[John Kavanaugh]

Where is or was this and does it look like a bad thing?

[Garland Bayley]

...I pretty much agree with some of what you have said.  Human evolution, sports science, club fitting and better coaching are responsible for some of the distance increase. ...

Human evolution?
Either you chose the wrong word, or you have no understanding of the scale of "human evolution."

Sports science?
Are you talking about biomechanics? If so, can you site one proven example where tour pro(s) got longer by application of biomechanics?

By club fitting I assume you are referring to what has been called optimization where implements are chosen to gain the most distance by optimizing the ball spin produced. This has worked very well with the new ball. But, how well would it work if spin were returned to the ball in a rollback? For that matter, could these athletes everyone talks about be able to keep the ball in play well enough to compete at a high level with the ball spinning more?

Better coaching?
Tiger changed coaches so often because he got better coaching? Just because there are more coaches enabled by more money in the sport, doesn't mean there is better coaching. Which would you choose, modern day David Ledbetter, or old times Harvey Pennick? Modern day Sean Foley, or old times John Jacobs?

[John Kavanaugh]

Garland,


Have you seen what is happening to NBA rookies? Science is building athletes bigger, faster and more fragile. No doubt the youth movement in golf is also being periodically touched.

[Thomas Dai]

Where is or was this and does it look like a bad thing?

It’s Fraserburgh .... and imo it looks very acceptable.
Atb

[Kalen Braley]

Garland,


Have you seen what is happening to NBA rookies? Science is building athletes bigger, faster and more fragile. No doubt the youth movement in golf is also being periodically touched.

Garland,

John is basically right on this one.  Read an article on ESPN a few weeks ago that goes into the details.

Long of the short?  They're playing far far more basketball these days as they play year round without breaks.  Its not science per se making them more fragile, just old fashioned over use at younger and younger ages..

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/27125793/these-kids-ticking-bombs-threat-youth-basketball

[Garland Bayley]

Garland,


Have you seen what is happening to NBA rookies? Science is building athletes bigger, faster and more fragile. No doubt the youth movement in golf is also being periodically touched.

Garland,

John is basically right on this one.  Read an article on ESPN a few weeks ago that goes into the details.

Long of the short?  They're playing far far more basketball these days as they play year round without breaks.  Its not science per se making them more fragile, just old fashioned over use at younger and younger ages..

https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/27125793/these-kids-ticking-bombs-threat-youth-basketball

And, as Michael Jordan has shown, none of those NBA rookies will ever be able to golf a ball at near the highest level.

[Garland Bayley]

Garland,


Have you seen what is happening to NBA rookies? Science is building athletes bigger, faster and more fragile. No doubt the youth movement in golf is also being periodically touched.

Could you be more specific on what science will build better golfers playing a Titleist balata equivalent performing ball.

Or, am I feeling a significant breeze coming from Indiana?

[JESII]

Golf Digest did an article on Francisco Molinari last winter describing the transition he went through that led to 20+ yards off the tee. It included a physical evaluation to start, then a plan to strengthen his body through strength & flexibility training and then swing technique development to match.


This is from a top 50 caliber player looking to become top 10...and he did.


20+ yards!


I suspect every current top 1,000 player has gone through some version of this with the singular goal of optimizing their swing for distance with enough accuracy to play. Few with the success, or at least immediate return FM realized.

[Kalen Braley]

Golf Digest did an article on Francisco Molinari last winter describing the transition he went through that led to 20+ yards off the tee. It included a physical evaluation to start, then a plan to strengthen his body through strength & flexibility training and then swing technique development to match.

This is from a top 50 caliber player looking to become top 10...and he did.

20+ yards!

I suspect every current top 1,000 player has gone through some version of this with the singular goal of optimizing their swing for distance with enough accuracy to play. Few with the success, or at least immediate return FM realized.

Jim,

You may have to post that article.
He's currently 147 in Driving Distance on tour this year at 288,...
Last year he averaged 301
In 2017 he averaged 291

https://www.pgatour.com/stats/stat.101.html

[Garland Bayley]

Golf Digest did an article on Francisco Molinari last winter describing the transition he went through that led to 20+ yards off the tee. It included a physical evaluation to start, then a plan to strengthen his body through strength & flexibility training and then swing technique development to match.


This is from a top 50 caliber player looking to become top 10...and he did.


20+ yards!


I suspect every current top 1,000 player has gone through some version of this with the singular goal of optimizing their swing for distance with enough accuracy to play. Few with the success, or at least immediate return FM realized.

So what! Even I could get Kalen 20+ yards with a little work. And, he wouldn't even have to give up his ancient Big Bertha.

