Just Saw This Today

[Dariusz J.]

Dari: how short is too short in your book? 190? 240? 280? Anyone hitting it 190 is going to be more accurate than someone hitting it 310.

Well, it is not a matter of numbers, they change anyhow with each generation that is stronger, faster, more intelligent. There always should be a qui pro quo and there always should be an equation that would equal chances of all crucial aspects of the game. Say, average fairway width was 30 yards while the average length of the tee was 270 yards and average par $ hole was 400 yards (for instance); every 10 years the second number increases and every 10 years the equation should make the first number decrease (leaving the hole length as it is).
Moe would hit 210 and would always find a fairway; he would have to hit long irons or even woods as the 2nd shot. Nicklaus would find 70% of fairways and have short iron/wedge to the green but these 30% left should cost him something; Sadlowski would hit 20% of greens with his tee shot and 10% of the rest of his shots would find the fairway where he just pitches onto the green; however, the remaining 70% of tee shots causes him a big trouble.
In 95% of cases: 1. Nicklaus; 2. Moe; 3. Sadlowski.

Cheers

 

[Bigwill]

I think LD guys get a bad rap from the golfing public at large. People tend to thing that they're just big, hamfisted brutes who muscle the ball out there. There are a lot of good players in LD (not PGA tour good, but that's the PGA tour), and quite a few have really low rounds under their belts. A lot of them were former mini-tour players who moved over to LD. A lot of them looked at Jamie's playing in the Nationwide tour event as a way to help change the perception that they're just meathead one-trick ponies. Think about this: Jamie hasn't won in 2 years. No other longdrive champ has recieved the pub that he has. Why? Because guys like Mike Dobbyn (6'8", 300 lbs) and Joe Miller (6'4", 270 lbs), give people permission to perpetuate the negative perception of longdrivers, even though neither is a chop.

When you think about it, what they do should be impressive, not just for the raw speed they produce. They have to hit the ball, swinging all out, at speeds approaching 150mph, and hit it squarely, with the proper angle of attack, to have a chance to hit the grid with the right ballflight for the grid and weather conditions; just a few degrees off and that ball is gone . Most regular golfers can't do that at 90mph. It is definitely a highly specialized skill, but it is a skill nonetheless, and the speed and effort level that they perform this skill at narrows their margine of error significantly. Anyone who respects the ability of someone to strike a ball well should respect what they do, IMO. And the fact that they participate in a sport that showcases their ability to hit one club well shouldn't cause people to assume that they can't do anything but hack it up with the other clubs in the bag.

"Yeah, but can he putt?"

Maybe he can

(not directed at anyone in particular, btw)

 

[ZAP]

Some good points made above. Swinging at those speeds is nothing short of amazing from an athletic standpoint. I hope my post did not come off as bashing LD guys because that was not my intention.

 

[Dariusz J.]

I think LD guys get a bad rap from the golfing public at large. People tend to thing that they're just big, hamfisted brutes who muscle the ball out there. There are a lot of good players in LD (not PGA tour good, but that's the PGA tour), and quite a few have really low rounds under their belts. A lot of them were former mini-tour players who moved over to LD. A lot of them looked at Jamie's playing in the Nationwide tour event as a way to help change the perception that they're just meathead one-trick ponies. Think about this: Jamie hasn't won in 2 years. No other longdrive champ has recieved the pub that he has. Why? Because guys like Mike Dobbyn (6'8", 300 lbs) and Joe Miller (6'4", 270 lbs), give people permission to perpetuate the negative perception of longdrivers, even though neither is a chop.

When you think about it, what they do should be impressive, not just for the raw speed they produce. They have to hit the ball, swinging all out, at speeds approaching 150mph, and hit it squarely, with the proper angle of attack, to have a chance to hit the grid with the right ballflight for the grid and weather conditions; just a few degrees off and that ball is gone . Most regular golfers can't do that at 90mph. It is definitely a highly specialized skill, but it is a skill nonetheless, and the speed and effort level that they perform this skill at narrows their margine of error significantly. Anyone who respects the ability of someone to strike a ball well should respect what they do, IMO. And the fact that they participate in a sport that showcases their ability to hit one club well shouldn't cause people to assume that they can't do anything but hack it up with the other clubs in the bag.

"Yeah, but can he putt?"

Maybe he can

(not directed at anyone in particular, btw)

I am also not ripping LD guys off. They do an amazing job and are the best athletes in this particular discipline which goal is to hit the ball the furthest possible. I used to watch ReMAX reruns on the net even before David Mobley's victory.

