[Sam Andrews]

Reading the AAC thread (would love to hear how bad a designer I am btw), I wondered if removing the driver from what was always going to be a pretty short course would make it more interesting to play. I then wondered if the defence of shorter courses the world over was not to push the tees further back or change the ball but to eliminate the driver's main accomplice — the tee peg. Golfers are always exhorted to "play it as it lies", so should we make players simply drop the ball at the teeing ground and accept their lot?

[Jon Wiggett]

Might be an interesting idea in general. The reason for allowing players to tee the ball up on a pile of sand was due to players teeing off very close to the hole and so sparing the putting surface. Would it not be more interesting to do away completely with both the tee peg and the flat teeing ground and instead have a larger area of fairway height grass with the golfer being allowed to drop anywhere within this area.

Jon

[jeffwarne]

Would create more maintenance and the need for much more tee space.
I.e. divots.

In no time manufacturers would figure out where to distribute weight to achieve driver distance.
Game would get WAY harder for mid-high hdcpers

Can you imagine Tiger pouting when he dropped into a divots on the tee.
I think I like it after all

[Thomas Dai]

I've heard the no-tee/very short tee only suggestion put forward by both Peter Thomson and Nick Faldo.

Both ideas have some merit, particularly the short tee only version whilst we still use existing/grass teeing areas. I can foresee a time though, and it might still be a long way off, when pretty much all teeing grounds will be synthetic mats and then there should be no bad lies so 'drop and hit' might be more likely to work.

A cynical question if I may - I wonder which equipment manufacturer will be the first to push for the introduction of such a rule on the basis that golfers will then fork out loads of £$€ to buy their new super-whizzo driver guaranteed to hit the ball miles when hit off no tee?

Atb

[Sam Andrews]

Re: the maintenance issue. Does it not give the opportunity to be more flexible regards the teeing area, moving it around much more to prevent wear and so providing different angles of play?

[BHoover]

No one is stopping you from playing without a tee. But I think it's borderline ridiculous to suggest/think that this is a viable solution. It would make the game harder for higher handicap players and take away a key aspect of the game -- how one plays the driver.

[Joe Hancock]

I carry 7 clubs. My driver is an older Titliest 975J that I hit off the deck quite well. That's why it's in the bag, with a handful of irons, a couple wedges and a putter. I'd guess I can hit the driver about 80% off the deck vs. off a tee. I like my odds if everyone else has to hit their whiffle-bat drivers off the deck.

Let's do this.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Sam,
 
Evidently, you haven't seen the man from down under play golf.
 
I used to support your premise until I played golf with Mr Taylor.
He changed my views.
 
I think that Bill Brightly will concur.

[James Brown]

Would be interesting for clubs to try out a club tournament with no tees to see how it goes.  I have played some of my locals courses with only a 3-wood from the tee just for fun and to change up club selections and it was fun every so often.   But I think this would be bad fo the game as an overall rule,  since it would take some of the fun out of driving. 

[RJ_Daley]

I believe it was RTJjr who wrote an article suggesting this some years ago.  I think it appeared in Golf Coursenagement magazine.   I do like the idea.  I think it would serve as a limit to any more length ever expanding the notion of designing to a concepual turning point down par 4s and 5s.   It used to be 240 from the back tees.  I think that is now something of a conventional 280.  So what if this would stimulate manufactures to re-design the sole weight and sweet spot.  It still seems to me that it sets much more of an upper limit of how much more distance can be designed into a driving club.  The very best on tour may still hit a ball off the deck about 290 to 300.  But, that is a very tiny few and I think this rule would stop them pretty much at that limit.  As to the regular joe high handicapper having a bit harder time to get a ball airborn off the deck... they are not doing all that well with topped shots, skankers, skyballs, 100 yard hooks and slices now.   

[Sam Andrews]

No one is stopping you from playing without a tee. But I think it's borderline ridiculous to suggest/think that this is a viable solution. It would make the game harder for higher handicap players and take away a key aspect of the game -- how one plays the driver.

Sorry Brian, I lit the touch paper and then retired. Surely one of the issues facing golf today is that, unlike in times past, drivers are so much easier to hit off a peg and give such distance that they are a no brainer when one gets to the tee. One of the key aspects of the game, the drive, has little of the fear that was caused by the tiny, persimmon-headed swines in the days of my youth. Playing off the ground might just bring that back.

[jeffwarne]

No one is stopping you from playing without a tee. But I think it's borderline ridiculous to suggest/think that this is a viable solution. It would make the game harder for higher handicap players and take away a key aspect of the game -- how one plays the driver.

