the Distance Debate - should the authorities act

[Grant85]

I find it a slightly odd debate as you're basically trying to penalise people for playing the game better than others as a starting point.

This isn't the case if you take the initial point that the bigger hitters have benefited most from the ball and equipment over the past 2 decades. Back in the day Greg Norman and John Daly were still bombing it past people in the right conditions, but they weren't 50 yards past other pros.

I'd be very against thinning the fairways out further at say 350 yds compared with 300yds just to counteract someone like Bryson hitting it well (he's still hitting 62% of the fairways) but I'd potentially agree that more penalties for being way off line could work i.e. if you're going for it then you need to be confident in your game. However, let's not ignore that these players are good when offline and can shape shots to recover - those elements are actually quite exciting like Mickleson at the Masters. I don't necessarily want to see 280yd fairway drive, 180 yd 7 iron into centre of green, two putts all the time - birdies, wedges spinning close, recoveries are good for golf.

Bryson is driving it long and straight - there's no denying that.

Issue is not penalties for being way off line, it is that the large headed driver and low spinning ball don't deviate as far with a mishit.
In 1991 John Daly averaged 261 Driving. Bryson is currently 330 and was 350 for the most recent event.
Now John Daly could absolutely hit it out there 350 with the old equipment, and tried to plenty of times. But the mishits brought his average way down and probably he didn't even try to hit it full gas on many holes, such were the penalties of spinning one wide.

I think the likelihod of a Mickelson, Seve, Bubba Watson type player being at the top of the game again are getting further away. The equipment is moving more and more away from shot shaping and most youngsters simply won't learn to play these shots.

What Bryson is doing is also going against the argument that technology means everyone can be a good driver of the ball etc as we're seeing a current marked difference.

Obviously Bryson is also massively talented, as well as being very strong. But the large head and low spinning ball are the tools that allow guys to swing without fear. Yes they are good and are delivering a club very accurately at 130 mph... but put a smaller driver and higher spinning ball in their hand and the fear factor dials things back a bit. They could still step on one when there is room to miss, but they just won't have that opportunity on 13 or 14 holes any more.

Incidentally we talk about a pro game, but the distance debate isn't yet the same for the women's game. 3 of the top 5 women are c.44, 50 and 76th in the women's rankings for driving distance, the last of those being the world no 1 Ko Jin-Young. Potentially stereotyping, but perhaps more premium on hitting fairway as harder to generate power out of rough, distance more in keeping with how courses are "designed" to be played with hazards in right place, more onus on short game as differentiator and lots of variation in distances and approach to shots between players on a round.

Rather than restricting the PGA tour, perhaps you're just watching the wrong tour!

Again, I'd make the point that the bombers have gotten the most out of the equipment advances. Any roll back will not impact the women's and amateur game to the same extent. Also power is becoming a bigger factor in the ladies game and likely we will see a Serena type player who has a much natural level of strength come through and move things along, similar to what Tiger did in the mens game 20 years ago.

 

[Grant85]

How will changing equipment / ball effect anything. Bryson will still hit further than anyone else unless you change only his ball. There is only one fix and thats either put more areas out of bounds or make offline shots really really hard.

So lets say a 440 yard hole currently has a couple of bunkers down the left that severely narrow the fairway. These effectively come in at 280 and to carry the 2nd one is 320.

Justin Rose tees it up and decides he can't carry 320, so nudges a 3 wood and hits a nice shot into the safe side of the fairway, 285 but is accurate enough to avoid the bunker. Leaves himself 155 on the angle.

Next up Adam Scott - again can't carry the bunkers. Considers a lay-up but decides to try and play an accurate shot to the narrowest part of the fairway. Just tugs it a little and ends up in the 1st trap. 145 away.

Bryson / Wolf / Champ / tees it up. He doesn't even see the bunker at 280 or really care about the 320 carry for the 2nd bunker. He pulls driver and batters one over the bunkers, lands 333 and rolls out of fairway into the 1st cut... 355, but leaves himself just 80 yards in.