However, true golf should demand more sophisticated skills than just distance. Therefore, it is a qui pro quo situation. Let's take another example - sports of power. It happens that the strongest athlete in the world, Mariusz Pudzianowski ended his starts in strongman competitions and started to participate in mixed martial fights. One should think he kills everyone but the truth appeared a bit sadder to the guy. Weaker competitors with better techniques kicked his ass easily - why ? because the opponent was not standing still and had skills.
Similar thing should happen with LD guys (and some of tour bombers as well) trying to compete with true artists of golf. Conditions on courses should not favour LD guys, but rather should give them a very tough challenge.

Cheers

 

[Bigwill]

I am also not ripping LD guys off. They do an amazing job and are the best athletes in this particular discipline which goal is to hit the ball the furthest possible. I used to watch ReMAX reruns on the net even before David Mobley's victory.

However, true golf should demand more sophisticated skills than just distance. Therefore, it is a qui pro quo situation. Let's take another example - sports of power. It happens that the strongest athlete in the world, Mariusz Pudzianowski ended his starts in strongman competitions and started to participate in mixed martial fights. One should think he kills everyone but the truth appeared a bit sadder to the guy. Weaker competitors with better techniques kicked his ass easily - why ? because the opponent was not standing still and had skills.
Similar thing should happen with LD guys (and some of tour bombers as well) trying to compete with true artists of golf. Conditions on courses should not favour LD guys, but rather should give them a very tough challenge.

Cheers

I didn't take your post or Eyeoffish's as bashing LD. It just reminded me of the general feeling in golf circles regarding LDers. No offense taken.

The only problem I have with your analogy is that with Pudzianowski, his initial sport had little to do with MMA, save providing him with a base of power. In longdrive, they are striking the ball, and the vast majority honed those skills on the golf course.

The only other problem I have with this post: What is inherent in being a big hitter that precludes him from being a true artist? Strength/power doesn't have to come at the expense of touch and creativity. This is a thought process that we see in a lot of sports. People are amazed when a big strong guy displays soft hands, a delicate touch, some creativity, etc.

Now, if you're bemoaning the current state of tournament golf versus the old days, I can see where your problem is. But even if players are electing to play a more power-based, less "artistic" brand of golf, it doesn't mean they aren't capable of playing a more old-school style. It just wouldn't make much sense for most players to do so given the state of equipment and course conditions.

You know what's ironic is that the player who plays the most old-time style of golf, swing and all, is also one of the longest hitters in tournament golf.

 

[ZAP]

I really would like to watch Bubba play. If he comes to Firestone this year I am going to watch him play a practice round.

 

[Bigwill]

I really would like to watch Bubba play.

Me too. I hate that they got rid of the event in Flint. I didn't start playing until around 2000ish, and didn't see a tour event until a few years later, so I've never seen someone working a ball around a golf course. Would be something to see.

 

[Dariusz J.]

I didn't take your post or Eyeoffish's as bashing LD. It just reminded me of the general feeling in golf circles regarding LDers. No offense taken.

The only problem I have with your analogy is that with Pudzianowski, his initial sport had little to do with MMA, save providing him with a base of power. In longdrive, they are striking the ball, and the vast majority honed those skills on the golf course.

A good point. I agree with you. I just wanted to say with this analogy is that the course should not be an imaginary opponent that stands still and waits for the slightest possible amount of punishment. It should be a chance leveller. The problem is when some of chances are drastically promoted while the other are not.

The only other problem I have with this post: What is inherent in being a big hitter that precludes him from being a true artist? Strength/power doesn't have to come at the expense of touch and creativity. This is a thought process that we see in a lot of sports. People are amazed when a big strong guy displays soft hands, a delicate touch, some creativity, etc.

I said it because my researches on human kinetics (what they are worth, they are for me anyhow) prove that there cannot be a pattern that is good for everything. If Sadlowski starts to work on repeatability, he will lose distance.

Now, if you're bemoaning the current state of tournament golf versus the old days, I can see where your problem is. But even if players are electing to play a more power-based, less "artistic" brand of golf, it doesn't mean they aren't capable of playing a more old-school style. It just wouldn't make much sense for most players to do so given the state of equipment and course conditions.

You know what's ironic is that the player who plays the most old-time style of golf, swing and all, is also one of the longest hitters in tournament golf.

Never said they are not capable. But there is a suspicion that some of them are not.

