Gary Player: Technology is destroying golf

[Maxwell]

Gary Player discusses trend of improving golf balls and how it will continue to negatively impact the sport, including the need to lengthen historic courses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GweMaI6bmvI

Published on Aug 9, 2017

" Jack Nicklaus has been saying this for many years as well "

Blair
St. Catharines,Ontario

[Ignatius Reilly]

So now we've got both Jack AND Gary saying the ball is wrecking the sport, and I agree.

There's a bunch of challenges in rolling it back:

Resistance from ball manufacturers
Resistance from young guys who think these are just grumpy old men who hate being out-driven.
Resistance from guys who think the Tour is exciting because you get to see guys pounding it 340yds.

There's also a bunch of advantages, as he mentioned:
The compound costs of lengthening, watering and fertilizing courses to keep up with the ball.
The loss of classic courses played as they were designed.

I think a lot of players fear losing distance if the ball got dialed back, but they're just kidding themselves if they really believe that their 300yd drive is in any way longer than any pro could hit it 50 or so years ago. It's not YOU hitting it 300, it's your club and ball doing it. None of us is hitting it longer than Slammin Sammy....

[Maxwell]

I agree Iggy....I don't know where this situation? is going to end. Six hour or more rounds of golf(with carts) is allot of time to be on the golf course. An hour to say hello to those in your foursome, hit a few balls and make it to the 1st hole...and then after the round and in the club house for a few Brewski's(or refreshments), a bite to eat and then drive home....another hour. It can be a long day if your not a "die-hard" of the game. The game is losing some of it's popularity but maybe it's a cyclical thing. Time will tell.
Blair

[4underthru9]

I agree Iggy....I don't know where this situation? is going to end. Six hour or more rounds of golf(with carts) is allot of time to be on the golf course. An hour to say hello to those in your foursome, hit a few balls and make it to the 1st hole...and then after the round and in the club house for a few Brewski's(or refreshments), a bite to eat and then drive home....another hour. It can be a long day if your not a "die-hard" of the game. The game is losing some of it's popularity but maybe it's a cyclical thing. Time will tell.
Blair

Actually you describe my kind of perfect golf day, except of course for the 2 extra hours on the course.

[Phatchrisrules]

There are a load of other factors that Gary and Jack (and Arnold before them) are missing out on. Here is a relevant snap shot of driver distance averages vs. the #1 in driving distance over the past ~15 years (posted in 2015) http://golfweek.com/2015/12/22/avera...d-much-decade/

Quickly looking at it, average driver distance has gone up about 15 yards since 2000, both in average, and with the longest player, from 273 (301.5) to 290 (318). However, what we are seeing is a confound, not a correlation. In 2003-~2008 you had all the manufacturers max out their COR and MOI, meaning that not only were players hitting it longer with their normal swings when struck properly, you also have an increase in average distance when mishit, which is helping artificially inflate the average some. On top of this, you have a decreasing trend in shaft weights from many players opting for steel, switching to heavy-weight graphite in the 80g range (Tiger used an 85g blueboard almost exclusively in this period until about 2010/2011), and then a general reduction in weight as graphite tolerances became far tighter and you could get the same control and feel and stiffness out of a 60-70g graphite shaft that was normally only reserved for those in the 80g range. Lighter = more swing speed = more distance.

On top of this, you have players getting into better and better shape. I don't know of a single tour pro nowadays who isn't getting towards the end of their prime/past it that doesn't have a crazy gym regimen both before AND after a round. Tiger popularized this and was quickly followed suit by Vijay I believe and now almost every player does it. Look at the physique of players from 2000 vs. now, a lot of them look like football players when before, bodies like David Duval, Kenny Perry, and Fred Funk dominated. Lastly, you have courses becoming drier and drier. Look at the average driver distance for something like the U.S. Open that is typically a burnt out course compared to when they play Pebble Beach that is all carry. Very rarely do you see any mega bombs at Pebble, when at other courses you can see sometimes upwards of 30-40 yards of roll. Even for a ridiculous swing speed of like 125mph, which produces ball speeds up around 190mph, that is still *only* ~317 carry. Yes, that is a massive, massive, massive poke, but it is a far cry from some of the 340-370 yard drives we've seen on some of these courses this year that run out forever and just happen to have a speed slot at precisely the 290-310 landing zone which shoots the ball forward.

