Bear with me as I work through this concept, then let me know if you have had similar experiences.

1.   The vast majority of the technological improvements in golf clubs seem concentrated in the driver.  Drivers are vastly easier to hit for accuracy than they ever have been, while I find most 3 woods and 5 woods, like irons, to be much more similar to what we were using in the recent past, say 10 yrs. ago.

2.   Optimization of clubheads, shafts, and the particular golf ball also focuses mainly on the driver, where the benefits are the highest.

3.   As a result of 1 and 2 above, I now find it somewhat easier to put my driver in play than my 3 wood or 5 wood, even though all three are the same brand and model with frequency-matched shafts.

4.   Consequently, I hit my driver more often than I used to, not so much for the extra distance, but because of the better chance of hitting a fairway, or only missing by a little.

5.   Distance then becomes a RESULT of the process above, rather than the primary reason for the selection of the driver.  If I could hit my 3-wood in play 30% more often than my driver, I would accept a 20% distance reduction, but I am no more accurate with my 3 wood, and it seems easier to “groove” my swing if I am hitting only one club most of the time on tee shots.

Which leads me to three questions:

1.   Have any of you experienced the same thing, or am I the Lone Ranger on this?

2.   Would the same concept hold true on the Tour?  Would a Tour player select his/her 460 cc driver more often, regardless of GCA features, not so much to gain extra distance over the 3-wood, but because they are at least as accurate now as a 3-wood, with extra distance becoming a desirable by-product?

3.   Do we err in looking at club selection by the pros, assuming that they hit driver because they don’t care at all about accuracy, when in fact the opposite is true, and they realize better than most of us just how accurate modern drivers really are?  (Remember, we only know the % of fairways they DO hit, and NOT what the % would be if they had hit another club!)

I’m not trying to start yet another golf ball/distance thread, I promise.  I just had this on my mind after playing Sunday afternoon and reflecting on that and other recent rounds.  It makes me wonder, though, about the extent to which these things are figuring into the USGA’s considerations of what to do next.

I often feel more confident putting my driver in play rather than my 3 or 7 wood, particularly when I am playing poorly, thus, I only really use them off the tee when a driver brings risk from hitting the ball too far.

Nothing sucks worse than trying to do the right thing and put a fairway wood in play and then hitting it into trouble 50 yards farther back than where you would have been if you hit the driver into trouble.

I agree, this is a very interesting topic.

Until a few years ago, I could never find a driver that I really liked. Once the size hit 460 cm, I've had 3 drivers, and I have liked all 3, and I have hit each new one better than the last.

My progression has been Calloway, Titiliest, and now the Ping 2 which I find the best.

Was your 3-wood an afterthought?  A left-over?  THe days of wood sets are long gone.  Shafts matter, do you have a steel like your irons or a graphite like your driver.  A 3-wood is still a very valuable club, potentially!

3-wood tee shots depend on how well matched your driver is to your 3-wood to your other non-irons and irons, methinks.  How you have picked your 3-wood has an awful lot to do with it.

No, it wasn't an afterthought, and that's what really made me think of this.  I have been hitting my current driver great, but NOT the 3 or 5 woods that I had (different brand, similar shaft).  Recently, I got the 3 and 5 of the same line as my driver, and even frequency matched the identical shaft.  I still find it much easier to hit the driver, which surprised me, despite the fact that I really like this 3 and 5 a lot.  

My three and five ARE still valuable, but only from the fairway OR if the driver will go too far.  That was my point; if accuracy is what matters, then driver is the club!  

If that is at least partially true on the Tour, then maybe we've been looking at "Flog" all wrong; those guys may be actually opting for accuracy, with distance as a very nice side benefit, rather than opting for distance and sacrificing accuracy.  If THAT'S true, then does that account for the USGA being slower to attack the ball, and seeming to instead be focusing on things like MOI?

Why don't they make fairway woods with large heads but higher lofts i.e. a 3 wood with 15 degrees of loft and a 350 cc head?  Is it because they would be too hard to hit when you don't have the ball teed up?

Why don't they make fairway woods with large heads but higher lofts i.e. a 3 wood with 15 degrees of loft and a 350 cc head?  Is it because they would be too hard to hit when you don't have the ball teed up?

That's exactly why; the sweetspot on a clubhead that size is too high on the face.  Remember how often players hit Big Berthas off the deck?  Who hits a current generation driver off the ground?  So the 3 wood is still very valuable; just much less so off the tee than we all remember.  