So the strategic penalties that were placed there to give the longer hitters a decision to make actually make the course easier for these guys, such is their advantage. Yes - they've made the gains to get that advantage, but it means the strategy element is completely obsolete for the most part.

 

[Grant85]

No, they are played on those courses because most members clubs do not want the hassle that a tour event brings.

TBH, I couldn't care less about Augusta (ultra exclusive private club that the vast majority will never get the chance to play) and Pebble (american resort course that is just a money making machine). I do care about the Old course though but it is what it is, it can't really be extended any further and it can be protected with wind and pin placements. If the pros shoot 20 under, so what?

I think most members courses in the US do want to host. It completely transforms a business model. A Harbour Town, Riveria, Quail Hollow can make millions on visitor income due to the increased interest. Still leave plenty of time and weeks for the members to play. Remember a Golf membership is far more of a status symbol in the US, so the clubs absolutely do want the events there.

Colonial in Fort Worth was very close to losing their event when their sponsor pulled out. The members and town of Fort Worth rallied and had a mass fundraising effort to get the sponsorship money together to ensure the event could continue. Then Charles Schwab stepped in as title sponsor the following year.

As for the the Old Course... when the pro's shoot 20 under and it's 5 shots too many even for a play-off, then I think a lot in the golf world (and certainly the R&A) will realise it's gone too far.

Problem is when the architectural features on the course don't ask enough questions, you tend not to get much separation in the field. On a good set up, the guy who plays the best will rise to the top. When there's no premium on 4 or 5 different types of skills, there's likely to be a bunch of guys on similar scores and a very bunched leader board.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

Maybe the solution is that players will pick and choose the venues they compete at. Places like Harbour Town or Valderrama don't suit bombers because they are too tight, maybe the shorter guys will concentrate on those events instead.

 

[Papas1982]

Without reading it all. I saw a tweet from Westwood stating Bryson was +8 for putting over the week.

Would appear it is still the one who putts best who wins.

 

[Orikoru]

Without reading it all. I saw a tweet from Westwood stating Bryson was +8 for putting over the week.

Would appear it is still the one who putts best who wins.

His putting is very good. Must be time for another "ban the long putters" thread as well.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

I think most members courses in the US do want to host. It completely transforms a business model. A Harbour Town, Riveria, Quail Hollow can make millions on visitor income due to the increased interest. Still leave plenty of time and weeks for the members to play. Remember a Golf membership is far more of a status symbol in the US, so the clubs absolutely do want the events there.

Colonial in Fort Worth was very close to losing their event when their sponsor pulled out. The members and town of Fort Worth rallied and had a mass fundraising effort to get the sponsorship money together to ensure the event could continue. Then Charles Schwab stepped in as title sponsor the following year.

As for the the Old Course... when the pro's shoot 20 under and it's 5 shots too many even for a play-off, then I think a lot in the golf world (and certainly the R&A) will realise it's gone too far.

Problem is when the architectural features on the course don't ask enough questions, you tend not to get much separation in the field. On a good set up, the guy who plays the best will rise to the top. When there's no premium on 4 or 5 different types of skills, there's likely to be a bunch of guys on similar scores and a very bunched leader board.

If the courses in the States want to run a business model based around PGA tour revenue then let them. How often are you likely to play those courses or be affected by it?
As for the Old course, next time you play it will you be upset that someone shot 30 under in a tournament or will you just be thrilled to be walking in the footsteps of legends?

 

[fundy]

Maybe the solution is that players will pick and choose the venues they compete at. Places like Harbour Town or Valderrama don't suit bombers because they are too tight, maybe the shorter guys will concentrate on those events instead.

This already happens to some degree, the problem being that more and more courses they play at suit the bombers and theyre usually the type of courses the us majors and wgc events are played on too, makes it harder and harder to keep the tour card

If you watch any of the Korn Ferry theres plenty more bombers lining up to make it on tour too

 

[Foxholer]

How will changing equipment / ball affect anything. Bryson will still hit further than anyone else unless you change only his ball. There is only one fix and thats either put more areas out of bounds or make offline shots really really hard.