Let's not lose our heads on this. The course set ups are more to blame on this than anything else.

[4underthru9]

You make some very good points, maybe it would also be good to compare scoring averages then and now using the same parameters.

[Jeffc]

I don't see many people complaining that pro game is bad - other than perhaps pace of play. It's not like they are all going out and shooting 60 every time out. People like offense and making birdies is offense. It's mostly like guys from the good old days complaining and I don't see how it's ruining the game. The other side is the amateur side of things where everyone wants to hit it further and there is little harm in that. Making the game easier for the average golfer isn't a bad thing, it's still plenty hard.

[bl8d]

"you can't go home again." New balls and clubs are here to stay. As for the tour,-grow the rough , slow the greens and tighten the fairways. That will do it.

[Ignatius Reilly]

PhatChris makes some good points.

I agree that fast fairways and speed slots are contributing to the problem.

I also agree that shafts, heads, and fitness are to blame along with the ball. I think the only reason for focussing on the ball is cost. Everyone can replace all their balls over a short period of time at little cost. Replacing a full set of clubs (with fancy-arsed shafts!) would cost a fortune.

We might be able to curb the fitness trend with more beer.

[Phatchrisrules]

PhatChris makes some good points.

I agree that fast fairways and speed slots are contributing to the problem.

I also agree that shafts, heads, and fitness are to blame along with the ball. I think the only reason for focussing on the ball is cost. Everyone can replace all their balls over a short period of time at little cost. Replacing a full set of clubs (with fancy-arsed shafts!) would cost a fortune.

We might be able to curb the fitness trend with more beer.

There is just too many variables to concretely say balls are the issue. I remember Arnie trying to get them capped about 10-12 years ago and it was a hot button issue for all of a week before it was forgotten. In my opinion, the older generation are just trying to preserve their dignity. Yet, if I remember correctly, Sam Snead still has the most wins (or is maybe only 1-2 behind Tiger), and Jack still holds the most majors. Didn't Arnie famously drive the first green of Oakmount or something, which is like 340? A great player with power will always be a great player who hits it a mile and wins a lot, the difference now is there is less divide between the so-so players and the greats of our time in terms of ability (they are all good) and strength (they are all strong. When back then, you had a few muscular guys like Arnie and Jack that hit the ball a mile, and the rest of them were just left in the dust; there was a much greater stratification of the abilities.

[Ignatius Reilly]

There is just too many variables to concretely say balls are the issue. I remember Arnie trying to get them capped about 10-12 years ago and it was a hot button issue for all of a week before it was forgotten. In my opinion, the older generation are just trying to preserve their dignity. Yet, if I remember correctly, Sam Snead still has the most wins (or is maybe only 1-2 behind Tiger), and Jack still holds the most majors. Didn't Arnie famously drive the first green of Oakmount or something, which is like 340? A great player with power will always be a great player who hits it a mile and wins a lot, the difference now is there is less divide between the so-so players and the greats of our time in terms of ability (they are all good) and strength (they are all strong. When back then, you had a few muscular guys like Arnie and Jack that hit the ball a mile, and the rest of them were just left in the dust; there was a much greater stratification of the abilities.

Yeah, but I've somehow got 4 drives of over 300, all made in my late-40s.

That puts me somehow on a level with 1950s Snead and that is just wrong on a bazillion levels. I've never even broken 80 FFS.

Give Sammy, or Jack or Arnie or Bobby today's equipment and they'd hit it a mile too. And that leads to the other discussion about costs to make an 8,9, 10,0000 yard course viable.

Again, the ball is the easiest and cheapest way to dial it back.

[Jeffc]

Yeah, but I've somehow got 4 drives of over 300, all made in my late-40s.

That puts me somehow on a level with 1950s Snead and that is just wrong on a bazillion levels. I've never even broken 80 FFS.

