Off Course is back this week with a fantastic show including discussing some polarizing topics including Jack Nicklaus being full of it and is golf etiquette dead. Hosted by Dan Edwards and Rob Miller, each Friday the hosts give you a deep look into the world of golf and equipment in a way unlike any other podcast has done before.
Episode 14 is here and Rob and Dan discuss the following topics.
Jack is Full of It
Golf Etiquette Being Dead
Is Distance a Skill?
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Defintely with @HipCheck on TopGolf not really being an entry into the game of golf, because it isn’t the game of golf. It’s games, based on hitting golf balls. And drinking and eating and hitting more golf balls.
I want my TWENTY. PER-CENT. Seriously. Who do I need to talk to about that? I want a distance problem.
Can we post a banner somewhere saying the only thing Bryson changed was him? I feel like that is TOTALLY lost in all the Bryson mania. Keep the equipment out of it.
Jack… Why does every hero have to turn into a crabby, know-it-all, hypocritical **** when they get old?
Good listen, guys.
Top Golf serves its purpose and introduces new people to the game, but that isn’t the entry point into playing 18 holes, the rules and etiquette that comes along with it. I think the problem is Top Golf bleeding over to traditional golf and trying to bring that atmosphere/lack of etiquette.
I think Jack needs to pipe down. The trampoline’s he’s trying to pass off as a fairway this week are not helping his cause. He can slow down the fairways and still keep the greens fast. Agronomy is the best tool to fight whatever the perceived distance issue. It’s like saying, too many golfers are making longer putts, ban the mallets and alignment aides bc it’s making putting too easy. I also think Bryson is teetering on the line and can do some serious damage to his body without some issues popping up. I am not sure what the timeline is, but when the headline hits that Bryson hurt himself, I’m not sure many will be shocked.
You need to play a round one foursome BEHIND Dan. The more crowded the course, the better.
I can’t wait for next week and the R&A discussion. I agree with @Canadan this week on most points, including the lack of etiquette that exists in this newer generation of golfers it seems. I can’t believe Dan didn’t make a smart comment to the guys that kept pulling up to his box but I love the golf cart buffer move haha. Speaking of etiquette, at least around here people don’t even fix ball marks on greens! Its absurd.
Loophole – noun. Definition: ambiguity or inadequacy in the law or a set of rules.
What’s so outrageous? ????
Free drops for pros purposely blasting into grandstands is also a loophole as well. It’s fun to be a pro.
The free drop grandstand argument is a loophole yes absolutely. Improving ones self to hit the ball farther is not a loophole, not everyone would be able to do what he is doing or they would be.
The inadequacy in the set of rules I’m talking about isn’t working out, it’s equipment rules. Find the straightest longest combo. Max distance. Minimize curve. Cut every corner. Ask for free drops when necessary.
What guy on tour in the history of golf hasn’t done that?
Its a SKILL
If there was a rule that stated drivers had to be a certain loft than you could make the argument he is using a loophole. However I’m pretty sure his equipment is conforming, different…yes but that is Bryson. I’m no rules expert but I’m pretty sure there is not, If you want to argue that in general the rules need to be changed in this regard fine but the argument that he is using a loophole in the current rules to his advantage is laughable as is the fact that they need to be changed because of what one single person is doing
That would actually be breaking a rule, not a loophole. But if your REALLY don’t think the term loophole doesn’t apply then cool. He’s just ‘working the system.’
“Clubs are maxed for distance, but you can’t stop me from working out to hit it further and say FU to your course design.”
I love it. He’s the USGA Distance Study in human form.
Haha I know I did that on purpose. I’m not trying to argue here but I just think the word loophole getting thrown around by @golfunfiltered initially and then hearing it on your podcast blew my mind. I just don’t see what he is doing as a loophole or even bending the rules to his advantage. I think what he is doing is impressive and something that is not sustainable long term.
Loophole is probably the wrong word, but here’s how I see it.
Overall, there really isn’t anything preventing any player from going down this same path, aside from desire to do so. Nothing inherently wrong with that. Golf’s governing bodies also have specifications equipment must fall within, or at least not exceed. So there’s that failsafe.
However, the fact that parity exists within the equipment itself, coupled with the variability within the players, and the millions of combinations that result, allows for significant differences in starting point. In other words, all golfers are not equipped the same.
Is there a problem with that? I honestly don’t know. One argument could be that the difference between Golfer A and Golfer B should be skill and talent. The added variable of equipment differences makes it tough to compare.
Of course, equipment variance is seen throughout many sports. Endless examples exist. But there are also sports where a standard is established across the board for anyone who plays it: the ball used (for applicable sports) and the field of play.
In golf, the only standard across the board is the course, which I argue is being threatened due to the lack of a standard everywhere else.
Are people really asking for everybody to be the same? Should Jordan and Craig Hodges have been the same? Should Tom Brady only be able to throw the same passes as his backup?
If the equipment has a limit, the difference is skill level.
That’s correct, skill level should be the difference. Equipment variance can be narrowed.
So I am still trying to figure out how anybody could view this as some sort of loophole? Every player features a different skill set. Bryson wanted to improve his, so hit the gym, worked on his long game and here we go.
And if someone does want to view it that way, where was the talk of loophole when Tiger put on a ton of muscle, visited "doctor" Gallea for "treatment" and got much bigger? Or Gary Woodland going in the reverse and dropping 25 lbs.
Sounds to me like you want everyone to play the same ball, the same clubs and the same putter. Lets put all the OEM’s out of business and go back to the 1920’s then shall we?