Whom do you think about in your last sentence ?

Cheers

 

[Bigwill]

A good point. I agree with you. I just wanted to say with this analogy is that the course should not be an imaginary opponent that stands still and waits for the slightest possible amount of punishment. It should be a chance leveller. The problem is when some of chances are drastically promoted while the other are not.

I agree. It's just that there aren't a lot of things that you can do to make a golf course play harder that doesn't play to the advantages of being a longer/stronger. There are some things you can do that tip the scales back in favor of a "finesse" player, but not many if the long hitter is comparable in skill,


I said it because my researches on human kinetics (what they are worth, they are for me anyhow) prove that there cannot be a pattern that is good for everything. If Sadlowski starts to work on repeatability, he will lose distance.

I've talked to Sadlowski, and he swings differently for LD comps than he does playing for score (not drastically, but his swing isn't as long or as hard), and he plays a fade largely as opposed to the draw he hits in competition. So the guy you see hitting through watermelons and plywood isn't the same guy you'd see shooting for score.

Never said they are not capable. But there is a suspicion that some of them are not.

Whom do you think about in your last sentence ? C'mon, man! Bubba! Now, he's never going to be as accurate as someone like Hogan or Trevino or Mo. And I'm not comparing his ballstriking prowess to them (so don't bite my head off ). But (especially considering the equipment of the day), many consider him a throwback to the days when players moved the ball a lot more. These days, in tournament golf, he is definitely considered by many people to be an artist on the course, complete with the artist's knack for being a little "different".

Cheers

.

 

[Dariusz J.]

Another good post, Will. I agree with everything, Bubba paragraph included.

One thing though - "It's just that there aren't a lot of things that you can do to make a golf course play harder that doesn't play to the advantages of being a longer/stronger. There are some things you can do that tip the scales back in favor of a "finesse" player, but not many if the long hitter is comparable in skill".
I'd say as follows - if you brutalize the course the way I want, long and inaccurate drivers will use long irons, hybrids or 5-woods from the tee because they soon learn that there is silly to risk without an overaverage consistency. It will equalize chances since they won't outdrive a short but accurate players who can still use their drivers. And if a long whacker and an accurate player lie at the same distance from the hole, I'd bet there are at least chances that the latter will hit it better with his #5 iron than a whacker with his #7 iron.
Nowadays, there is no such chance if a whacker hits a wedge with which he will always hit the green even from "rough".
Moreover, I'd introduce a lot of hazards or thick bushes between fairways to make them lose one stroke for sure if they drove more than 20 yards away from the fairway. Internal OB would be the best, but I do not like this method - OB is OB and must show the border of the course eventually.

Cheers

 

[OLIVER1]

Another good post, Will. I agree with everything, Bubba paragraph included.

One thing though - "It's just that there aren't a lot of things that you can do to make a golf course play harder that doesn't play to the advantages of being a longer/stronger. There are some things you can do that tip the scales back in favor of a "finesse" player, but not many if the long hitter is comparable in skill".
I'd say as follows - if you brutalize the course the way I want, long and inaccurate drivers will use long irons, hybrids or 5-woods from Moreover, I'd introduce a lot of hazards or thick bushes between fairways to make them lose one stroke for sure if they drove more than 20 yards away from the fairway. Internal OB would be the best, but I do not like this method - OB is OB and must show the border of the course eventually.

Cheers

Dariusz,
I understand where you're coming from, I really do; but, to throw thickets, bushes and water hazards everywhere: To make it as truly penal as you suggest, you'd have nowhere to put spectators. I applaud your purist sentiments, but these guys are entertainers, who are on T.V to make money for networks.
It's a sad state of affairs, I know, when money sullies everything...I weep with you. But like BigWill said, if you've got a bomber who is as adroit with the other parts of his game as he is with the driver, then it's difficult to see what practicable measures you can put in place...

 

[Matt 4-L]

Me too. I hate that they got rid of the event in Flint. I didn't start playing until around 2000ish, and didn't see a tour event until a few years later, so I've never seen someone working a ball around a golf course. Would be something to see.

I know what your saying, I used to go to Warwick hills most every year, and now the tour doesn't even sniff Michigan, luckily I go to Florida most years and time it around the tournament at Innisbrook.

 

[Bigwill]

Another good post, Will. I agree with everything, Bubba paragraph included.