Because he won't be hitting it 350 (and others 310)! He'll be hitting it 270-280 while others hit it 250-260. Sure he'll still hit it further than others, but not so much further - so 'unfairly penalising' him for his unique quality!
Simply doing nothing will very soon make so many 'traditional' courses layouts unworkable - for Pros!

 

[robbeh32]

Because he won't be hitting it 350 (and others 310)! He'll be hitting it 270-280 while others hit it 250-260. Sure he'll still hit it further than others, but not so much further - so 'unfairly penalising' him for his unique quality!
Simply doing nothing will very soon make so many 'traditional' courses layouts unworkable - for Pros!

So his 40 yard advantage will only be a 20 yard advantage with this new ball?

 

[Grant85]

If the courses in the States want to run a business model based around PGA tour revenue then let them. How often are you likely to play those courses or be affected by it?
As for the Old course, next time you play it will you be upset that someone shot 30 under in a tournament or will you just be thrilled to be walking in the footsteps of legends?

I'd just rather see different styles of golfer compete on the same course.

It doesn't bother me as a golfer I won't play these courses, but I certainly wouldn't want to play 7,500 yard versions of them.

But as a fan, I fear that Tour golf is becoming very one dimensional and I'd much rather see a Luke Donald or Graeme McDowell have a chance at some of these events against the bigger hitters and not have thick rough a few paces off every fairway and green.

 

[Piece]

Bifurcation. Just no. I don't want to play a game that I can't relate to. Half my thrill is playing courses the pro's do and if I'm playing a different set of rules then I'll think what's the point.

 

[Deleted Member 1156]

The bottom line is we are comparing the elite against the grass roots level. There will always be differences but it doesn't stop our enjoyment of the sport.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

I'd just rather see different styles of golfer compete on the same course.

It doesn't bother me as a golfer I won't play these courses, but I certainly wouldn't want to play 7,500 yard versions of them.

But as a fan, I fear that Tour golf is becoming very one dimensional and I'd much rather see a Luke Donald or Graeme McDowell have a chance at some of these events against the bigger hitters and not have thick rough a few paces off every fairway and green.

Ryan Armour was in the last group on Sunday. He’s a short hitter.
BdC just played better on Sunday, and putted a whole lot better than anyone else that day.
It’s not like he dominated after rounds 1,2&3, so anyone could have won.

 

[Foxholer]

So his 40 yard advantage will only be a 20 yard advantage with this new ball?

Indeed - or something like that! That's why I believe it's unfair to 'penalise' the one guy who has made the 'quantum leap'. When 'everyone' was hitting long, but not super long was the time to do it! Unfortunately, prevarication has ruled that out. Same applied when Tiger was in a similar position. Having an Old Course tee placed OOB (?) on the Eden Course (and, I think, a decent walk back from the previous hole's green) seems a bit daft!

 

[harpo_72]

It’s interesting because BdC has worked it out and has made it happen. Will we see others manage that ? Time will tell.
Is it good for golf? Well what does the fan want to see? Do you want to see it muscled round , do you want to see shot shaping etc?
It is ironic that everyone wants a big driver because it makes the game easier and now they are complaining that individuals that have put the time in are just using the big driver to their advantage. I am up for seeing smaller drivers, bring back 180-190cc heads, no problem for me. It will hit the pro’s driving averages, but they will still hit the ball very far! You can fiddle the spin rates on the ball, causing power to be overridden with negative aero... but how far do you go?
i like the idea of playing the hole you tee’d off on .. if it’s well wide it’s OOB, also knock the relief rules on the head play it as it lies and the same ball has to complete a round unless lost (same engine inF1 killed qualifying ?.. wonder what a same ball rule would do)
but as imurg said doesn’t impact me, and me neither, will I watch it for free yeah ... and there is the crux of it, if it loses value these boys will have to get day jobs and not be able to hang around all that spandex

 

[Deleted member 3432]

Just a shame that the long difficult par 4 no longer exists in pro golf. Standing on the tee knowing they must hit the fairway since the 2nd shot requires a very long iron for all of the field.