Or that someone doesn’t view hitting it further as a skill.
I look forward to our next meal with Jamie Sadlowski then.
Oh, it’s definitely a skill. No question.
I thought it was a loophole? Make up your mind
Not at all. Don’t make that jump in logic.
What about instead of rolling back the ball, we max that sucker out and optimize it to a standard? Give it to everyone. Eliminates the distance loss concern, and course designers can know what’s coming at them.
A skill can’t be developed enough in response to a loophole?
I really don’t think courses need to be changed. They have already tried making them longer (Erin Hills for example) and we see how that turned out. Years ago they were making them "Tiger Proof" and that didn’t matter either. Every player has a choice on equipment to play from clubs to balls all within the rules, its their skill level that allows them to do certain things better than others.
Even if we did go backwards and standardize everything as you suggest certain players would be better at things than others, thats their skill
Yes sir, I agree with you there. I think at some point golf will go that route.
I hope you are wrong.
I very well may be, but at some point courses will become obsolete.
Something has to be done.Over time I have become more supportive of the “grow the grass” argument. That seems easiest and most likely.
Obsolete why? As it compares to par?
I honestly think at some point it may become an issue. But I also think golf has a funny way of balancing things out.
Maybe listen to it then because it’s not stating it, it’s asking the question.
The carry distances of half the tour are massively long given course lengths. What would be wrong with bifurcation of equipment?
Nothing, except it’s going to be very tough to draw the line on where that line takes place.
f**k you.
Massively collectively long? Hardly.
selectively long? Absolutely.
Bouncing 60-80 yards? Definitely.
Where is the real problem.
You mean the bullet point for the podcast? It’s a question. We break down why it’s being asked during the show, but I understand why not everyone feels like listening.
I stand by everything I’ve said. And it’s definitely not as simple as what you’re presenting because I respect the hell out of what jack accomplished as a player.
Bifurcate for pros, USGA Am events, and NCAA, and global equivalents. Doesn’t seem to be tough to draw that line.
280 carry isn’t on average isn’t massively long? To have a 280 average means that when they want to ramp it up the average Tour player can carry it 290+
This without a doubt
Agree. To imply that Jack is "full of it" as clickbait makes me not even bother to listen to the podcast. Jack is regarded by everyone as a decent and honorable guy. Just can’t go along with this.
Yet post in the podcast thread and argue the topic? Perhaps listening offers insight because nobody said otherwise to what you say above.
Asking if Jack is full of it on this thread is an implication. And you clearly know this.
Again if you want to debate a podcast, listen to the podcast. Seems pretty logical.
If you don’t, that’s cool. There are 7 million posts on the forum that don’t have a podcast.
"when they want to ramp it up" …what?
Of course they can (some of them). Hell, I can carry it 290 if I ‘ramp it up’
But, they don’t. And their numbers confirm it. Funny how the Korn Ferry Tour distance numbers are through the roof, yet those guys aren’t breaching the PGA… Weird how that works. It’s almost like… distance… isn’t.. everything?
Not really the point of the thread (or the podcast though). The point of the podcast was to put Jack on blast for trying to eff with the equipment of the game I love while at the same time letting these guys get 20% of their total distance on the ground. It’s a joke. If he was serious about length being an issue, his fairways in Columbus would be soaked for weeks leading up to these events.
The thread is about a podcast, where we discuss whether Jack’s claims that players hit the ball too long while allowing them to set up his tournament with concrete fairways (which adds MASSIVE distance) to tee balls.
It’s a simple question. Does the tournament condition of Muirfield align with his concerns about distance, or is he just blowing smoke? And while I respect the hell out of his on course accomplishments (whether he was fun or crusty out there), it doesn’t mean he can’t be challenged when he’s throwing the athletes aka golfers of today under the bus by saying they are damaging the integrity of the game or course architecture with their incredible feats of distance.
…which is a skill, and should not be capped.
We had a chat after the round today about numerous holes on my home course where we cannot aggressively take corners on par 4s because there are things like heather, bunkers, houses, OB, etc in the way.
If you look at the conditions of the hole that Bryson hit his 423 yard monster on, the design is kind of a joke for anyone with power. Blast it on a straight line with wind at the back. If you nut it, you’re golden because the fairways are like ice rinks. If you don’t nut it, you’re just in the rough (oh noes, the roughs!). We’ve watched guys hit it to within feet on a short par 4 all last week with water right and bunkers left, yet he’s shocked that when only rough is present as a ‘miss’ golfers are swinging with reckless abandon with the wind at their back?
Maybe Jacky didn’t spend enough time on that hole.
Let’s do this.
When Jack offers to re-do every course he’s done for free to make up for the now shorter equipment, I’ll take him seriously. Until then, he’s just another poor course designer pissing and moaning about how people are outsmarting his designs, and wanting to get paid 7 figures… for what? Amateurs aren’t going to sell their drivers, and I guarantee you if the USGA said tomorrow the 2021 ball will be 25% shorter, stores would lose golf balls like Costco did toilet paper.
Less than 1% of golfers can get anywhere near a 290 carry. Ok, so you are a freakishly superior athlete, but that doesn’t make the Tour carry distances anything less than massively long. And if they are averaging 280, that means when they go full swing on their driver, it’s 290+ regularly.
It seems so simple that if you water the fairways, lengthen the rough, tighten up the fairways and strategically place hazards and trees you could take care off the issue. And you don’t have to turn a whole industry on it’s head to do it.