Sorry Brian, I lit the touch paper and then retired. Surely one of the issues facing golf today is that, unlike in times past, drivers are so much easier to hit off a peg and give such distance that they are a no brainer when one gets to the tee. One of the key aspects of the game, the drive, has little of the fear that was caused by the tiny, persimmon-headed swines in the days of my youth. Playing off the ground might just bring that back.

In an era where experts are better than ever, and average players are leaving the game for whatever reason,
I don't see why we would adopt a game where experts will continue to excel, manufacturers would reap a windfall with an entire new generation of drivers,the new "Teeless X-Super Hot", and average guys would get VERRRRY frustrated as the gap between them and the elite widened considerably.

Teachers don't call them flight inducers for no reason.
par 3 play would deteriorate considerably for most players.


This is also why I am against the advent recently of such incredibly hyper short cut fairways.
Elite players love it,the rest struggle enormously.

[Thomas Dai]

I carry 7 clubs. My driver is an older Titliest 975J that I hit off the deck quite well. That's why it's in the bag, with a handful of irons, a couple wedges and a putter. I'd guess I can hit the driver about 80% off the deck vs. off a tee. I like my odds if everyone else has to hit their whiffle-bat drivers off the deck.
Let's do this.

I probably play 60% of my golf with only 7-8 clubs. Doesn't seem to make much difference vrs carrying 14. More fun too. And unlike the good 'ol days, when hitting a steel shafted persimmon headed driver off the deck with a decent flight was the hallmark of a really good player, the modern titanium/graphite driver is reasonably playable off the deck.


ab

[David_Tepper]

"the modern titanium/graphite driver is reasonably playable off the deck."

Thomas D. -

I would question that statement for 2 reasons:

1) Most modern drivers now have shafts that are 45" or 46" inches long vs. steel-shaft persimmon drivers that were 43"-44" long. Trying to hit that longer shaft "off the deck" is not easy.

2) I have read that the "sweet spot" on most modern (deep face) drivers is above the center of the clubface. If that is the case, contact with the ball hitting a modern driver "off the deck" would be well below the sweet spot.

The overwhelming majority of handicap golfers would likely hit their modern 3-woods off the deck much better than their drivers because a) the 3-wood shafts are shorter and b) the 3-wood club faces are shallower.

DT 

[jeffwarne]

  The very best on tour may still hit a ball off the deck about 290 to 300.  But, that is a very tiny few and I think this rule would stop them pretty much at that limit.


RJ,
If I had a nickel for evey time I'd heard that (that limit) just in my adult liftetime, well it wouldn't be measured in pocket change





  As to the regular joe high handicapper having a bit harder time to get a ball airborn off the deck... they are not doing all that well with topped shots, skankers, skyballs, 100 yard hooks and slices now.

"a bit harder time"??
The quality of mid-high handicappers tee shots would plummett.The fact that they're not doing well is not an argument to take their tees away

[Doug Siebert]

Terrible idea. Very little effect on the most skilled players, very large effect on the least skilled. The tee shot with the big headed driver is the hacker's best shot at making decent contact until he reaches the green.

[David_Tepper]

50+ years ago, before the days of "open" tennis, the pro tennis circuit experimented by making the player serving the ball stand behind a line that was either a foot (or a foot & 1/2) behind the baseline. The theory was it would make the serve a less dominant shot and would keep (or at least deter) players from rushing the net behind their serves and ending the points so quickly. Suffice it to say the experiment was tried and abandoned quickly.   

[Kalen Braley]

50+ years ago, before the days of "open" tennis, the pro tennis circuit experimented by making the player serving the ball stand behind a line that was either a foot (or a foot & 1/2) behind the baseline. The theory was it would make the serve a less dominant shot and would keep (or at least deter) players from rushing the net behind their serves and ending the points so quickly. Suffice it to say the experiment was tried and abandoned quickly.

David,

I'm not sure how that exactly relates to not using tee pegs.

But ironically that practice did eventually end because of improved racket technology...and more often than not rushing the net works against you now.  I'm sure there is a tennis equviliant site to this one that pines for the good old days before carbon fiber and over-sized rackets that turned allowed players to turn tennis balls into speeding bullets from anywhere on the court.

[Pat Burke]

FWIW
My "safety" shot with driver is a barely teed shot that goes about ass high
and cuts slightly.
Has NO left in it, and if the fairways are firm at all, goes a good distance relatively.


