Titleist responds to the USGA's Distance Insights Report

[93civiccpe]

Three years ago they had some Tour pros hit Ben Hogan’s old driver and took Trackman readings. Jason Kokrak, one of the Tour’s longest hitters, participated. His drives averaged in the 260s (with modern balls). But, but, fitness ....


“Launch angles with the throwback club were much lower, around 9 degrees instead of Kokrak’s usual 11. Spin rates were dramatically higher, 3,100 rpm versus the usual 2,200; thus, the curve balls everyone was hitting. Ball speed was 164 mph against the 179 Kokrak gets with his Titleist 917D2. As for distance: Kokrak’s tournament roll-included average of 304 yards contrasted with his max carry of 271 with the old club. Of his 10 drives, most flew in the low 260s.

The size of Hogan's driver compared to today's standard club is striking.
Kokrak, from Warren, Ohio, 6-foot-4 with a program weight of 225, looks like he could have played offensive line at Ohio State.”

Yep, evidence that tech has helped. I have agreed from the beginning. That in no way proves that only tech has increased distance over the years. Only that it is one factor, which I have agreed upon from the beginning. Is that really hard to understand. All you are proving is that tech has played a factor, not that it's the only factor. Causation.. Hard to prove without a lot of data.

 

[LICC]

Yep, evidence that tech has helped. I have agreed from the beginning. That in no way proves that only tech has increased distance over the years. Only that it is one factor, which I have agreed upon from the beginning. Is that really hard to understand. All you are proving is that tech has played a factor, not that it's the only factor. Causation.. Hard to prove without a lot of data.

Finau also tried the Hogan driver and carried 260. With modern balls, so take more distance off to account for the newer ball technology. Two of the longest, fittest guys on Tour hit it no farther than the players hit the same equipment in the 1950s. The distance gains are 95% from the equipment. All direct evidence leads to that conclusion.

 

[93civiccpe]

Finau also tried the Hogan driver and carried 260. With modern balls, so take more distance off to account for the newer ball technology. Two of the longest, fittest guys on Tour hit it no farther than the players hit the same equipment in the 1950s. The distance gains are 95% from the equipment. All direct evidence leads to that conclusion.

That's terrible logic. A lot of club designers will tell you that the clubs were designed for the balls of the day. So you are comparing apples to oranges in that they used different balls and you are comparing the results trying to prove a point. They also hit with descending blows back then and due to knowledge and tech the guys today know that a couple degrees up is optimum for getting the long drives. So they are using a modern swing and modern ball with clubs not designed for it. How can that possibly prove anything??

 

[93civiccpe]

And btw, I'm not trying to be difficult. I work with data for a living and causation is easy to get wrong. Knowledge and data have been used to improve everything. We no longer have fat golfers smoking cigars on the PGA tour (at least not at the top). The guys winning are much better athletes and credit that athleticism. Even if it's a small percentage I don't think they are wrong. That's a lot of extra work to get in that shape if you honestly think there's no benefit. And it's crazy the story about Bryson. He was breaking the F9 and SpeedZone heads and went to an older (King Ltd) driver and is hitting further. So he got stronger, is using older equipment, and is hitting further.

 

[93civiccpe]

Btw, another thing just hit me. When you say that tech is the only thing that has increased distance, then say it's a swing change with Phil (and not fitness) you have broken your own argument. You are saying technique has also caused gains. And technique changed due to data right? By that argument you are agreeing it's not just hardware /tech.

 

[LICC]

That's terrible logic. A lot of club designers will tell you that the clubs were designed for the balls of the day. So you are comparing apples to oranges in that they used different balls and you are comparing the results trying to prove a point. They also hit with descending blows back then and due to knowledge and tech the guys today know that a couple degrees up is optimum for getting the long drives. So they are using a modern swing and modern ball with clubs not designed for it. How can that possibly prove anything??

That is just bad spinning right there. Why don’t you try considering that your idea has flaws and data like this is very telling.

 

[93civiccpe]

That is just bad spinning right there. Why don’t you try considering that your idea has flaws and data like this is very telling.

Once again, you refuse to consider you can be wrong. And look above, you've already broken your own argument. Not worth going on. I've tried to be respectful and show how data and causation works but you refuse to even consider a counter point. Explain how Bryson went backwards with tech and is hitting it measurably farther and the one big change was his fitness and strength?

 

[93civiccpe]

That is just bad spinning right there. Why don’t you try considering that your idea has flaws and data like this is very telling.

I'm not the one saying I'm right. I'm offering a counter hypotheses to yours. At no point have I said I was right or given an absolute like you have. I'm the one saying causation is extremely difficult to prove so I don't make those absolute statements.

