it was downright ugly off the fairway, and he was simply astounding.

So in that sense firmness and narrowness was the ultimate test of driving skill.

Agreed and that was how Norman
separated  himself.If he had chosen irons or fairway woods he would have moved back to the field.
Nowadays there is often nowhere to fit a 330+drive and thats why a Tom Watson can drive theball to the same place whete the younger players fit what are now layups.

Modern length and technology would hurt Norman in his prime as other players would be long enough to keep up with him and at some point  47 yards in vs. 76 yards in isn't worth the risk.

Firm and fast does separate the ballstrikers abd shotmakers though.

[jeffwarne]

Same thing nearly happened in the 2009 OPEN at Turnberry.


Bring the game back to 6700 yards anyone can win. Take it to 7400 many can't. It is the 580 yard par 5 holes where the big hitters are getting up with irons over 72 holes you can't give the big hitter an eight shot start.

Adrian,
Agreed that did happen in 2009,
but I think we can agree that as much fun as that was, modern equipment being ahead of course size made that possible.
Not too many other sports where a 60 year can hold his own against the game's elite in THEIR primes.

I mean why not bottleneck the fairways to 5 feet wide and grow the rough to a foot at 270 and invite the women and all seniors.
At some point it is nice to see who can attempt to control and work a driver not a 3 iron, which is my pet peeve against poorly regulated equipment changing the nature of golf and course demands at the elite level and creating the need for never ending elasticity of courses, not a peeve against firm and fast

[Niall C]

As masterful as Watson was/is at touring a ball round a links course, I don't think Turnberry 2009 was set up to take the driver out the hand of long drivers any more than any other Open I've been to. Watson just played some excellent golf and up until perhaps the last round holed some good putts. At least thats my impression.


Niall

[Sean_A]

Same thing nearly happened in the 2009 OPEN at Turnberry.


Bring the game back to 6700 yards anyone can win. Take it to 7400 many can't. It is the 580 yard par 5 holes where the big hitters are getting up with irons over 72 holes you can't give the big hitter an eight shot start.

Adrian,
Agreed that did happen in 2009,
but I think we can agree that as much fun as that was, modern equipment being ahead of course size made that possible.
Not too many other sports where a 60 year can hold his own against the game's elite in THEIR primes.

I mean why not bottleneck the fairways to 5 feet wide and grow the rough to a foot at 270 and invite the women and all seniors.
At some point it is nice to see who can attempt to control and work a driver not a 3 iron, which is my pet peeve against poorly regulated equipment changing the nature of golf and course demands at the elite level and creating the need for never ending elasticity of courses, not a peeve against firm and fast

Being a a big proponent of USGA mandated fewer clubs (maybe 8 or 9) allowed, which would mean many people would not carry a driver, why do you think it is so important to test the driver?  I never really cared much about which clubs are hit from the tee as a form of "testing" the golfer because I don't think length should be overly emphasized.   


Ciao

[JESII]

That really is a great point Sean...if we're looking to test players ability to judge, adapt and execute why should we be overly concerned about their ability to do so with one particular club?


Too Josh's initial observation...isn't this really the ultimate test of ball control? The ability to make it stop when you want and go when you want. I wish I had seen more than the 5 or 10 minutes I did.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Josh,
 
When you have I&B that inherently make the ball go straighter, it's almost impossible to defend against distance.
 
When guys hit 3-woods further than Nicklaus ever hit his driver, and when guys hit 6-irons 200+ yards, F&F isn't going to defend against anything.
 
Jeff hit the nail on the head, the governing bodies blew it and now it's too late.
 
 

[JESII]

Disagree Pat...how often do we really see firm conditions in TV? At the green end, it's incredibly rare...especially since the Tour can get the fairways to bounce and roll like a parking lot.

When it happens, the guys that can control their ball and their game win almost every time.

Firm and fast IS the only defense!