One thing though - "It's just that there aren't a lot of things that you can do to make a golf course play harder that doesn't play to the advantages of being a longer/stronger. There are some things you can do that tip the scales back in favor of a "finesse" player, but not many if the long hitter is comparable in skill".
I'd say as follows - if you brutalize the course the way I want, long and inaccurate drivers will use long irons, hybrids or 5-woods from the tee because they soon learn that there is silly to risk without an overaverage consistency. It will equalize chances since they won't outdrive a short but accurate players who can still use their drivers. And if a long whacker and an accurate player lie at the same distance from the hole, I'd bet there are at least chances that the latter will hit it better with his #5 iron than a whacker with his #7 iron.
Nowadays, there is no such chance if a whacker hits a wedge with which he will always hit the green even from "rough".
Moreover, I'd introduce a lot of hazards or thick bushes between fairways to make them lose one stroke for sure if they drove more than 20 yards away from the fairway. Internal OB would be the best, but I do not like this method - OB is OB and must show the border of the course eventually.

Cheers

That's why I used the caveat that the longer player be comparable in skill. On a course set up like this, if the big hitter is hitting it all over the lot, he has no chance. But if they're both playing well, the longer hitter has an advantage in every situation from tee to green, and the shorter player's margin for error shrinks.

Think about this: if that shorter hitter has a 5 iron to a hard uphill green, and the big hitter has a 7 iron, it isn't simply a 2 club difference, because the big hitter can likely hit all of his irons higher and with more spin club for club, which mean that the shorter hitter could hit that 5 iron beautifully and not be able to hold it, where the longer hitter with the 7 iron could. The shorter hitter, in effect, has a harder shot than even the 2 club difference indicates. Then it becomes a mental game, because you know that he is playing a shorter, maybe even easier course than you; can you deal with that and just focus on your own game, or are you gonna start swinging a little harder?

That's the downside of making a course harder to challenge the longer hitter; you make it harder for the shorter hitter as well, and they pay a steeper price than the longer hitter when they get into trouble.

Is there a way to truly penalize the longer hitter that mitigates his advantage over the other player and balances things out? Heck, is it even fair to do so? I don't know. Just wondering...

 

[Dariusz J.]

Dariusz,
I understand where you're coming from, I really do; but, to throw thickets, bushes and water hazards everywhere: To make it as truly penal as you suggest, you'd have nowhere to put spectators. I applaud your purist sentiments, but these guys are entertainers, who are on T.V to make money for networks.
It's a sad state of affairs, I know, when money sullies everything...I weep with you. But like BigWill said, if you've got a bomber who is as adroit with the other parts of his game as he is with the driver, then it's difficult to see what practicable measures you can put in place...

Thanks, Oliver, for sharing sentiments.

But...enertainers ? they seem to care only for their money. I am not entertained watching incompetent profesional players who are often very rude and show bad manners not counting with anyone around.

Spectators ? there will be plenty of room for them near tees and greens. They shouldn't be located alongside fairways because they help too much. When I play and happen to screw my drive noone stands and helps me to stop the ball or to find a ball. Why better players should have such help ? A provisional ball, 5 mins of looking for lost ball and arrivederci -- 2 strokes in the ass. LOL.

Cheers

 

[Dariusz J.]

On a course set up like this, if the big hitter is hitting it all over the lot, he has no chance. But if they're both playing well, the longer hitter has an advantage in every situation from tee to green, and the shorter player's margin for error shrinks. Think about this: if that shorter hitter has a 5 iron to a hard uphill green, and the big hitter has a 7 iron, it isn't simply a 2 club difference, because the big hitter can likely hit all of his irons higher and with more spin club for club, which mean that the shorter hitter could hit that 5 iron beautifully and not be able to hold it, where the longer hitter with the 7 iron could. The shorter hitter, in effect, has a harder shot than even the 2 club difference indicates. Then it becomes a mental game, because you know that he is playing a shorter, maybe even easier course than you; can you deal with that and just focus on your own game, or are you gonna start swinging a little harder?

While I agree again with your opinion that it would be more than 2 clubs sometimes, the sentence in bold makes me smile.

Anyhow -- if I am to choose to bet my money for Trevino (not mentioning Hogan or Moe because it was too long ago) and his #4 iron against #7 iron of e.g. JB Holmes -- I'd choose Trevino. Granted, Holmes would be closer to the flag provided he hits it well, but Trevino would hit the green always. And around the green a very nasty rough, very nasty bunkers, water also...

Cheers

 

[Dariusz J.]

Ouch. You must be talking about matchplay, 'cos that would certainly mean LOSS OF HOLE..!