 

[LICC]

Once again, you refuse to consider you can be wrong. And look above, you've already broken your own argument. Not worth going on. I've tried to be respectful and show how data and causation works but you refuse to even consider a counter point. Explain how Bryson went backwards with tech and is hitting it measurably farther and the one big change was his fitness and strength?

I didn’t break any argument. Phil made swing changes to swing faster. The results were he became longer and wilder. That in no way contradicts the clear data and facts the the predominant reason for increases in distance on Tour has been the equipment.

 

[93civiccpe]

I didn’t break any argument. Phil made swing changes to swing faster. The results were he became longer and wilder. That in no way contradicts the clear data and facts the the predominant reason for increases in distance on Tour has been the equipment.

Ok.. At least that's a change in what your originally said and one that I think is easier to defend. I've said over and over that I believe tech is the biggest factor but that I thought saying it was the only factor was not true and nearly impossible to prove. I bet if we were playing 18 or grabbing a beer together we'd have a heck of a time like most THPers and have fun discussing this in person. I thought all along we were not very far off. I do respect a good debate but often my logical side comes out and data is my thing. You will notice that when I do debate things on here I often say "I think" or "I believe" because most statements are hard to prove 100%. That might be the downside of being an engineer.. I can be overly stubborn when it comes to statements of fact that aren't proven. I how there's no hard feelings.. I enjoyed the conversation. Last year there was an event where THPers got to go to a Top Golf with Jamie Sadlowski.. I hope that happens again and you get a chance to ask a guy like Jamie his opinion since he trained to hit a ball far and uses unique drivers meant for the long distance competitions.

 

[leftshot]

Three years ago they had some Tour pros hit Ben Hogan’s old driver and took Trackman readings. Jason Kokrak, one of the Tour’s longest hitters, participated. His drives averaged in the 260s (with modern balls).

Let's sum this up. Three years ago they had Jason Kokrak swing a club not fitted for him, designed for a different swing type and ball, and they gave Kokrak 10 swings with this ill-fitted club that he's never swung before, and you think this is a valid way to determine the cause(s) of distance increases?

 

[LICC]

Let's sum this up. Three years ago they had Jason Kokrak swing a club not fitted for him, designed for a different swing type and ball, and they gave Kokrak 10 swings with this ill-fitted club that he's never swung before, and you think this is a valid way to determine the cause(s) of distance increases?

Actual data from him actually swinging older equipment- yes that is a highly valid way of getting the most useful comparison information. Oh please with the balls weren’t built for the club nonsense. The older balls would have went even shorter distances.
Around the same time they had some Tour pros at Cherry Creek hit the same club and ball type that Arnold Palmer used when he drove the green at the 1st hole at the 1960 US Open. No one came close except Rory, and he hit it into the front left bunker. All these fit guys couldn’t drive it farther than Arnie with the same equipment.

 

[93civiccpe]

Actual data from him actually swinging older equipment- yes that is a highly valid way of getting the most useful comparison information. Oh please with the balls weren’t built for the club nonsense. The older balls would have went even shorter distances.
Around the same time they had some Tour pros at Cherry Creek hit the same club and ball type that Arnold Palmer used when he drove the green at the 1st hole at the 1960 US Open. No one came close except Rory, and he hit it into the front left bunker. All these fit guys couldn’t drive it farther than Arnie with the same equipment.

I don't know that's true about the balls. I heard one of the PGA pros discussing how hard a 1 iron from the 80s is to hit as the balls back then spin more which helped it get into the air and the low spin nature of the balls today make it much more difficult.

 

[Phil75070]

If each and every parameter that could affect distance were to be legislated by the USGA/R&A for both balls and clubs, there would ultimately be no differentiation in performance among manufacturers and no incentive for innovation within the Rules.

I don't trust the ruling bodies as, if you think back, the groove decision was supposed to cause the players to dial it back and abandon the "bomb and gouge" style of play. We see how well that worked.

 

[LICC]

I don't know that's true about the balls. I heard one of the PGA pros discussing how hard a 1 iron from the 80s is to hit as the balls back then spin more which helped it get into the air and the low spin nature of the balls today make it much more difficult.

So you think manufacturers have been making balls travel shorter distances with newer technology??

 

[93civiccpe]

So you think manufacturers have been making balls travel shorter distances with newer technology??

I think they've been able to manipulate spin more with modern ball technology. If you have a ball that spins more, it makes sense it would be easier to launch with a lower lofted iron and a descending strike. Newer balls are designed to get the golfers into the optimal spin and launch conditions with driver, irons, and wedges. How many pros carry a 1 iron anymore? I don't think they need to.. They can play a 2 or 3 driving iron that rolls out a long way.

