Reflections on "The Open" and is the driver becoming antique.

[Ken Titcume]

Aside from a finish that would defy even the best script writer there are a number of points that have arisen through discussion between myself and friends with regards to what happened at Carnoustie. It worries me greatly that there is a trend for organisers of major tournaments to negate the importance of the driver in the Pro golfer's bag. I once thought this to be the sole domain of US Open courses. My only hope is that The Open will not go down the same path as I have always experienced an air of excitement upon seeing the pros take driver that is never matched by the sight of a one iron. It was quite noticable with the possible exception of the last day at Carnoustie that most of the pro's  used driver very few times and this I feel can be contributed mainly to the penal set up of the course. Surely the driver's place in the bag should be as secure as that of the wedge. I just hope that the driver does not become a museum piece that is brought out of retirement once a year for the Masters.The other common issue that arose was that The Open is the hardest television coverage of all majors to watch. Due possibly to the lack of contrast between fairway and ball the ball is more difficult to see and the camera work and commentary seem to be less than perfect. Not to mention the Brit's passion for following one of the local lads in the early rounds despite the fact that he is as likely to make the cut as I am of dating Elle McPherson. In case of ambiguity let me stress that the chances of that occuring are zero. Hopefully no feathers have been ruffled.

[Tony Dowling]

I agree 100%. A full slash with the driver is  a great part of the game that is sadly going the way of dinosaurs. Part of the problem is that if a pro hits it 250 metres, then holes have to be 450 metres to make him hit a long iron into a par four and how many courses are blessed/cursed with those type holes?Why won't the R&A gear the ball back? That is the obvious fix and it would bring the driver back from extinction. A pro should ideally hit the big stick 10 times a round; right now, it is probably just 4-5. B-o-r-i-n-g.

[Lloyd Bickerton]

Technology has all but replaced the driver.At the President's Cup last year, Ran and I watched Stuart Appleby pull out a Callaway 4 wood plus from the back markers on what is normally the 6th hole on the West Course at Royal Melbourne. The carry is at least 230 metres, albiet downhill, but still a 4 wood!!! MacKenzie would never have believed it as he would have thought the 6th was a driver hole if ever there was one.RM has the widest fairways in Aussieland but the pros hit the driver no more than one third of the time that I saw.Next year's British Open will be better - the driver will be out heaps at St. Andrews. Tiger will win that one, and remember, you heard it here first. RM, Augusta, St. Andrews - the common demoninator? Driver is still possible, great greens, with the end result being excitment.

[George Blunt]

I agree with all the points about the driver, the ball and the British Open Telecast.A possible solution may be a geared back ball that is also orange!  That way we could atleast see 50% of the telecast. (Not even the BBC could miss an orange ball more than 50% of the time.)

[Garland Bayley]

Timely as we will be seeing Carnoustie again this year. Timely as it bemoans the distance the ball is going. Timely as it predicts Tiger winning the 2000 open. Timely as it discusses the driver at the Masters, but misses the mark on where that trend is going. Timely as it discusses the pros at Royal Melbourne where Ran suggested holding the real masters that Bobby Jones had in mind.

So, will we be seeing driver this year at Carnoustie?

[Ken Moum]

So, will we be seeing driver this year at Carnoustie?

I certainly hope so. One would think that the R&A learned its lesson the last time at Car-nasty.

Ken

[Bob Jenkins]

I find it interesting how one could ask if the driver is becoming antique. It is the club (next to the putter) that most of us use most often and you would expect that would result in comfort and more consistency with the driver. Maybe that is different for those who regularly send their driver over 300 yards.

Personally, I feel comfortable with a driver in my hands and cannot fathom how it would be obsolete, unless I could hit a 2 iron 250 yards.

Bob Jenkins

[Ron Farris]

Don't know much about being a Pro and the using the driver.
Have things changed that much since July 21, 1999 when the thread was started?

I just purchase a new Titlest driver this morning.  I bought it off the shelf, took it for nine holes and averaged somewhere between 300 and 320 on my drives.  The carry for me seemed to be around 280-290 and this means that the bunker placement or possibly the tee locations need to be moved on the course.  Job security I guess.  

The driver will not go away, but the 1 Iron is gone.

[Doug Siebert]

The original poster brings up kind of an interesting point in light of where driver technology has gone since he posted it in 1999.

I first started playing as a kid right before metal woods appeared on the scene.  I remember back then the ability to hit a driver well was the mark of an accomplished player.  You see a guy pull out a driver and make reasonably solid contact with it and hit it reasonably straight (at least, without a big slice) you knew he was a real golfer.  It took more skill to hit a driver well than any other club in the bag.

Fast foward to 2007, and the driver is the EASIEST club in the bag to hit.  By far.  There are no longer golfers who can't hit a driver and use a fairway wood or long iron instead, like there used to be when persimmon ruled and even to a lesser extent during the reign of the 200cc steel driver.

So I'm forced to ask whether a tight setup that encourages the pros to leave the driver in the bag is necessarily a bad thing anymore from the standpoint of "taking the driver out of the players' hands"?  I'm not trying to argue that deep rough where your only option is a wedge out and try to get up and down with another wedge is good.  Its not.  But I no longer think that the argument that merely taking the driver away from the pros is bad because the pros need to be tested with the driver is valid.  The driver is not a test of their skill.  Period.  Making them hit a 1 iron would be a much better test of their skill.