[Tom_Doak]

Being a a big proponent of USGA mandated fewer clubs (maybe 8 or 9) allowed, which would mean many people would not carry a driver, why do you think it is so important to test the driver?  I never really cared much about which clubs are hit from the tee as a form of "testing" the golfer because I don't think length should be overly emphasized.   

When we all went to that golf architecture summit in St. Andrews a few years ago [where I got to walk the Castle Course], Tom Mackenzie asked the R & A equipment guy about restricting players to 7 clubs to increase skill.  His immediate response, without thinking, was "our friends at the equipment companies wouldn't like selling only half as many clubs."   


In the states the term is "regulatory capture".

[jeffwarne]

I had so many sound arguments as to why testing accuracay AND length is important (rather than just seeing who could hit the fairway at the bottleneck point i,e. recently outdated/out innovated courses being used in many majors)


but since I see Mucci and I agree.....
I will admit I am a moron and concede defeat

[jeffwarne]

Same thing nearly happened in the 2009 OPEN at Turnberry.


Bring the game back to 6700 yards anyone can win. Take it to 7400 many can't. It is the 580 yard par 5 holes where the big hitters are getting up with irons over 72 holes you can't give the big hitter an eight shot start.

Adrian,
Agreed that did happen in 2009,
but I think we can agree that as much fun as that was, modern equipment being ahead of course size made that possible.
Not too many other sports where a 60 year can hold his own against the game's elite in THEIR primes.

I mean why not bottleneck the fairways to 5 feet wide and grow the rough to a foot at 270 and invite the women and all seniors.
At some point it is nice to see who can attempt to control and work a driver not a 3 iron, which is my pet peeve against poorly regulated equipment changing the nature of golf and course demands at the elite level and creating the need for never ending elasticity of courses, not a peeve against firm and fast

Being a a big proponent of USGA mandated fewer clubs (maybe 8 or 9) allowed, which would mean many people would not carry a driver, why do you think it is so important to test the driver?  I never really cared much about which clubs are hit from the tee as a form of "testing" the golfer because I don't think length should be overly emphasized.   


Ciao

Sean,
throughout history, the greatest players have been also the longest hitters
Jones, Snead, Hogan, Palmer, Nicklaus,Norman, Woods,
McIlroy.
I don't think length should be OVER emphasized either, but I do enjoy seeing a great driver such as Norman or Nicklaus separate themselves by hitting driver farther and straighter than another player.
Fairways that consistently run out at 3 iron length for long drivers allow a disproportionate # of players to hit their second shot from the same place and place of the onus of skill separation on the approach shot, short game and putting, thus robbing the bold long straight driver of what I believe should be a distinct advantage, relative to the risk taken.
Simply put, technology has reduced the importance of long straight driving as it can now be done with irons and hybrids and still leave a short iron in many cases on classic major courses.


I'm aware this doesn't affect your game or most others, but I get a lot of enjoyment watching the majors and we can certainly agree they play a different game than before, even if we disagree about how much that matters.

[Jon Wiggett]

Jeff,

were they the longest or just very good with the driver. Okay, Palmer and Woods might have been a bit erratic but the rest were very straight especially as you say Nicklaus and Norman. I would add that Ballesteros and Thomson two other greats of golf were not all that long and certainly Seve was also quite wayward in his heyday. 

[Sean_A]

Jeff


You may as well say you really love the old gas guzzling, carries 6 - sleeps 6 (on the bonnet  ), 8.2 litre Cadillac Eldorado compared to the premium cars of today.  Your obvious solution is to buy the Eldorado, just as its obvious what you should do for your golf. Either way, you certainly ain't gonna see the "great" driving of yesteryear ever again. 

I do think there is plenty of scope for better balanced golf courses which can alllow for less clubs in the bag.  Part of the drama as it were happens off stage (which can open up an entirely new branch of reporting which could lead to interesting discussions on why he chose his clubs) when players will have to decide which clubs to carry....because there is no way a serious golfer is not going to obtain a ton of clubs no matter what the limit is.  Much like Formula drivers deciding on tires before the race, golfers will have to figure a strategy before teeing off on #1 and choose their set accordingly.  Right now, for good golfers, 14 clubs is a ridiculous amount of weapons.  I also think 14 weapons for a decent or poor golfer is a ridiculous amount because they ain't good enough to worry about it.  I want to see shot-making and I believe less clubs is a way to encourage that. 

