[Erik J. Barzeski]

Some fascinating comments from Patrick Cantlay recently regarding distance...

Your bar for "fascinating" is seemingly very low.

[Jeff_Brauer]

On another thread we have another professional golfer getting slaughtered for being selfish. So do we do the same with Cantlay for selfishly wanting the ball restricted so he, a professional golfer, can play Cypress Point "the way the designer designed the course to be played" irrespective that it would turn it into a slog for the majority of us ?


Niall


ps. if he truly wanted to play it the way the architect anticipated it would be played should he not just go and buy some equipment from the 1920's ? I'm sure some of you hickory enthusiasts could help him out 

My guess is that even 1950s through maybe 1980's clubs and balls would work almost as well.  While there was some distance progress, I believe it accelerated the most around 1997 with the intro of the ProV.


But your is an interesting discussion.  Rather than spend millions on extending courses, or even rolling back all ball and club tech, why not just manufacture (or save from closets) a variety of clubs and balls.  In essence, it's the implement equivalent to forward and back tees in course design, no?  I'm sure the molds for many of those old clubs are still out there, maybe in use for starter sets, etc.  And, longer hitters could just use the Noodle or some other soft ball that would not go as far.


Maybe some creative tournament would be played with old clubs and balls, or maybe have all 4 days played with different equipment for variety?  Yes, most pros would hate it, and you might get the bottom 100 players who would still play for the check, but would that be any different than some other silly season events, like Father-Son, PGA-LPGA, Skins game, etc.?  To me, that would seem interesting to most golf watchers at least once a year.

[Thomas Dai]

Thanks for posting this Matthew.
As an aside worth mentioning Tiger comment in an TV discussion with Nantes/Faldo last week about the driver head size and the distance issue  “Add spin to the golf ball. That’s a way to shorten it up as well.”.
Just repeating a great players words.
Make of them what you wish.
As for now it seems that golfers as a collective specie will go on spending more money on equipment that makes the ball go further while also carrying on spending more money on making golf courses longer.
Atb

[Niall C]

A great player who more than anyone benefitted from advances in technology and now that his competitive career is basically over he's "repenting". Do me a favour. Give him a set of hickories and tell him to join Patrick Cantlay on the first tee and leave the rest of us to enjoy the feeling of being able to get the ball airborne and a decent distance.


Anyway, this Rollback Alliance, have you managed to agree amongst yourselves yet as to what era you're going to go back to ? 


Niall

[Erik J. Barzeski]

A great player who more than anyone benefitted from advances in technology and now that his competitive career is basically over he's "repenting".

Tiger?

The opposite is more true.

[Niall C]

Two ways of looking at it;


Financially - there really can't be many who earned more for promoting new equipment


Playing - the difference between the tiger and the rabbit is probably wider now than it has ever been and a lot of that is to do with equipment. Given Tiger was at the top for for so long how could he not have benefitted more than any ?


Niall

[Kalen Braley]

Two ways of looking at it;

Financially - there really can't be many who earned more for promoting new equipment

Playing - the difference between the tiger and the rabbit is probably wider now than it has ever been and a lot of that is to do with equipment. Given Tiger was at the top for for so long how could he not have benefitted more than any ?

Niall

Niall,

I don't think Tiger's primary advantage was length off the tee, even if it was one for most of his career.

His primary advantage was being absolutely clutch, and no moment being too big for him.  He just flat out hit great shots when it mattered the most, (with every club in the bag), and almost never came back to the field when he had a lead.  Ernie Els was certainly not alone in feeling intimidated every time he teed it up against him, even if one of the few to admit it. In his prime a Tiger stare down was all that was needed to make most fold like a cheap suit.

[Tim Gavrich]

If drivers heads had been capped at 300cc all these years, Tiger could have won 20+ majors. All any observant golfer need do is look back at the '97 Masters to see how the equipment of that era enabled him to parlay his superiority with irons/wedges/putter with his power off the tee.