[TEPaul]

Doug:

You say the driver is now the easiest club for the pros to hit. I don't think so. They don't hit it any more accurately than they used to, probably less so. They just hit it a lot farther. Matter of the fact, the club that has probably changed the most for the pros is the 3 wood off the tee. They hit that today longer and more accurately than pros hit their drivers 20 years ago. You see these guys today using 3 woods off tees on 450+ par 4s all the time. I don't remember them ever doing that in the past with anything like this regularity.

[Doug Siebert]

If they miss the fairways with their driver now it sure isn't because they mishit the ball.  Mishits can still cause a pro to miss the fairway with an iron, but certainly not with a 460cc driver with its huge sweet spot and MOI values many times that of a persimmon driver or 1 iron.

Pros can still miss the fairway in other ways, of course, but that's because they aren't able to bring the club back to the ball on a square path with the face square to the target.  No technology will ever fix that, or at least I sure as hell hope not!  They've mostly chosen to give up the additional accuracy the modern driver has afforded them in pursuit of additional distance (e.g., Tiger's driver swing where both his feet appear to leave the ground at impact)  But that's because the ball flight (all carry, little roll) makes flogging a smart strategy.

If they had 40 yards less carry and 40 more yards of roll on a given drive, I'll bet you'd see them swinging a bit slower and more in control, and you wouldn't see them being so inaccurate with their drivers, because flogging wouldn't be so smart.  At least not on a longer par 4 where your attempt to get a 9 iron from the fairway leaves you with a 5 iron from the rough if you fail.  Today its pretty close to being a 9 iron either way, so why not grip it and rip it, and hope it stays away from the trees?

[Gary Slatter]

I agree that the new drivers are as easy to hit as the 4 iron was in 1999.  Wild swings, or the anticipation of one, may keep the driver in the bag at Carnoustie for some players. Looking forward to a great Open on a great course, many players seem to have A games this year!

[Wayne_Kozun]

Fast foward to 2007, and the driver is the EASIEST club in the bag to hit.  By far.  There are no longer golfers who can't hit a driver and use a fairway wood or long iron instead, like there used to be when persimmon ruled and even to a lesser extent during the reign of the 200cc steel driver.

If this is true then isn't it strange that the greatest player in the world has a lot more trouble with his driver than any other club in his bag.

[Bill Gayne]

Is the capability of today's tour pros overrated? For example, did the leadership of the ANGC over estimate how good these guys are and unintentionally created a course that was beyond the abilities of even the best?

[JESII]

Doug,


It is my opinion that flogging is a direct result of soft, but perfectly pure, putting surfaces. I don't think it has anything to do with driver technology. If they have no fear of holding the green with that nine-iron out of the rough...or of making the 6 footer for par after recovering from a perfectly maintained short-side bunker...why not FLOG away?

[Garland Bayley]

Fast foward to 2007, and the driver is the EASIEST club in the bag to hit.  By far.  There are no longer golfers who can't hit a driver and use a fairway wood or long iron instead, like there used to be when persimmon ruled and even to a lesser extent during the reign of the 200cc steel driver.

If this is true then isn't it strange that the greatest player in the world has a lot more trouble with his driver than any other club in his bag.

Swing speed!  Played yesterday and hit driver better than any other club in the bag. Of course, I am taking an easy swing with all my clubs to keep them in play. When you get to the controlled violence of Tiger, then the longer the club the more difficult to control.

[Doug Siebert]

Wayne,

Like I said before, the bigger clubhead makes it pretty much impossible for pros to hit mishits big enough to cause them to end up missing the fairway or losing enough distance to really matter.  But it doesn't help Tiger square up the face at impact or have the club moving along the desired target line at impact, which are the things responsible for his missed fairways.  With the longer club and higher swingspeed an error of x degrees that might be OK with a 2 iron carries far enough offline to find trouble.


JES,

I don't mean to dismiss soft greens as a component to flogging.  But greens were soft 10 years ago before flogging, many pros still flog even when greens are very firm.  At least I don't think they are maintained softer today than they were 10 years ago.  If you want to discourage flogging, I think you'd have much greater success making drives have less carry and more roll than you would by making greens harder and a bit shaggier.

[Garland Bayley]

Wayne,

Like I said before, the bigger clubhead makes it pretty much impossible for pros to hit mishits big enough to cause them to end up missing the fairway or losing enough distance to really matter.  But it doesn't help Tiger square up the face at impact or have the club moving along the desired target line at impact, which are the things responsible for his missed fairways.  With the longer club and higher swingspeed an error of x degrees that might be OK with a 2 iron carries far enough offline to find trouble.

...

Your argument sounds like he has the same control over the driver clubface as the 2 iron clubface. I doubt that is true. The longer club results in less control over the clubface.

[Doug Siebert]

Garland,

I didn't mean to imply that he'd have the same error, with the longer clubhead and harder swing with the driver he'd have more error.  But even if the error was identical between driver and 2 iron the 2 iron is more likely to hit the fairway because the target is effectively wider in "degrees of dispersion allowed" since the 2 iron doesn't hit as far.

If you also add in the fact that many courses have had new tees added or bunkers moved to pinch in driver landing areas, the 2 iron will often have more actual width.

Put all these things together and its pretty obvious why Tiger can be crappy with his driver despite it being the easier club in the bag to hit.

[Garland Bayley]

Yes Doug, since the pros basically "hit it on the screws" all the time, the only reason they need the MOI of a big driver is to earn a fat paycheck from the equipment company.

Big MOI makes some difference for the rest of us, and the equipment companies have convinced most that it makes far more difference than it really does.

Take Patrick Mucci (yes please take him, anywhere but here ) for one. He has bought the equipment company line hook, line, and sinker.