I don't think it's up for conjecture either. The gear and the ball make it so much harder for the elite players to separate themselves. Tiger is extraordinary, like a pianist finding a way to dominate in competitions where everyone plays wearing boxing gloves.
Tiger Wins
- Thread starter hp12c
- Start date
- Status
I don't think it's up for conjecture either. The gear and the ball make it so much harder for the elite players to separate themselves. Tiger is extraordinary, like a pianist finding a way to dominate in competitions where everyone plays wearing boxing gloves.
It applies to everyone because you simply don't have as much time to practice when you have kids.Sure there are varying degrees of commitment but I could argue that Tiger might have had more commitments outside of playing that Jack never had.The amount of endorsements Tiger had during his peak was mind boggling.
Jack's commitment to his family was that he did not play as many tournaments as he could have.He centered his attention on majors and the bigger tournaments.It's not widely known but Jack lead the scoring average eight times but never won the Vardon trophy because he did not play enough rounds to qualify.
One point I am not sure if anyone has mentioned....imo, it is easier to chase a record than having to "set the bar". AFter Jack broke the record, how many of those 2nd place finishes do you think he would have converted to wins if he could have predicted the future(i.e. Tiger).
None, I think Jack tried the best he could to win every tournament.
I would think just the opposite about records. There is immense pressure to break or tie a record but there is no pressure to go into uncharted territory. Think Hank Aaron chasing 714.
mgranato
New
It's all about the ball
Jack won all 18 of his majors with possibly the worst ball in competitive golf history.
***************************************************************
Perhaps the most damning evidence of the MacGregor golf ball’s inferiority comes from Frank Thomas, who for 26 years directed testing of all golf balls used in competition as the USGA’s technical director. To make sure the balls used on Tour were the same as those originally submitted for the conforming ball list, Thomas collected sleeves of balls from Nicklaus and Weiskopf for testing at the 1977 U.S. Open at Tulsa’s Southern Hills Country Club.
When Thomas put the Tourney through its paces on “Iron Byron” at the USGA’s test center in New Jersey, he said the MacGregor ball veered 2-3 yards to the left; the next one turned a little more; and some moved as much as 15 yards off target. Having never before seen such an inconsistent ball flight, Thomas stopped the test.
“I thought something must be wrong with ‘Iron Byron,’ ” Thomas said recently in a telephone interview.
But the machine operated properly, and the results of MacGregor’s re-test were identical.
At the 2000 U.S. Open at Pebble Beach, following Thomas’ retirement, he revealed to Nicklaus the startling results of the ’77 test. Nicklaus told him he wasn’t surprised.
“He knew it wasn’t a very good golf ball,” Thomas said. “It just shows how good he really was. I truly believe he would’ve won several more majors if he had played a better ball.”
****************************************************************
The full article on the MacGregor Tourney ball can be seen here.
Jack won all 18 of his majors with possibly the worst ball in competitive golf history.
***************************************************************
Perhaps the most damning evidence of the MacGregor golf ball’s inferiority comes from Frank Thomas, who for 26 years directed testing of all golf balls used in competition as the USGA’s technical director. To make sure the balls used on Tour were the same as those originally submitted for the conforming ball list, Thomas collected sleeves of balls from Nicklaus and Weiskopf for testing at the 1977 U.S. Open at Tulsa’s Southern Hills Country Club.
When Thomas put the Tourney through its paces on “Iron Byron” at the USGA’s test center in New Jersey, he said the MacGregor ball veered 2-3 yards to the left; the next one turned a little more; and some moved as much as 15 yards off target. Having never before seen such an inconsistent ball flight, Thomas stopped the test.
“I thought something must be wrong with ‘Iron Byron,’ ” Thomas said recently in a telephone interview.
But the machine operated properly, and the results of MacGregor’s re-test were identical.
At the 2000 U.S. Open at Pebble Beach, following Thomas’ retirement, he revealed to Nicklaus the startling results of the ’77 test. Nicklaus told him he wasn’t surprised.
“He knew it wasn’t a very good golf ball,” Thomas said. “It just shows how good he really was. I truly believe he would’ve won several more majors if he had played a better ball.”
****************************************************************
The full article on the MacGregor Tourney ball can be seen here.
The point is they had different bars to chase. Jack's bar was 14. Tiger's is 19. Jack's motivation probably lessened once he got to 14. If Hank Aaron was chasing 800, he probably would have hit more home runs.
birly-shirly
New
Intuitively, I agree with much of this. I absolutely do think that equipment has made it easier for amateurs to launch the ball in the air - but I do question whether the same benefits apply to elite players.
