Odd grouping of years you have made Dave. Is there a reason you chose 1923 as your starting point, when Sean pointedly said 125 years? Does it have anything to do with availability of stats (or lack of availability) before that time?
I got the numbers from an old magazine article where, if I recall correctly, they were recording actual driving distances of a handful of top players. The 1923 date is mistaken-- it should be 1918. So in the 75 years after 1918, distance increased about 32 yards. I used 1918 because it seemed to me to be one of the only sources for driving distance and one that struck me as probably reliable.
I used 1993 because this seems to be approximately where things really took off.
However you look at it, the jump in the past decade or so has been absolutely extraordinary and unprecedented-- at least since 1918.
Also, who are the 'top golfers'? US pro tour? European pro tour? Leading ams? What are the distances you are you referring to, such as what the leading players hit it in 1923 and 1993 and today.
I used the PGA Tour average driving distances (which I believe is the top 150 players or so.) To be consistent with the previous sample, I should probably have focused only on the best of the best. My guess is that doing so would boost the most recent numbers up near or above the 300 yd mark and further increase the jump we've seen in the last dozen years.
How serious can most people really be about the game being ruined or compromised by too much distance if they themselves insist on using the equipment they accuse of ruining the game? If the game is more fun or challenging or interesting without the newest equipment, then it stands to reason that those who feel that way would play without such equipment. Otherwise, it is only fair to conclude that the chance to win a $2 nassau means more than the fun or challenge or interest, is it not?
This is not a fair conclusion at all.
You are forgetting one important factor and the focus of Patrick's post and this website-- the architecture. The new equipment is not only causing ruinious changes to our great courses, but is also greatly expanding the gap between long hitters and short hitters. Whatever equipment I choose to play with has absolutely nothing to do with this problem, and this is the only problem with which I am concerned.
One need not martyr oneself every Sunday in order to recognize this problem and advocate change.
__________________________
TEPaul said:
If the USGA/R&A comes in with some new I&B rules and regulations soon which judging by the report USGA "Equipment Standards" Committee chairman Jim Vernon just gave at the USGA annual meeting seems fairly likely, and for whatever reason some of the major ball and club manufacturers don't choose to conform this time and a significant slice of the golf public decided to buy that non-conforming equipment anyway, then what would you suggest be done?
Tom,
First, I'd be thrilled if they did something that made a significant difference. I just hope that waiting so long to act hasn't hindered their ability to do so effectively.
Your question assumes that the bulk of the golfing public will be hurt by the changes, and i dont think this is necessarily the case. It is possible for the USGA to bring balance back into the game by pushing hard on the biggest and best, and less so on the little guy. Look at it this way . . . ball technology has disproportionately helped those with extremely high swing speeds; if new rules disproportionately limited these same individuals the game could be brought back into balance without killing the little guy. This approach also gives the manufacturers to focus their technology on the players who need it most.
But assume the USGA impliments rules where everyone's game takes a hit and everyone could be doing better with nonconforming stuff. I still think most avidavid golfers would still play by the rules. Nonetheless, here are a few suggestions of how to help them along . . .
--Make sure Augusta and the PGATour are on board . . . that way the best in the world will still play conforming equipment, equipment manufacturers will likely still manufacture it, and golfers will still want to play what the Tour guys play.
-- Dont allow the use of non-conforming equipment in any tournament at any level of golf. National, regional, and local governing bodies should refuse to sanction any sort of event wher the rules are not followed.
-- Refuse to issue handicaps to those who wont follow the rules.
-- Better yet, forbid the use of non-conforming equipment at your clubs. If they can do it for the cell phone or shorts, then why not cheaters clubs.
-- Refuse to play matches with those who use 'cheater' equipment. Better yet, refuse to play with those using 'cheater' equipment.
-- Boycott companies that sell 'cheater' stuff.
As for those who still want to play the cheater stuff, just ignore them. Some people refuse to play by the USGA rules now, so why should new equipment rules be any different?
There is a point to this question and that point is to try to show again what happened with balls and equipment in the last decade or so and why the regulatory bodies felt it necessary to proceed as they have to do something about it effectively without risking essentially upsetting the whole apple cart in the process.
On this point we will have to disagree. Think of all of the advancements that have been made while the USGA has been trying to figure out what to do. As they let each new advancement go to the public their job became harder and harder. I for one would have liked to have seen them take a stand long ago. After all, it isnt as if noone saw this coming.