No, no...strokeplay ! 2 strokes in the ass is a Polish idiom (that I shouldn't have written translating it that way) meaning 2 strokes lost.

Cheers

 

[birly-shirly]

Bubba? Holmes? Sadlowski?

I really don't understand what the fuss is about. These guys earn their money, as far as I'm concerned. But they're hardly the top tier UNLESS you have, shall we say, specialist tastes.

Dariusz - can you say specifically WHICH major champions of recent years have been, in your view, undeserving?

If you don't want to have to defend your choices to me - just pick a winner of either the US Open or the PGA. I really only get to see the Masters and the British Open. Mostly, I see guys who are well in control of their game and NOT winning titles from the deep cabbage.

Instead of a "Best Player never to have won a major" list - can we have a "Worst players who should never have won a major" list?

And I'm not talking about guys who happened to overachieve one lucky week - like, say, Todd Hamilton. I'd like to hear examples of guys who played bad (in your humble opinion), and won good.

But please, let's not talk about Darren Clarke's skipping through bunkers....

 

[Dariusz J.]

Dariusz - can you say specifically WHICH major champions of recent years have been, in your view, undeserving?

If you don't want to have to defend your choices to me - just pick a winner of either the US Open or the PGA. I really only get to see the Masters and the British Open. Mostly, I see guys who are well in control of their game and NOT winning titles from the deep cabbage.

Instead of a "Best Player never to have won a major" list - can we have a "Worst players who should never have won a major" list?

And I'm not talking about guys who happened to overachieve one lucky week - like, say, Todd Hamilton. I'd like to hear examples of guys who played bad (in your humble opinion), and won good.

But please, let's not talk about Darren Clarke's skipping through bunkers....

I do not watch statistics, neither I watched all majors of recent years. But if I am to choose - it would be certainly a guy who won mainly because of his overall luck, short game and putting without great accurate ballstriking from tee to green.
I think we can find quite a few who fall into this category recently.

Conversely, a "best player who never won a major" list would include a great ballstriker who couldn't putt or chip well. Probably Knudson. Certainly not current no.1 who is a total disappointment from the tee not being rather a bomber. In real golf he would have no chances to smell top ten of players.

You asked for my opinion -- thus, remember that I have the choice to say unpopular things.

Cheers

 

[dschultz6072]

This thread sounds like a bunch of jealousy now. This is the "game" the LD guys learned. It wasn't necessarily golf. It's a different game. Why the hell would you think about hitting every ball down the middle if all you need is one good one? These guys are swinging out of their asses every time just in case they catch it. BTW, you can tell if an LD guy can play golf though just by their swing. Look up Domenic Mazza or Dobbyn.

About being long and accurate, as if even someone like Sadlowski wasn't completely ripped for his size. If you want to hit it further, improve your technique. If your technique is as good as it gets, hit the gym. If you don't want to hit the gym, then you're stuck. This is how it works in any sport, whether it's increasing your field presence, getting some range, higher jump, increasing bat speed, whatever. There's no reason to be all snobby about your precious game, or worse yet, look down on someone who can get up and down because their ballstriking wasn't on that day.

That crack at Luke Donald...sheesh.

 

[Dariusz J.]

This thread sounds like a bunch of jealousy now. This is the "game" the LD guys learned. It wasn't necessarily golf. It's a different game. Why the hell would you think about hitting every ball down the middle if all you need is one good one? These guys are swinging out of their asses every time just in case they catch it. BTW, you can tell if an LD guy can play golf though just by their swing. Look up Domenic Mazza or Dobbyn.

About being long and accurate, as if even someone like Sadlowski wasn't completely ripped for his size. If you want to hit it further, improve your technique. If your technique is as good as it gets, hit the gym. If you don't want to hit the gym, then you're stuck. This is how it works in any sport, whether it's increasing your field presence, getting some range, higher jump, increasing bat speed, whatever. There's no reason to be all snobby about your precious game, or worse yet, look down on someone who can get up and down because their ballstriking wasn't on that day.

That crack at Luke Donald...sheesh.

Jealousy ? ROFL. I can hit very long if I want to, much longer than the majority of this board I guess, especially taking into account my "physical conditions" as you said and can assure you that it is much tougher to find a way to a great consistency. I would never change the feel of hitting 13/14 fairways for a 315 meters drive (both being my records). I used to think otherwise before though.
But as I said, everyone has his/her toys and priorities

Cheers