But, back to the OP.  The new heads, especially three woods would overcome this rule
quicker than you might think.  Tour Guys would just hit 11 or 12 degree clubs that would go forever,
and the average golfer would be leaving notes on on houses down  the "slice" sides of holes for all the damage
they cause!

[David_Tepper]

"I'm not sure how that exactly relates to not using tee pegs."

Kalen B. -

Moving the server further from the net was an attempt to negate the impact of a "power shot" on the play of the game, just like reducing the ability of a golfer to drive the ball a great distance by eliminating the tee peg would be an attempt to reduce the impact of a "power shot" in golf.

You are correct that the change in tennis rackets has allowed players in the back court to hit more aggressive shots from the baseline. That has made rushing the net a lower percentage play.

In addition, far more top-level tennis is played on slower bouncing surfaces that it used to be. In the 1940's-50's-60s, players competed on grass courts, a surface the favored serve & volley play, for 10-12 tournaments a year. Now there are basically just two grass courts tournaments a year, Wimbledon and Queen's Club (the week before Wimbledon).

DT
   
P.S. Back in the days when Jack Kramer and Pancho Gonzales played pro tennis, the indoor court they played on was often a sheet of canvas stretched over a basketball court or an ice rink. That was a really fast surface. 
 

[Kalen Braley]

Dave,

Thanks for the clarification. 

I would also agree with Pat in his last post....the result would likely just be pros using drivers that look closer to 3 woods and would still get crazy distance. Even many guys on tour are regularly hitting their 3 woods 280-290....which is nuts to me.

P.S.  I spoke to my tennis buddy who plays a lot and he agrees that the newer rackets has only really affected the pros and top notch amateurs.  Comparable to golf, the average joe hasn't seen much benefit in the oversize racket heads other than you can get the racket on more balls.....

[Pete_Pittock]

Some thoughts. Teeing areas on multiple shot holes would likely have to enlarged to disperse divots and multiple practice divots. Different grasses might be incorporated to limit very tight lies. Mowing height Might be slightly raised.
Architects would likely look more closely at the first yards of the hole, as there is more likelihood of foozles. Top shot bunkers would be more in fashion. They would also look at forced carries over water.

One might run out of balls before reaching the first fairway.

[Niall C]

I thought the point of not being able to hit a driver off a tee was that you wouldn't be able to swing as fast and as strongly (therefore less distance), not if you wanted any kind of consistency. I'm talking about average golfers ie. mid single figure h'cappers upwards. I tend to think that what the pro's do is neither here nor there in terms of this discussion, as these guys are so good you could likely make them play with a broom handle and they would still shoot level par.


I tend to agree with the concerns about conditioning. When the Open qualifier was down at Gailes, on one of the short driveable par 4's the pro's largely decided not to risk going for the green but instead decided to take irons off the tee. Being a championship tee it was fairly small and as the result of that one days play it had to be re-turfed. Maybe an extreme example but it would obviously be an issue.


Niall

[Ronald Montesano]

What is the point of making the game harder for everyone? This is akin to "Make America Great Again," as though someone has an enormous blanket that will fix problems that may or may not exist.


If you wish to challenge yourself, get rid of your tees. They mate in your bag, you know, which is why you always have more the next time you play. Gestation period is twelve hours for a baby tee to be born.


When club pros like Jeff Warne talk about how people would leave the game, when people involved in maintenance don't even bother to post, you know it's a bad idea to inflict on the game in general.


Drop and hit as often as you want. You'll instantly turn into a local legend, that dude who hits driver off the deck EVERYWHERE. That would be a great rep to have, you'd doubtless improve through the bag.

[Thomas Dai]

"the modern titanium/graphite driver is reasonably playable off the deck."
Thomas D. -
I would question that statement for 2 reasons:
1) Most modern drivers now have shafts that are 45" or 46" inches long vs. steel-shaft persimmon drivers that were 43"-44" long. Trying to hit that longer shaft "off the deck" is not easy.
2) I have read that the "sweet spot" on most modern (deep face) drivers is above the center of the clubface. If that is the case, contact with the ball hitting a modern driver "off the deck" would be well below the sweet spot.
The overwhelming majority of handicap golfers would likely hit their modern 3-woods off the deck much better than their drivers because a) the 3-wood shafts are shorter and b) the 3-wood club faces are shallower.
DT

1) Hold the driver (any club) at the bottom of the grip and it becomes shorter (and hopefully more controllable!)
2) Even if hit low on the face the driver off the deck will normally skuttle and run and and run and run and run. Great into the wind links shot.


Atb

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()