Ciao

[Adam Lawrence]

Jeff,

were they the longest or just very good with the driver. Okay, Palmer and Woods might have been a bit erratic but the rest were very straight especially as you say Nicklaus and Norman. I would add that Ballesteros and Thomson two other greats of golf were not all that long and certainly Seve was also quite wayward in his heyday.

The Seve I remember could clonk the ball Jon. He was, after all, the first to drive the tenth at the Belfry when it still played 300 yards

[Thomas Dai]

With due deference to how many clubs ought to be allowed, and for what it's worth I'm in Sean's camp on this one, the 15th club, the famous 6-inches between the ear's is usually the key aspect, although any number of players can have a hot week, the week nothing goes wrong, everything goes right, and this includes long, wild hitters with lessor course management skills than some of those named above.

Atb

[jeffwarne]

Jeff,

were they the longest or just very good with the driver. Okay, Palmer and Woods might have been a bit erratic but the rest were very straight especially as you say Nicklaus and Norman. I would add that Ballesteros and Thomson two other greats of golf were not all that long and certainly Seve was also quite wayward in his heyday.

Jon,
Surely you are aware of how long young Jack Nicklaus was, breaking inserts in his driver quite frequently, to say nothing of Greg Norman and Tiger Woods. I watched both of them hit it to places NOBODY had ever been in their prime
Seve was very long and also a very good driver when he was on.
I watched him play MANY rounds where he drove it as long as anyone of the era and controlled the flight incredibly, shaping it powerfully and artfully around corners.
His wildness was highlighted by the fact that even when he was driving it poorly he was able to stay in the hunt and thus visible.
I really miss not having seen Peter Thompson in his prime and he is of course proof that great driving can be achieved without being super long

[jeffwarne]

Jeff


You may as well say you really love the old gas guzzling, carries 6 - sleeps 6 (on the bonnet  ), 8.2 litre Cadillac Eldorado compared to the premium cars of today.  Your obvious solution is to buy the Eldorado, just as its obvious what you should do for your golf. Either way, you certainly ain't gonna see the "great" driving of yesteryear ever again. 

I'd love an El Dorado-you selling?
My '94 Suburban will have to do


I think you're wrong Sean that we won't see the "great driving" of yesteryear, we just see it on a different scale when the players go to modern beasts such as Whistling Straits (Jason Day), Chambers Bay(Dustin Johnson) and Erin Hills.
The only was to test "driving" for Tour players is to reign in equipment (which you think will never happen) or build modern monstrosities built to test modern players, adding a good 1/2 hour to hour per round for those who try to walk them the other 51 weeks of the year.


Playing at firm and fast on classic courses bottlenecked at 270-300 is weather dependent  but when it does happen it's not even a course management test as everyone has it mandated to hit the ball to the same spot. You'd have to be stupid to hit a driver to a spot 350 out littered with pot bunkers or lost ball gunch when a 3 irons gets you a wedge in anyway.
Nicklaus used his prodigious length to great advantage tonot only separate himself when the situation presented, but also to LAY up with his one iron to places others had to hit the riskier driver, but now most can reach these same areas with a long iron, so they all do the same thing.

[Jon Wiggett]

Jeff,

I obviously did not express myself clearly enough. I was making the point that IMO it was their accuracy off the tee rather than their length which was the deciding factor.

Adam,

if memory serves me correctly the 10th at the Belfry for the Hennessey Cup was 275 or 280 ish yards though this is still very impressive. I believe it was at the 306 yard mark when Norman drove the green some years later.

Jon

[jeffwarne]

Jeff,

I obviously did not express myself clearly enough. I was making the point that IMO it was their accuracy off the tee rather than their length which was the deciding factor.

