PODCAST Off Course: Episode 15: Does Golf Have a Distance Problem?
Wait a minute...
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #28
What you guys didn't see, was my use of google maps + MS Paint showing how more than one hole could be resolved at Muirfield with one bunker and one tee relocation.
I maintain that the biggest threat here is not course design, it's BAD course design. #1 at Muirfield is flat out pedestrian on the line they were taking. All you need to do is move the tee box 20 yards to the right for the pros, and they have to hit a banana to get back on that kind of line.
Hell of a lot cheaper to build a tee box than re-design a perfectly fine hole.
I maintain that the biggest threat here is not course design, it's BAD course design. #1 at Muirfield is flat out pedestrian on the line they were taking. All you need to do is move the tee box 20 yards to the right for the pros, and they have to hit a banana to get back on that kind of line.
Hell of a lot cheaper to build a tee box than re-design a perfectly fine hole.
I'm horribly curious to see this new bryson-tron play on a links style open in 30mph winds.
HipCheck
@robmillertime
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2020
- Messages
- 833
- Reaction score
- 807
- Handicap
- 7
You're assuming that pros hate bunkers, though. Why wouldn't it be worth the risk? A 100 yard bunker shot? Should all holes be sand fairways now? Asking for a (internet) friend.
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #31
lmao, why did you quote my post to talk about a bunker?
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #33
I don't either - but I also want to see them properly guarded - Strategically placing tee boxes goes an awful long way.
HipCheck
@robmillertime
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2020
- Messages
- 833
- Reaction score
- 807
- Handicap
- 7
I don't think placing tees adjacent to the tree lines to eliminate the accessibility of parts of the golf course, creates good course design. It does take driver out of the hands of everyone. So...yay? We're not trying to create golf socialism where EVERYONE is forced to take the same path to the whole.
I think there is confusion on rolling the ball back. It's just a "Let's kill distance for all" statement. It's creating a ball that needs to be CONTROLLED by the pro, more than today's super stable balls. Bombers will still hit it further than non bombers. But can you bomb AND control it? Are you a shotmaker or are you all about distance? I don't think you'd call Bryson a shotmaker right now. He engineers his way around a course in ways that others don't think of
Last edited:
Moving the tee box does nothing on 1 at Muirfield IMO. The pros are just taking it over the edge of the houses. Is it really bad course design if the hole was designed when the driver went 250 on average and 300 was an outlier?
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #36
If you go beside the trees, they won't be able to elevate that fast.
And yes/no. But the additional bunker alters that experience significantly.
We can agree to disagree on the trees. Having been there I don't think the trees would cause you or me an issue let alone the best players in the world. What bunker you didn't mention a bunker on the first hole?
For the record I don't think there is a distance issue.
Hamfist
I promise not to murder Canadan.
A couple of thoughts.
I've said it before, and will say it again: there is no reason to change anything or to even worry about the length guys are hitting it on the PGA. The only thing that the distance does is drop the scores for tournaments. So what? If you win a tournament at 5-under versus 19-under, the check amount remains the same. Let them go low, it's all just entertainment. Might there be short-term dominance by a few guys? Yes. Until, that is, everyone catches up to them. It's the nature of competitive sports.
The rest of the golf-playing world remains unaffected by these guys bombing it.
Much ado about nothing.
I've said it before, and will say it again: there is no reason to change anything or to even worry about the length guys are hitting it on the PGA. The only thing that the distance does is drop the scores for tournaments. So what? If you win a tournament at 5-under versus 19-under, the check amount remains the same. Let them go low, it's all just entertainment. Might there be short-term dominance by a few guys? Yes. Until, that is, everyone catches up to them. It's the nature of competitive sports.
The rest of the golf-playing world remains unaffected by these guys bombing it.
Much ado about nothing.
Rob gets it.
I’m no golf historian. What was the driver behind the golf ball that got us to where we are today?
Primarily, control and distance. Just like it is now.
The progression from wound to the multilayered solid core ball was met with all the same trepidation from the governing bodies that we hear today. Innovation is a wonderful thing, don't get me wrong. I have faith the game will continue to adapt to technology, but I also believe at some point tech will surpass longstanding rules and standards.
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #42
- Admin
- #43
Isn't the bolded above what Bryson is doing? Just because he's doing it differently doesn't mean its wrong.
HipCheck
@robmillertime
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2020
- Messages
- 833
- Reaction score
- 807
- Handicap
- 7
or does he exploit it?
Also, no.
You just can't argue that distance issues are all due to bad course design of the past. Yet, you are.
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #45
I think it's adorable that after all of our discussions, that's the conclusion you've come to.
Will it though golf has always been dominated by the longest player. Never has there been a time when the shortest player was the best. This era is no different. The only thing different about now is people are upset because old courses are no longer viable.
Isn't that a problem, though? If courses are no longer viable, as you say, what's the solution?
HipCheck
@robmillertime
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2020
- Messages
- 833
- Reaction score
- 807
- Handicap
- 7
Yes, BUT because modern balls go much much straighter and spin way less than balls of old (add the modern driver into the mix), and he's eliminating the need to work the ball. You simply don't have to do it a lot anymore. Would you call him a shotmaker? He's really a spectacle more than shotmaker. Creative? Nah not really.
Hit it as long as you can, land it soft on the green, make your putts. PGA Tour is about flying the ball all the way to the hole and then putting on smooth, fast greens. Each week.
At the same time, this makes majors more interesting. Even the PGA.
HipCheck
@robmillertime
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2020
- Messages
- 833
- Reaction score
- 807
- Handicap
- 7
- Admin
- #50
But why do you have to be shotmaker? Being able to control a ball at that speed and distance is pretty impressive to me. Heck before him Bubba Watson hit the ball pretty damn far and took some different lines and was able to control his shot shape a bit for a while. I still am not sure others can do what Bryson is doing, I guess we will see. I don't understand the logic of wanting to go backwards in ball tech or equipment though. Whats next go from iPhones back to Motorola flip phones?Yes, BUT because modern balls go much much straighter and spin way less than balls of old (add the modern driver into the mix), and he's eliminating the need to work the ball. You simply don't have to do it a lot anymore. Would you call him a shotmaker? He's really a spectacle more than shotmaker. Creative? Nah not really.
Hit it as long as you can, land it soft on the green, make your putts. PGA Tour is about flying the ball all the way to the hole and then putting on smooth, fast greens. Each week.
At the same time, this makes majors more interesting. Even the PGA.