We've launched the new forums! Read more here

How important is equipment for the Tour player?

I don't think it makes a huge difference. Those guys could shoot well with almost any equipment. It makes a bit of a difference though and that's why they are fitted so thoroughly.
 
Damaikis said:
I don't think it makes a huge difference. Those guys could shoot well with almost any equipment. It makes a bit of a difference though and that's why they are fitted so thoroughly.
Click to expand...

I agree that fitting has taken on huge importance and I think that fitting can make pretty much any brand work for an individual professional.
 
To answer the original question, we need to think about this from several point of views, we seem to think that it would have something to do with the actual clubs, and / or mental side how they trust their clubs. There's also another big thing that changes, the company. How the company and the people in that company supports the player. Do all the companies act the same way, do they offer monetary compensation, do they have orange juice at meetings, do they ask the player for feedback, do they send him gift baskets on christmas. Does the player want gift baskets, does the player just want to be left alone and play with stock shafts and gear? There's so many factors that can disturb / help the player to get those couple of more birdies than the next guy. How quickly does the player adapt to the new company? How quickly does the company adapt to the new player?

So, we've got a lot of things,

1. The actual equipment.
2. Mental side of having new clubs & gear.
3. Company / player relationship?
4. Company support towards the player.
5. Player support towards the company.

and so on...
 
Guys rise and fall in the rankings all the time. Players have good years and bad years. I think this is just an example of people trying to find reasons why and a simple reason is "well he changed his equipment!", nevermind if it's right or not. There could be several reasons which are more likely, we just don't know about them so we try to attribute it to equipment.
 
thepete said:
Guys rise and fall in the rankings all the time. Players have good years and bad years. I think this is just an example of people trying to find reasons why and a simple reason is "well he changed his equipment!", nevermind if it's right or not. There could be several reasons which are more likely, we just don't know about them so we try to attribute it to equipment.
Click to expand...

I'll take that a step further and say that it often is way for people to manifest their own brand biases.
 
thepete said:
Guys rise and fall in the rankings all the time. Players have good years and bad years. I think this is just an example of people trying to find reasons why and a simple reason is "well he changed his equipment!", nevermind if it's right or not. There could be several reasons which are more likely, we just don't know about them so we try to attribute it to equipment.
Click to expand...

Agree 10000%.
 
I don't look at Woods, irons, wedges its self being such a huge change as those can be ground on, welded on, weight moved, taken away, added, proto's built to make the player wants in his hands. I think the ball is biggest unknowen factor that the player has to deal with.

But in the grand scheme of things the_pete is spot on.
 
To me, I don't think it's as much about the clubs as it is about their confidence and feeling comfortable over the ball. Most of the big names that have struggled after a switch can have thier issues traced to one facet of the game or the other.....GMAC's putting stats fell off the face of the earth, so his struggles were more from that than anything else, Camilo just lost his short game completely.

Guys with that kind of talent can go out and shoot under par with just about any clubs you give them as long as all areas of their game are clicking....I think it was more mental than anything else.
 
Depends on the player. Some guys switch and lose it as Faldo said recently. Others not so much. It is an odd thing.
 
Only way to know for sure is to ask a Tour pro. I used to work for a manufacturer and seen what the pros put our tour dept thru. So my opinion is that they are really into equipment and not just off the rack stuuff.
Hawk said:
This question comes from comments that come up time to time, most recently in the Rory to Nike thread.

How much do you think equipment brand plays a part in the success of a Tour pro? We have seen a number of guys move to new companies after finding success, only to see that success wither away. Was the new equipment really the cause of their decline or do you think other factors like distractions, pressure to perform, fatigue, etc were the reason? How much does brand bias play into the opinions we have on the subject?

We hear often that it's the indian rather than the arrow and a Tour pro could shoot a great score with the clubs we are blaming for our bad scores, but then we hear that somebody like Gmac couldn't win after chaging sponsorts because of the equipment. Just an interesting double standard that I find curious.
Click to expand...
 
Sure, any OEM can probably make a club that matches exactly in specs another's. But the feel won't be there. That's whats so crucial to them.
 
JF16 said:
Sure, any OEM can probably make a club that matches exactly in specs another's. But the feel won't be there. That's whats so crucial to them.
Click to expand...

Im curious why?
 
If you hit anything flush it's gonna feel fine and these guys don't miss the sweet spot.
 
I usually don't think it is the equipment but the mental change that effects the player.

These guys seem to be so mental with their game that the slightest changes may lead to the poor play. I mean a person walking 25 feet away or a camera click makes these guys go nuts. So I really think it all comes down to the mental side of it at that level.

I really don't see a big difference between, Callaway, TM, Titleist, Ping, Nike, etc at that level so to blame the equipment seems unfair.
 
I am of the opinion that the pros will hit any club with great success, assuming the shaft stiffness and L/L/L is close to what they are used to.
 
I think there's two sides to this... sort of...

On the one hand, these guys are so good that they may notice the slightest difference in weight, offset, or just different minute nuances in the equipment. On the other hand, these guys are so good that they could probably succeed with any equipment.
 
One-T, I mean Overton, looked like he was on his way to stardom but has backslid big time since changing equipment (though it could be too much partying in Bloomington).
 
Typically the switch takes place after a banner year so I think there are numerous factors in play. Like
Dean said, comfort plays a factor. I'd they or anyone isn't comfortable the gear isn't going to work.

Fatigue from playing a larger off season schedule from the past season success. From more travel. Possibly lack of familiarity with new courses from new invitees due to success.

I think equipment is important but I think other factors play a roll and take a toll on the performance of a player. With time they should get used to the new gear ala GMAC
 
I think I remember reading somewhere that Gmac used Cleveland equipment in college, so it wasn't totally "new" if that is the case
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top