 

[LICC]

Butch Harmon calls for bifurcation:

“I think technology should be for the average player and not the Tour player,” Harmon said earlier this week on an Instagram live video with his son, Claude Harmon III, also a longtime instructor. “I think the Tour should have its own rules.”

The changes center around distance. The current technology for professionals is making “some great golf courses obsolete,” Butch Harmon said, as players are hitting it longer than previous generations. ...

Golf is also the only sport, Harmon said, where former stars would be better if given the new equipment. He used NFL middle linebackers as an example – Sam Huff, Ray Nitschke, Dick Butkus and Chuck Bednarik “couldn’t even play today; they couldn’t pass cover.” Ben Hogan, Sam Snead, Byron Nelson, Arnold Palmer and Jack Nicklaus would be better, as “the game has gotten easier for the good players because of equipment.”

“People will say, ‘Well, how can you say the game of golf’s gotten easier?’ It hasn’t gotten easier for us because we’re not that talented,” Harmon said. “But because of the club heads, because the balls don’t curve as much – the reason that these young players can hit the ball so far is they can swing that hard at it because it doesn’t spin. If you swung that hard at a wooden driver and a soft ball, that thing is going to go right off the planet.”

 

[Daddio]

These older courses wouldn't be obsolete if they strategically grew the grass when the tour came to town. Cut it back for the rest of us after they leave. So easy, so obvious it's being ignored deliberately to full fill their agenda.

 

[Jiffypop]

These older courses wouldn't be obsolete if they strategically grew the grass when the tour came to town. Cut it back for the rest of us after they leave. So easy, so obvious it's being ignored deliberately to full fill their agenda.

and not make the fairways brick hard.
I'll never forget the first time I walked across the 4th fairway at Firestone and felt how firm it was. And this was after a 3 hr rain delay.

 

[LICC]

These older courses wouldn't be obsolete if they strategically grew the grass when the tour came to town. Cut it back for the rest of us after they leave. So easy, so obvious it's being ignored deliberately to full fill their agenda.

The longest hitters are ramping up 320-330 yard carries. A bit thicker fairways aren't going to make THAT much difference.

 

[Pantherhawk]

These older courses wouldn't be obsolete if they strategically grew the grass when the tour came to town. Cut it back for the rest of us after they leave. So easy, so obvious it's being ignored deliberately to full fill their agenda.

Honestly, I think most venues already do this. A number of years ago I played at TPC Deere Run the last day they allowed play prior to the John Deere Classic. That tournament does not have the reputation for being a challenging course, but I was very surprised at how thick the grass was when I played. Now, maybe it was just really thick and then was going to be mowed down a bit before play (entirely possible). But I had lies in the rough where I couldn't advance the ball 150 yards - and at the time I was in my early 20s and my handicap was something like a +2.

These guys just have such incredible speed that what us mortals consider to be a thick, near impossible lie is just somewhat challenging for them. Part of that is technology, part of that is technique, part of that is increased athleticism. But the point of this is that I'm not sure seasonal/temporary changes to grass length can be enough for PGA Tour players to experience the challenges that the rest of us experience when we miss fairways.

 

[Pantherhawk]

and not make the fairways brick hard.
I'll never forget the first time I walked across the 4th fairway at Firestone and felt how firm it was. And this was after a 3 hr rain delay.

To me, the firmness of the fairways is one of the biggest differences. The first bounces you see on Tour always make me jealous. It seems they get more yardage on the first bounce than I get full roll out on a dry day.

 

[BigMac]

To me, the firmness of the fairways is one of the biggest differences. The first bounces you see on Tour always make me jealous. It seems they get more yardage on the first bounce than I get full roll out on a dry day.

Come play a desert course during the summer!

 

[Pantherhawk]

Come play a desert course during the summer!

I was supposed to be there in a couple weeks...

 

[LICC]

Honestly, I think most venues already do this. A number of years ago I played at TPC Deere Run the last day they allowed play prior to the John Deere Classic. That tournament does not have the reputation for being a challenging course, but I was very surprised at how thick the grass was when I played. Now, maybe it was just really thick and then was going to be mowed down a bit before play (entirely possible). But I had lies in the rough where I couldn't advance the ball 150 yards - and at the time I was in my early 20s and my handicap was something like a +2.

These guys just have such incredible speed that what us mortals consider to be a thick, near impossible lie is just somewhat challenging for them. Part of that is technology, part of that is technique, part of that is increased athleticism. But the point of this is that I'm not sure seasonal/temporary changes to grass length can be enough for PGA Tour players to experience the challenges that the rest of us experience when we miss fairways.

Agree with this. They would prefer to be in the rough 20-30 yards closer to the green than in the fairway 20-30 back.