Golf 2023

edcunited1878 said:
Haha, that's enormous varience. What flex do you have on your shafts and what about the ball you use. And you're hitting your 8 longer than tour pros? Something's no adding up.
Click to expand...

stiff shaft, Bridgestone ball normally but was just in simulator so mostly prov1. I’m thinking the gap is just an anomaly, so will test again tomorrow but typically 20 shots gives a good indication. Would need to test on outdoor facility Off of grass before being certain if there’s a bigger issue
 
FriedClams said:
PW (46) goes 145-150 and 7 iron 190ish
Click to expand...
If the new numbers hold up after a few rounds, take your 8 iron in to be bent with a couple degrees more loft. That will be the quickest & cheapest way to back your 8 iron down vis à vis yardage.
 
FriedClams said:
stiff shaft, Bridgestone ball normally but was just in simulator so mostly prov1. I’m thinking the gap is just an anomaly, so will test again tomorrow but typically 20 shots gives a good indication. Would need to test on outdoor facility Off of grass before being certain if there’s a bigger issue
Click to expand...

Yeah, go off grass and not mat if possible. Play a few rounds and focus on distance/gap from those clubs. When you only have one or two strokes and you're inbetween distances, that's when you really know what to play and when.

Anything 165+ starts at 7, and the closer to 200 is 6.
 
edcunited1878 said:
Yeah, go off grass and not mat if possible. Play a few rounds and focus on distance/gap from those clubs. When you only have one or two strokes and you're inbetween distances, that's when you really know what to play and when.

Anything 165+ starts at 7, and the closer to 200 is 6.
Click to expand...

I’m a hardcore, I’m always practicing but today was just weird I had never seen that variation.
 
FriedClams said:
I’m a hardcore, I’m always practicing but today was just weird I had never seen that variation.
Click to expand...

Fair and it's fun when you're getting distance, but can be so frustrating when you're theoretically hitting the best club for you at the moment and then you see the line but you fly it over and it becomes a poor outcome but the ball strike is pure.
 
FriedClams said:
How can I upload a swing video from my phone onto here?
Click to expand...

You might have to upload the video to your YouTube account (assuming you have one) and then just share the YT link here. Click on the '...\/' drop down button immediately to the right of the emoji icon and click on media and insert the URL.
 
edcunited1878 said:
Inside 130 yards and 130 feet, he struggles for consistency and it shows.
Click to expand...
The blokes so far up his own arse it’s painful. The interview with Rick Shiels you could tell Rick was trying to get off as soon as possible.

The only reason Bryson doesn’t want to be a part of the media is a - he wants to monetise himself and b. because they portray him how he is and he doesn’t like it.
 
mariachi-19 said:
The blokes so far up his own arse it’s painful. The interview with Rick Shiels you could tell Rick was trying to get off as soon as possible.

The only reason Bryson doesn’t want to be a part of the media is a - he wants to monetise himself and b. because they portray him how he is and he doesn’t like it.
Click to expand...

Shiels needs to change his series to break 80 ASAP, or stop playing off the back tees. You can’t call yourself a professional and not be able to chip.
 
FriedClams said:
Shiels needs to change his series to break 80 ASAP, or stop playing off the back tees. You can’t call yourself a professional and not be able to chip.
Click to expand...

He seems to be aware of this. They’re installing a new range in the studio for club testing but he certainly needs to grind for a while.

What it does remind us is that if you want to be a scratch golfer, you can’t just go out and turn it on. It’s a literal grind to stay there.
 
FriedClams said:
I have a major gapping issue just now between 8 and 9 iron. from 20 shots, the average carry for 9 iron was 158 but for the 8 iron is 181.
Click to expand...

Weirdly that’s exactly where I have a gap, same clubs and similar numbers on the distance
 
Gavinb33 said:
This is great news
Click to expand...

Is it though? What’ll it change. The big hitters will still be out driving the shorter hitters. They’ll still be taking a club or two less and hitting more greens. If anything, this hampers the shorter hitters?

For example, instead of 6 iron vs 8 iron approaching the green, it’ll be 5w/4 iron vs 6 iron, which surely helps the longer hitters more?
 
RexHamilton said:
Is it though? What’ll it change. The big hitters will still be out driving the shorter hitters. They’ll still be taking a club or two less and hitting more greens. If anything, this hampers the shorter hitters?

For example, instead of 6 iron vs 8 iron approaching the green, it’ll be 5w/4 iron vs 6 iron, which surely helps the longer hitters more?
Click to expand...
That will always be the case, short hitters v. long hitters. Can't ever get around that, so basically it is a moot point.

The most important aspect of rolling the ball back is to allow courses to dictate how they are played, not the other way around. It brings back into rotas great courses of yesterday that have been made obsolete by 460cc drivers & hot golf balls. I've been fortunate enough to play an inordinate amount of these courses & the architecture behind them is stellar, better than more recent generations of courses for sure. A slowed down golf ball will also be easier to manipulate with irons which brings shotmaking back into play. It's a win, win for me, anytime the modern game can be made more traditional.
 
mariachi-19 said:
My understanding is it will affect long hitters more by introducing additional spin at higher club head speed. There goes Bryson’s advantage haha
Click to expand...

So long hitters will be punished more due to working hard to hit it long? Amazing.

What golf watches does everyone use?