Judging from all these other responses I need a different driver...or something at least. I generally feel like I am a pretty good iron player, but I have a hard time getting the ball in play to begin with. My 3-wood is better than the driver, but even that's no guarantee. I hit a lot of good ones, but the bad ones aren't usually even close to the fairway.

Unfortunately...I'm guessing it has more to do with my swing than the clubs!

James,
   Thanks...I think you're probably right, at least to a point. Some of it is just my approach is lacking sometimes...I'm a good iron player because I don't care how far it goes, I try to hit whatever club and shot the situation calls for. There's not much I won't try.
    However, put me on the tee, and the big dog in my hands, and its grip it and rip it, which usually gets me clearing out about the time I start my downswing. I hit just enough really good ones to think I can do it every time, which maybe because of my swing or the shaft or both doesn't work. When I hit a 3-wood or something shorter for position, I take a better approach and have better luck. I agree it is worth getting it looked at this winter, I'd like to pretend its not my swing!

I have more fun hitting my circa 1870 spoon 190 yds occasionally than my modern driver 290 yds consistantly.
...my bigger problem is finding someone to play with.

Great post, AG

I replied earlier, but I think that Dan Kelly, Pat Mucci, et. al stole my post from cyber space.....

I replaced my 1-iron this summer with a 17 degree hybrid thingie which goes almost as far as my 3-wood, but is much more consistently accurate (as well as more versatile).  The driver I can throttle down, if necessary as well as hit off the deck (throttling UP is the only remaining problem....).  So....

Sayonara 3-wood!

But, what's next?  A hybrid thingie to replace the 3-iron, or some new wedge (I now carry 3)?

Inquiring minds want to know!

AGCrockett,

I think I control the ball better with the driver.

I can hit it low or high with a much greater degree of consistancy, and I feel that I can hit it straighter, and that I don't have to press for distance.

Patrick,
Given what you say here (which I find to be true for myself as well), do you agree that there is a possibility that the Tour guys are doing what we are, and accuracy is their goal, with distance as a side benefit, albeit a highly desirable one?  Would you then rather see the USGA change the ball or the driver as a remedy to too much distance?  Could there be an answer in finding a way to make the driver less accurate instead of the ball shorter?

I'm not trying to hook you into another ball/distance discussion here, I promise!  All of this has just occurred to me, and I am very, very curious about this avenue of approaching distance.

Which leads me to three questions:

1.   Have any of you experienced the same thing, or am I the Lone Ranger on this?

2.   Would the same concept hold true on the Tour?  Would a Tour player select his/her 460 cc driver more often, regardless of GCA features, not so much to gain extra distance over the 3-wood, but because they are at least as accurate now as a 3-wood, with extra distance becoming a desirable by-product?

3.   Do we err in looking at club selection by the pros, assuming that they hit driver because they don’t care at all about accuracy, when in fact the opposite is true, and they realize better than most of us just how accurate modern drivers really are?  (Remember, we only know the % of fairways they DO hit, and NOT what the % would be if they had hit another club!)

It certainly seems you are not alone in this observation A.G., good thread.

I'll try to answer your question 2 and 3 to my best.

2) I would say no, they are not as accurate with their drivers as their three woods. My reasoning is (other than observation) that they practice with their three woods a hell of alot more than we do so they don't have the lack of comfort issue when they "should" hit it. I also say no because the chief proponent of "flogging" said ...the rough at 125 is better than the fairway at 160 every time... or some such thing. To me that makes it a maintenance issue. Let the greens get a little brown and they will change their tune.

3) I think it's that they are pretty sure they can keep their drivers between the tree lines so that they will have the opportunity to reach the green with their next and that's all they need for the reasons stated in #2.

AG
I think the main reason why so many who have replied feel their drivers are more accurate than their 3 woods is because they aren't swinging out of their shoes anymore to get repectable distance.
The Pro is more likely to swing out of his shoes. MOI becomes more pertinent at faster swing speeds, it matters a whole lot less at 90mph than it does at 120.

Yes, but wouldn't the converse of this be that if, in the past, I would have chosen a lesser club (3 wood, 5 wood) over the driver for accuracy, then distance by definition would not have been my main aim, and I wouldn't have been swinging out of my shoes?  I'm now opting for the driver because I want accuracy, regardless of how hard I swing, which is not the way things have always been.

MOI mattering more at higher swing speeds makes a lot of sense to me, and may be why the USGA seems to be turning in that direction, and paying less attention to the ball.  In other words, make the driver less accurate for the long-hitters, and reduce distance by making the club of choice shorter.