Tiger became a less extraordinary driver of the golf ball as heads swelled because it takes less skill to hit a 460cc driver far and straight than it does to do the same with a 275cc driver. We don't need data to know that's true.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Playing - the difference between the tiger and the rabbit is probably wider now than it has ever been and a lot of that is to do with equipment. Given Tiger was at the top for for so long how could he not have benefitted more than any ?

No, the opposite is more true.

I'd die on the hill that you're wrong here. Because you are.

More forgiving equipment does more to elevate the "B" level players than it ever does to help the A or A+ players.

[Thomas Dai]

Playing - the difference between the tiger and the rabbit is probably wider now than it has ever been and a lot of that is to do with equipment. Given Tiger was at the top for for so long how could he not have benefitted more than any ?

No, the opposite is more true.
I'd die on the hill that you're wrong here. Because you are.
More forgiving equipment does more to elevate the "B" level players than it ever does to help the A or A+ players.

It’s not often I agree with EJB but I do on this aspect.
Atb

[Niall C]

Love it. Perhaps Kalen and Tim can sort out between themselves whether Tiger was a great player because he could hit it a long way or not.


Erik - well since you boldly state you are right then you must be and never mind the facts.


David - if Erik is correct and lesser players are elevated (which I accept by the way, but just not that they are elevated more than the very top guys) then perhaps you can tell us why that is necessarily a bad thing ?


Niall 

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Erik - well since you boldly state you are right then you must be and never mind the facts.

Virtually everyone is on the same side as me, including Jack, Tiger, etc.

And I realize that's a bit of an "appeal to authority," in a way, but here's the main thing: you mentioned "facts" but you haven't shared any facts that back you up. The truth is that if your game is closer to "the best ever," there's not a lot that equipment can help you do. "Game improvement" clubs and technology doesn't do much when your game can't be improved much.

David - if Erik is correct and lesser players are elevated (which I accept by the way, but just not that they are elevated more than the very top guys) then perhaps you can tell us why that is necessarily a bad thing?

Because it's done by equipment, not by the player simply being "better"?

[Kalen Braley]

Love it. Perhaps Kalen and Tim can sort out between themselves whether Tiger was a great player because he could hit it a long way or not.

Erik - well since you boldly state you are right then you must be and never mind the facts.

David - if Erik is correct and lesser players are elevated (which I accept by the way, but just not that they are elevated more than the very top guys) then perhaps you can tell us why that is necessarily a bad thing ?

Niall

Niall,

I think its very common for young players who arrive on tour to have massive advantages in distance.  In the last 10 years, outside of Jordan Spieth, I can't think of another young player who dominated on tour without being very long in general.  So yes Tiger certainly had that.  But it was more of the intangibles that account for his greatness, and perhaps the greatest player to ever tee it up.  His work ethic, unwavering devotion to the game, killer instincts, as well as the aforementioned being clutch, hitting accurate long irons, and performing in very high pressure situations....it all added up to why he was so dominant, just not his length.

For example:
Bryson De Chambeau, crazy long. in his first 6 years on tour: 9 wins, 1 major.  Very very impressive.
Tiger after his first 6 years: 36 wins and 6 majors.  Entirely different animal.

[Garland Bayley]

A great player who more than anyone benefitted from advances in technology and now that his competitive career is basically over he's "repenting".

Tiger?

The opposite is more true.

According to the article in Golf, Tiger did his Tiger slam starting with the solid core ball when no one else had it. That's a pretty big benefit!

[Garland Bayley]

... leave the rest of us to enjoy the feeling of being able to get the ball airborne and a decent distance.

Find yourself a clubfitter that can bend more loft into your clubs.

Anyway, this Rollback Alliance, have you managed to agree amongst yourselves yet as to what era you're going to go back to ? 

i think we should take Tiger up on his suggestion to put more spin in the ball!
Niall

[Garland Bayley]

Playing - the difference between the tiger and the rabbit is probably wider now than it has ever been and a lot of that is to do with equipment. Given Tiger was at the top for for so long how could he not have benefitted more than any ?