Give Sammy, or Jack or Arnie or Bobby today's equipment and they'd hit it a mile too. And that leads to the other discussion about costs to make an 8,9, 10,0000 yard course viable.

Again, the ball is the easiest and cheapest way to dial it back.

Until guys are shooting low 60s on a 7000 yard course on a regular basis the game is just fine. tighten the fairways and grow the rough.

[Phatchrisrules]

Yeah, but I've somehow got 4 drives of over 300, all made in my late-40s.

That puts me somehow on a level with 1950s Snead and that is just wrong on a bazillion levels. I've never even broken 80 FFS.

Give Sammy, or Jack or Arnie or Bobby today's equipment and they'd hit it a mile too. And that leads to the other discussion about costs to make an 8,9, 10,0000 yard course viable.

Again, the ball is the easiest and cheapest way to dial it back.

Hitting a ~300y drive and breaking 80 are not mutually exclusive. I've broken 80 under 10 times and I have hit more than my fair share of 300 yard drives, not consistently, but enough. Similarly, your long drive guys, save for Sadlowski, are usually around 10-12 handicaps. One doesn't have to equal the other. As Jeffc says, it's not about the equipment. Arnie and Jack and John Daly and that were long for their day. It wouldn't have mattered if they played in the 1860s, 1960s, or 2060s, they would have been mega long and mega good no matter what they played. Talent is talent. You want higher scores? Tighten the fairways, make the greens rock hard, and water the crap out of the fairways. The ball will roll out about 10 yards max and then they have to either lay up or risk blowing it through the green if they try and go for it.

Scoring averages have gone down by less than 1 stroke since 1980. Trevino played 82 rounds of tournament golf (20 tournaments) in 1980 and he was the scoring average leader at 69.73. Spieth on the other hand, was the scoring average leader in 2017 over 78 (19 tournaments) rounds with 68.84. The average score hasn't changed much. The difference is Trevino had 5718 total shots over the 20 rounds and Spieth had 5377 total strokes. If we take Spieth's SA and make him shoot 69.84 for 4 more tournament rounds to play an equal number of tournament rounds as Trevino, then we add another 275 shots to Spieth, making his total ~5652 total shots. Therefore, he played exactly one full round's of shots less (~66 shots) than Trevino did in 40 years of technology advancement.

But again, what is the CAUSE of this, all things being equal, assuming they played on equal playing grounds (same courses, same length, pins, and they have the same equipment) ? Is it simply that Spieth is longer than Trevino, sure I'd argue that, as Trevino was never really known for his massive drives, but then again, neither is Spieth. So could it be that Spieth is a better putter? A better iron player so he got closer to the hole more often? Did he hole out more often with chips, bunker shots, and pitches? Does Spieth manage himself better, as in he knows when to take his medicine, while conversely, Trevino would try and play a hero shot and it ended up costing him a double or worse? I don't have the answers because I wasn't alive 40 years ago and I'm not a statistician by any stretch, but there is a lot more going on here than just "the golf ball is too hot and they hit it too far and make us old guys look bad and bring courses to their knees." It's not true.

[bl8d]

a reminder from 2014- http://www.macleans.ca/economy/busin...e-end-of-golf/
The, "if you build it they will come" hubris failed to count the number of available players, and was not in step with the "if we make it they will buy it", given the New Improved, higher than before, price on both ends.

[hammy1983]

Most of those guys are so out of touch with reality. The problems on tour are 100% different than the problems for average golfers. One of their solutions to "grow" the game is the most agonizing sporting event in history called the drive, chip and putt. If you want to speed up the game put everyone on a clock. Course can do things such as get rid of fescue. I see soo many groups spend countless minutes "looking" for a ball they basically need to step on to find. Whereas a water hazard the ball is either in or out. Or if you change it to just a hazard or rough it would make things a lot faster.
We need to face that facts that were not going to go back in history on equipment. Focus on what will actually grow the game for those not on tour and start with speed on play. I guarantee you if you made a course that came back to the clubhouse every 3-5 holes and charged 3 holes at a time instead of forcing those to play 9/18, designed to course with flow in mind and reduced objects/areas where peopel can waste time, the course can still be challenging but fun and fast.