[JESII]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.golfdigest.com/story/how-francesco-molinari-picked-up-20-yards-off-the-tee-and-still-hits-it-straight/amp

[Kalen Braley]

Thanks Jim,

That makes sense. He did it from 2015 to 2018

"When asked to explain how he has picked up 20 yards with the driver over the past three seasons on the PGA Tour—yet, still puts it on the fairway—Francesco Molinari says, “I took the brakes off.”

Although it would seem he's regressed quite a bit this year....

P.S.  Garland the old Big Bertha is gone, i've got a TaylorMade now, but still suck!

[Mark_F]

Human evolution?
Either you chose the wrong word, or you have no understanding of the scale of "human evolution."

I'm using it in both senses of the term, although one of them, yes, isn't strictly correct.  Well done you.

Sports science?

Are you talking about biomechanics? If so, can you site one proven example where tour pro(s) got longer by application of biomechanics?

I am talking "sports science", since that is the term I used.  It covers a lot of ground.

But, how well would it work if spin were returned to the ball in a rollback? For that matter, could these athletes everyone talks about be able to keep the ball in play well enough to compete at a high level with the ball spinning more?

Who knows. It's a hypothetical, much like Matthew's citation of the spinning ball.

Better coaching?Tiger changed coaches so often because he got better coaching?

No one - including you - knows why he changed coaches.  injury may have something to do with it. Cost may be another.

Just because there are more coaches enabled by more money in the sport, doesn't mean there is better coaching. Which would you choose, modern day David Ledbetter, or old times Harvey Pennick? Modern day Sean Foley, or old times John Jacobs?

Leadbetter and Foley are too far away from me, and the thought of a seance scares me - and trying to find a reliable medium would take up time better spent practicing putting.   But I would choose Steve Bann over Bruce Green any day.

[Matthew Mollica]

Very interesting comments over the weekend from Medinah by Adam Scott, Tiger Woods and Brandt Snedeker regarding modern drivers and the deskilling effect which is now entrenched within the modern game. Perhaps the 460cc driver head size limit is in need of review in addition to the ball rollback.

[Rob Rigg]

Without a doubt, the ability to leverage launch monitors for both club fitting and swing instruction has benefited golfers looking to add distance.

Golf specific gym workouts, players dedicating themselves to stretching and flexibility training and some of the available swing speed tools have also helped golfers for sure.

Every TOUR pro must be / should be doing what Molinari did. And golfers will continue to get more efficient decade after decade.

I'd also agree that the average athlete is getting more efficient across sports. Many pro athletes from the 80s or 90s cannot believe how strong and fast the average modern athlete in their sport is.

The obvious disadvantage for golf is that equipment has changed drastically while it has either not changed (much) or is not as relevant to success in other sports.

I agree with Matthew - The comments this weekend from some of the most respected TOUR players in the world was a big deal.

The golf ball is a "no brainer" but the metalwood technology should also be looked at closely in terms of club head size and COR.

A high percentage of R&D and Engineering people who work for equipment manufacturers are legit "rocket scientists" or hold advanced degress and they are paid to innovate so they will, completely logically, push the limits of what the USGA considers "conforming" and it's a fuzzy line a lot of the time. If the rules are changed then the same game will start all over again as expected.

Maybe if enough influential TOUR players start to pushback then the TOUR Executives will actually engage the USGA and R&A to facilitate some thoughtful changes . . .

[jeffwarne]

...I pretty much agree with some of what you have said.  Human evolution, sports science, club fitting and better coaching are responsible for some of the distance increase. ...

Better coaching?
Tiger changed coaches so often because he got better coaching? Just because there are more coaches enabled by more money in the sport, doesn't mean there is better coaching. Which would you choose, modern day David Ledbetter, or old times Harvey Pennick? Modern day Sean Foley, or old times John Jacobs?

Well I'd put John Jacobs and Harvey Pennick down as two of the greatest teachers in history.
But I'd also say that right now there are more excellent teachers, and more simple, valid, and most importantly not harmful teaching ideas out there than at any time in my lifetime.
Literally hundreds(if not more) of teachers out there armed with solid experience, research and experience-compared to far fewer several decades before.
That's why you see success at the highest levels with many varied and unusual swings, rather than a method that only works for some and cripples the rest.


There's never been a better time to be a junior golfer and get solid instruction and good information.
But that doesn't mean there aren't still a lot of bad teachers out there (by sheer numbers)

[Garland Bayley]

So Jeff, how do you explain Bryson D? Result of simple, valid, and not harmful teaching?

How about Bubba W?

[jeffwarne]

So Jeff, how do you explain Bryson D? Result of simple, valid, and not harmful teaching?

How about Bubba W?

Both talented, both went to the same charm school.
Bryson will be Bryson-not sure I'd blame or credit his action on a teacher.
Bubba came to it on his own-no formal lessons.
Who is to say either's action is harmful?-they are successful.
A teacher using one of them as an inflexible model for their students would be the one doing harm.