I know there are issues with making comparisons across the years, when set-ups change. However, at a quick glance, I don't see much change in driving accuracy or GIR stats across 30 years of records.
Obviously, driving distance is up across the board. But is there any evidence that the field has bunched? Or, in other words, that the midpack or shorter-hitter has benefitted more than the Tigers and Phils of the world? 30 years ago, the longest hitters were driving it 35 - 40 yards past the shortest hitters, and that gap seems to have remained intact.
Maybe courses haven't added enough yardage to offset increased driving distance, in which case everyone is hitting their approach shots from nearer the green and not facing enough shots from challenging distance to really separate out the field. But if that were really the case, wouldn't average GIR be higher now than 30 years ago?
Lastly, I remember a fairly similar debate back in the 80s - when people were asking why there weren't any really dominant players coming through to succeed Nicklaus. Back then, the thought of anyone taking major victories into double figures was a pretty exotic idea and the argument that the field had bunched seemed more persuasive. But hasn't Tiger changed that?
James Marshall (Hogan1953)
New member
Lindsey,
What is it about today's ball design that allows you to swing more steeply? Thanks.
Lindsey Newman
New
birly,
I think the biggest thing is that the equipment has reduced side spin so much. I'm not even sure that equipment has helped the elite player as much as it has to limit them. I believe that's why Tiger and Ernie Els were using the softer more spin-able balls over the last few years. You can actually shape it a little.
It just my theory, but when I learned the game back in the mid-90's, I was hitting a Honma black cherry wooden driver and mizuno blades with Maxfli HT balata balls. Everyone tried to shape every shot and you actually could. All the better players could actually execute shots to fit th situation and I think that it may have been easier to attack a golf course back then. Now instead of carving a shot into the green you're almost forced to hit a straight shot at a tucked pin and the miss is a pull or push. In order to shape it with today's stuff, you're almost forced to completely miss hit the thing to get any curve on it.
So in a lot of ways I think the game has become more difficult for the better player.
I think the biggest thing is that the equipment has reduced side spin so much. I'm not even sure that equipment has helped the elite player as much as it has to limit them. I believe that's why Tiger and Ernie Els were using the softer more spin-able balls over the last few years. You can actually shape it a little.
It just my theory, but when I learned the game back in the mid-90's, I was hitting a Honma black cherry wooden driver and mizuno blades with Maxfli HT balata balls. Everyone tried to shape every shot and you actually could. All the better players could actually execute shots to fit th situation and I think that it may have been easier to attack a golf course back then. Now instead of carving a shot into the green you're almost forced to hit a straight shot at a tucked pin and the miss is a pull or push. In order to shape it with today's stuff, you're almost forced to completely miss hit the thing to get any curve on it.
So in a lot of ways I think the game has become more difficult for the better player.
Lindsey Newman
New
The ball just spins so much less on steep impact. Flies straighter and further. If you got really steep with an iron shot you could actually cut the ball without even making that bad of a swing.
Last edited:
tongzilla
New
i unintentionally curve the ball left or right very often without feeling i'm mishitting at all...in fact sometimes it can feel pretty pure...
birly-shirly
New
Interesting thoughts Lindsey - I hadn't really considered the possibility that equipment (really the ball, right?) might have made it easier to hit decent shots, but harder to hit great shots. That might explain why GIR stats have stayed fairly static, even whilst the best ballstrikers' advantage has been eroded.
Also, as a concept, it's hard for me to test. Like many others here, I'm not yet struggling with too little curve.
I do remember tour players, Ray Floyd and Trevino being 2, commenting back even in the 80s that the ball then was going too straight and taking some of the subtlety out of the game.
Lindsey Newman
New
I get together with couple of guys at the end of evey season and we play a Donald Ross with wood woods, blades designed pre 1990, no 60 degree wedges and blades or bulls eye putters. The one guy has dozens of real Titleist balata balls that have been keep cool and dry since 96. We break em out and play 36. It rediculous how easy it is to curve, cut and lose these balls.
Tongzilla, I am not saying you can't curve today's stuff, I'm just saying it takes more exaggerated motions to do it.
johnnymarlboro
New
1 under on the round, even for the tournament. Looks like its gonna be a MC.
puttmaster
New
LOL - looks like he and Phil collected their appearance fees and were still able to be home for the weekend, eh?
I suspected appearance fees may be happening under the table here. No reason, just a feeling. The guy that owns the place is a billionaire. The whole point of the event is to advertise his resort. What's a couple hundred grand for Tiger and Phil to him? I doubt the ratings will be that good watching Charlie Wi battle it out with Jerry Kelly and Jeff Maggert.
puttmaster
New
Rumor is: $1.5 mil for Tiger this week; $1 mil for Phil.
- Status