No, the opposite is more true.

I'd die on the hill that you're wrong here. Because you are.

More forgiving equipment does more to elevate the "B" level players than it ever does to help the A or A+ players.

Define Tiger and Rabbit players.
Define A and B players. You may very well be talking about different things.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Define A and B players. You may very well be talking about different things.

We're not.

Better equipment did more to help the B players than the A players of the era. By and large, the better the player, the less benefit he got from advances in technology.

Tiger benefited from advances in equipment less than almost everyone else playing the Tour at the time. When you can hit high long irons, hybrids don't really help. When you don't mis-hit the ball, adding a cavity back or "forgiveness" doesn't help you much, etc.

[Ken Moum]

At the bottom,  however, D- players didn't get THAT much help either IMHO.


Shanks, tops, chunks, pulls and giant flares don't really change much with typical game-improvement equipment.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Shanks, tops, chunks, pulls and giant flares don't really change much with typical game-improvement equipment.

And still, this did more to help those players than it ever would have helped Tiger Woods… to the point that it actually would have hindered Tiger Woods:





Of course, those players aren't competing on the PGA Tour, so if we can limit the conversation to just that…

[JMEvensky]

Better equipment did more to help the B players than the A players of the era. By and large, the better the player, the less benefit he got from advances in technology.

Tiger benefited from advances in equipment less than almost everyone else playing the Tour at the time. When you can hit high long irons, hybrids don't really help. When you don't mis-hit the ball, adding a cavity back or "forgiveness" doesn't help you much, etc.

I believe Nick Price has said the same. Perimeter weighted irons closed the gap between good and bad ball strikers.

[Garland Bayley]

Shanks, tops, chunks, pulls and giant flares don't really change much with typical game-improvement equipment.

And still, this did more to help those players than it ever would have helped Tiger Woods… to the point that it actually would have hindered Tiger Woods:





Of course, those players aren't competing on the PGA Tour, so if we can limit the conversation to just that…

You guys have understand that Erik has to sling this particular line of BS, because he is in the business of selling modern golf junk to D- players.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

You guys have understand that Erik has to sling this particular line of BS, because he is in the business of selling modern golf junk to D- players.

I don't sell equipment, Garland.

And from what I hear of your game, you aspire to be a D- player.

[Tim Martin]

Shanks, tops, chunks, pulls and giant flares don't really change much with typical game-improvement equipment.

And still, this did more to help those players than it ever would have helped Tiger Woods… to the point that it actually would have hindered Tiger Woods:





Of course, those players aren't competing on the PGA Tour, so if we can limit the conversation to just that…

You guys have understand that Erik has to sling this particular line of BS, because he is in the business of selling modern golf junk to D- players.

Garland-I thought Erik sold dreams.

[Jim Hoak]

I've always heard that selling modern golf equipment was the perfect business model--selling drugs to addicts.

[jeffwarne]

Playing - the difference between the tiger and the rabbit is probably wider now than it has ever been and a lot of that is to do with equipment. Given Tiger was at the top for for so long how could he not have benefitted more than any ?

No, the opposite is more true.

I'd die on the hill that you're wrong here. Because you are.

More forgiving equipment does more to elevate the "B" level players than it ever does to help the A or A+ players.

Agreed.
The difference between the Tiger and the rabbit is narrower than it has ever been.
Just look at this weeks leaderboard.
Two guys who survived via a 16 for 1 playoff on Tuesday made the cut and one is T-6.
Hitting it long is a skill that many more possess than ever due to many things including equipment.
If everybody starts the hole on average 140 and in, vs. 180 and in, the players are far more likley to bunch up, and it's harder to separate greats from very goods.


With Tiger's previous driving and iron skill, if they were playing old equipment, he'd hit it past you AND put it inside you.
Even as he aged he'd still put his iron inside you if they were all playing from further out, but once it became a wedge contest for many/most, a different breed emerged and changes constantly.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()