[Peter Pallotta]

Very interesting comments over the weekend from Medinah by Adam Scott, Tiger Woods and Brandt Snedeker regarding modern drivers and the deskilling effect which is now entrenched within the modern game. Perhaps the 460cc driver head size limit is in need of review in addition to the ball rollback.

Matthew - I referenced Scott's comments on another thread, but yours had me wishing that we had 'shot tracer' technology back in the 70s and 80s. What fun it would've been to watch the sheer variety of driver ball flights when you had golfers -- winning golfers all -- as different as Norman, Pavin, Zoeller, Lietzke, Watson, Irwin, Faldo, Ballesteros, Calcavecchia, Trevino, Woosnam and Nicklaus. Scott is right to note the de-skilling effect of the modern driver-ball combination; but for a viewer what's equally bad is the homogenizing effect! Watching it over the weekend at Medinah, I started thinking that the shot-tracing machine was broken, or that they don't really have the technology at all -- they just keep putting up the same high, long, baby-fade 'tracer' over every single shot.
 
 

[John Foley]

Has anyone thought of the legal implications of rollback?


What about the equipment manufacturers? Are they OK w/ some governing body telling them to tone down their R&D?


What about a well funded family who son/daughter has prepped for the game as its' defined now only to find out the new driver head size is now 320cc and the grooves are now changed.


Pandora's box is waiting.

[John Kavanaugh]

How about a guy like me that just spent $5,000 on a screen so I don't defecate in the pool every time I hear the smack of a ball?

[Garland Bayley]

So Jeff, how do you explain Bryson D? Result of simple, valid, and not harmful teaching?

How about Bubba W?

Both talented, both went to the same charm school.
Bryson will be Bryson-not sure I'd blame or credit his action on a teacher.
Bubba came to it on his own-no formal lessons.
Who is to say either's action is harmful?-they are successful.
A teacher using one of them as an inflexible model for their students would be the one doing harm.

My understanding is that Bryson's technique is from The Golfing Machine, which many teachers consider harmful. However, it is my understanding that a few teachers teach from that book/method. I don't know if Bryson had such a teacher or did it on his own.

My experience in professional practice (not golf) is that there are a few great ones in a field, and the majority of the practitioners are very average. Perhaps an illustrative example is Warren Buffet, vs. the vast majority of financial advisors who's recommendations consistently lose to the index funds.

So there may be "more simple, valid, and most importantly not harmful teaching ideas" as you say, but their application or usage by instructors for the most part will be average.

I think Bubba is an indication of the primary way to success. Practice or work. It doesn't matter how good the instruction is if you don't do the work. Ledbetter has had success as a teacher, but it seems to me that his two most successful pupils had work ethics that surpassed others, and perhaps was the primary component to the success.

So perhaps you can see why I don't see teaching, athletic training, sports science, etc. as big factors in the increase in distance the ball is being propelled. The improvements in technology to me are the keys. Therefore, roll back the ball by adding spin and ball COR. Roll back club COR to the COR of persimmon. Reduce the size of drivers to perhaps half.
Let me be able to see where the ball flies to so that I can find it in a timely fashion, and complete my round sooner.
After all, I want an after breakfast round followed by an after lunch round, and completed by an after dinner round.

[Garland Bayley]

How about a guy like me that just spent $5,000 on a screen so I don't defecate in the pool every time I hear the smack of a ball?

You should have bought a view property not on a golf course, and then drove your electric car to the course to play.

[Matthew Mollica]

Who makes the rules in golf?


How long have they presided over the laws of the game, including rules pertaining to balls and clubs?


Did equipment manufacturers know this before entering the market?


Are there precedents for sports governing bodies altering the position on equipment that at one time was considered compliant?


Maybe I’m naive but the R&A and the USGA have little to fear IMHO, and they must be allowed to continue to govern, without fear of paralysis from a company that profits from the game these organisations govern.

[SL_Solow]

The ship sailed when the USGA, contrary to legal advice, settled with Karsten on the square grooves ruling.  They feared being spent into oblivion in an extended legal battle so they rolled over.  Now, due to TV contracts and other marketing efforts they have a war chest of well over 200 million but still lack the fortitude to take on the large manufacturers.  The Tour certainly doesn't want to step up; its players receive large sums in endorsement money from the manufacturers who prefer the current system.  There is too much money in minimal regulation to expect any substantial change.  Candidly, that is why I have stayed out of this discussion.  At the highest level, it seems clear to me that, notwithstanding better training, nutrition, coaching, club fitting etc., the drastic change in distance at the highest level of play has been substantially accelerated by equipment changes.  At the highest level, it has made for a less interesting game and reduced the challenge posed by classic courses.  It has also contributed to slow play as courses are lengthened, whether that is sensible or not.  I officiate state level amateur tourneys and I see the impact at that level.  But absent significant financial incentives I fear this is nothing more than a moderately interesting intellectual exercise.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()