Long par 3's and increasingly longer par 5's are just a bore fest.

Long straight hitters have always had an advantage but the distance the ball is going long and mid iron play is becoming obsolete and removing one of the great skills of the game. The straight part of long seems to have disapeared now which tells me something is not right.

 

[Jimaroid]

The authorities are already acting. Here are the opening two sentences of the conclusion from the R&A's Distance Insights Project that has been ongoing for the last few years. https://www.randa.org/TheRandA/Distance-Insights

... For all the reasons stated above, we believe that it is time to break the cycle of increasingly longer hitting distances and golf courses and to work to build a long-term future that reinforces golf’s essential challenge and enhances the viability of both existing courses and courses yet to be built. In reaching this conclusion, we recognize that some have the view that the governing bodies might have done more in addressing the implications of the continuing increases in hitting distances and course lengths.

Taken with the text of the report, that second sentence reads like an acknowledgement of mistakes made in equipment governance to me. The full report and conclusions make very interesting reading. I've held a suspicion that oversights were made with the introduction of the modern balls in the 90's - they regulated the clubs more than the ball. It's best illustrated by this graph in the report that shows the rate of distance increasing rising dramatically during the same time frame as the ball and driver innovation. That rate of change from 1990 should have raised more eyebrows than it did at the time because whilst the clubs got better regulated there is a second wave appearing in the last 5 years. What hasn't changed? "It's the ball stupid."

So the conclusion of the R&A is pretty clear to me. They're going to "... review the overall conformance specifications for both clubs and balls ... " and I suspect we'll see the introduction of a new type of ball in the next 5 to 10 years.

 

[Grant85]

Ryan Armour was in the last group on Sunday. He’s a short hitter.
BdC just played better on Sunday, and putted a whole lot better than anyone else that day.
It’s not like he dominated after rounds 1,2&3, so anyone could have won.

It's a 72 hole tournament, so playing better on the last day or the 1st day... doesn't matter that much. Of course Bryson played well and holed the putts, you should have to do that if you are going to beat a field of 150 top Golf pros.

Ryan Armour and Kisner probably got as much as they could out of that event and had their best finishes of the season - but were 5 and 7 shots away from even getting into a play-off. So that's a lot of putts that Bryson could have missed and still been a shot or two better than these guys. Which is what's happening the weeks he doesn't win.

Webb Simpson is obviously the best of the 'shorter hitters' albeit he's probably longer than people think he is. But he's one guy out of the current ranked top 10. Someone with his game is probably not going to get out of the Korn Ferry tour in a few years, such is the scoring average from the longer hitters.

 

[Grant85]

It’s interesting because BdC has worked it out and has made it happen. Will we see others manage that ? Time will tell.
Is it good for golf? Well what does the fan want to see? Do you want to see it muscled round , do you want to see shot shaping etc?
It is ironic that everyone wants a big driver because it makes the game easier and now they are complaining that individuals that have put the time in are just using the big driver to their advantage. I am up for seeing smaller drivers, bring back 180-190cc heads, no problem for me. It will hit the pro’s driving averages, but they will still hit the ball very far! You can fiddle the spin rates on the ball, causing power to be overridden with negative aero... but how far do you go?
i like the idea of playing the hole you tee’d off on .. if it’s well wide it’s OOB, also knock the relief rules on the head play it as it lies and the same ball has to complete a round unless lost (same engine inF1 killed qualifying ?.. wonder what a same ball rule would do)
but as imurg said doesn’t impact me, and me neither, will I watch it for free yeah ... and there is the crux of it, if it loses value these boys will have to get day jobs and not be able to hang around all that spandex

At the moment, what Bryson has done is transformational so it has captured interest of fans and journalists.

But if it quickly became the norm and 90% of the field were muscling it around these courses and taking 6 hours to walk round an 8,000 yard course... I feel it would be bad for the game in the long term.