Adam,

if memory serves me correctly the 10th at the Belfry for the Hennessey Cup was 275 or 280 ish yards though this is still very impressive. I believe it was at the 306 yard mark when Norman drove the green some years later.

Jon

Agreed Jon,
Other than later Tiger and later Seve they were were great drivers because of their accuracy combined with power.

[Sean_A]

Jeff


You may as well say you really love the old gas guzzling, carries 6 - sleeps 6 (on the bonnet  ), 8.2 litre Cadillac Eldorado compared to the premium cars of today.  Your obvious solution is to buy the Eldorado, just as its obvious what you should do for your golf. Either way, you certainly ain't gonna see the "great" driving of yesteryear ever again. 

I'd love an El Dorado-you selling?
My '94 Suburban will have to do


I think you're wrong Sean that we won't see the "great driving" of yesteryear, we just see it on a different scale when the players go to modern beasts such as Whistling Straits (Jason Day), Chambers Bay(Dustin Johnson) and Erin Hills.
The only was to test "driving" for Tour players is to reign in equipment (which you think will never happen) or build modern monstrosities built to test modern players, adding a good 1/2 hour to hour per round for those who try to walk them the other 51 weeks of the year.


Playing at firm and fast on classic courses bottlenecked at 270-300 is weather dependent  but when it does happen it's not even a course management test as everyone has it mandated to hit the ball to the same spot. You'd have to be stupid to hit a driver to a spot 350 out littered with pot bunkers or lost ball gunch when a 3 irons gets you a wedge in anyway.
Nicklaus used his prodigious length to great advantage tonot only separate himself when the situation presented, but also to LAY up with his one iron to places others had to hit the riskier driver, but now most can reach these same areas with a long iron, so they all do the same thing.

Jeff

If we see great drivng on a different scale what are you moaning about?  Don't like monstrosties don't play monstrosities. None of it matters much to me because monstrosties are only one kind of bad course that I want to avoid.  Its never been equipment that was the driving force behind bad courses...its always been misguided opinions such as that which thinks driving is the be all and end all of the game    Its a skipping record mentality from as early as the 50s....well before the lastest, most recent, umpteenth...equipment crisis. 

It seems like you are just pining for a lost time more than anything else.  Get over it and you will be much happier 

Ciao

[Patrick_Mucci]

Disagree Pat...how often do we really see firm conditions in TV? At the green end, it's incredibly rare...especially since the Tour can get the fairways to bounce and roll like a parking lot.

When it happens, the guys that can control their ball and their game win almost every time.

Firm and fast IS the only defense!
 
Jim,
 
Firm and fast won't do anything to defend against the PGA Tour Pro.
 
Distance is "the" primary defender.
 
A firm and fast 500 yard par 4 will have them hitting a pitching wedge into the green, and lest you think the ball won't hold the green, then you're talking about goofy golf.
 
And, even then, they'll just land the ball short of the green and let it feed to the hole.
 
Without Mother Nature's consent and participation, F&F is a myth.
 
When's the last time you saw F&F in the Spring in Philadelphia ?
 
Or, at Pine Valley in July and August.
 
The notion that you can prepare a course to paint by number standards is absurd.
 
Actually, it's beyond absurd, it's moronic.
 
Unfortunately, the USGA let the I&B get by them. 
 
If you want to blame someone, Karsten Solheim might be a good start as he put the USGA in a highly defensive position when they didn't have the funds to defend themselvs.

[jeffwarne]

It seems like you are just pining for a lost time more than anything else.  Get over it and you will be much happier 

Ciao

Hope springs eternal.
If the USGA is willing to wrongheadedly attack grooves first, then anchored putters,and now solo golfers, I can hold out hope that anything is possible--like a rational approach to regulating the game.
It's not like they're not subject to reacting to public opinion and willing to intervene-they just need to hear more often what they actually need to address and how to address it.
I'm sure someone told the guy who brought up anchoring he was crazy as well- a movement has to start somewhere nd after all he was dead wrong and still got it through.