I'm looking at Garmin s62 v Garmin epix 2 v Garmin venu 2 plus.

Leaning towards the venu 2 plus at the moment, smaller than the other 2, cheaper than both, has the AMOLED screen which the s62 doesn't.

Seems ideal, don't need the virtual caddie stuff which the s62 has. Skinny wrists don't lend themselves to the epix 2 either.
 
One Night Only said:
So long hitters will be punished more due to working hard to hit it long? Amazing.

What golf watches does everyone use?

I'm looking at Garmin s62 v Garmin epix 2 v Garmin venu 2 plus.

Leaning towards the venu 2 plus at the moment, smaller than the other 2, cheaper than both, has the AMOLED screen which the s62 doesn't.

Seems ideal, don't need the virtual caddie stuff which the s62 has. Skinny wrists don't lend themselves to the epix 2 either.
Click to expand...
Much of the length comes from equipment, thus the roll back of the ball. Golf shouldn’t be all about club head speed.

I never knew there was such a thing as a ‘golf watch.’ Sounds pretty cool.
 
calodo2003 said:
Much of the length comes from equipment, thus the roll back of the ball. Golf shouldn’t be all about club head speed.

I never knew there was such a thing as a ‘golf watch.’ Sounds pretty cool.
Click to expand...

Thing is, all pros have the same access to the top of the line equipment, they get everything made to their exact specs, so it's an even playing field in that regard.

You can't say Rory's drives for example are just down to equipment. He's trained to bomb it accurately (well kinda accurate anyway)
 
One Night Only said:
Thing is, all pros have the same access to the top of the line equipment, they get everything made to their exact specs, so it's an even playing field in that regard.

You can't say Rory's drives for example are just down to equipment. He's trained to bomb it accurately (well kinda accurate anyway)
Click to expand...
Never said was totally down to equipment, but equipment does play a larger role than anything else vis à vis length.
 
One Night Only said:
So long hitters will be punished more due to working hard to hit it long? Amazing.

What golf watches does everyone use?

I'm looking at Garmin s62 v Garmin epix 2 v Garmin venu 2 plus.

Leaning towards the venu 2 plus at the moment, smaller than the other 2, cheaper than both, has the AMOLED screen which the s62 doesn't.

Seems ideal, don't need the virtual caddie stuff which the s62 has. Skinny wrists don't lend themselves to the epix 2 either.
Click to expand...
I just use my Fenix 6. Works fine and most courses are on it.

After 12 months of work, my swing seems to be coming together. Suddenly hitting clean and consistent strikes. Actually needing now to remember to slow my swing down. Can spank a 7 iron 175 yard
Carry but limited control. Happy to carry 155-65 carry with consistency.
 
mariachi-19 said:
I just use my Fenix 6. Works fine and most courses are on it.

After 12 months of work, my swing seems to be coming together. Suddenly hitting clean and consistent strikes. Actually needing now to remember to slow my swing down. Can spank a 7 iron 175 yard
Carry but limited control. Happy to carry 155-65 carry with consistency.
Click to expand...

I'll have to have a look at the fenix 6, not sure why I bypassed it in the first place.

I can spank a 7 iron between 2yards and 155yard carry. 155 yard is like a twice a year shot.
Usually I probably carry it 140ish I think, well that was when I felt good last week. First 3 rounds of the year I was probably carrying 130 if I was lucky.
 
RexHamilton said:
Is it though? What’ll it change. The big hitters will still be out driving the shorter hitters. They’ll still be taking a club or two less and hitting more greens. If anything, this hampers the shorter hitters?

For example, instead of 6 iron vs 8 iron approaching the green, it’ll be 5w/4 iron vs 6 iron, which surely helps the longer hitters more?
Click to expand...

I think so, its not so much down to the playing of the game where some will have a physical advantage which you cant get away from it's just humans are so wildly different, to me its down to the limitations of the golf courses they are probably at the limit of what they can do to eliminate the big hitters and it still isnt enough so this is the only way to keep the players playing the courses as they were designed which can only be a good thing and i would like to see the PGA and R&A go further and look at club head sizes as well and bring the game back to ball striking and shot making to the game.
 
Would rather have seen players be punished more for missing the centre of the face, than the ball rolled back. Scottie scheffler was hitting 300 yard straight drives hitting the toe of the new stealth 2.
 
FriedClams said:
Would rather have seen players be punished more for missing the centre of the face, than the ball rolled back. Scottie scheffler was hitting 300 yard straight drives hitting the toe of the new stealth 2.
Click to expand...
Best way poor club face location is punished is with a ball that has more spin.
 
Gavinb33 said:
I think so, its not so much down to the playing of the game where some will have a physical advantage which you cant get away from it's just humans are so wildly different, to me its down to the limitations of the golf courses they are probably at the limit of what they can do to eliminate the big hitters and it still isnt enough so this is the only way to keep the players playing the courses as they were designed which can only be a good thing and i would like to see the PGA and R&A go further and look at club head sizes as well and bring the game back to ball striking and shot making to the game.
Click to expand...


Yeah, I do get that. But this isn't a new issue. There were articles in golf magazines 50 years ago talking about the Bomb and Gouge and how it was destroying the game and how courses weren't being played how they were intended? So where does it stop? Why not go back to hickory clubs of 100 years ago? What was so special about golf in the 70's and 80's over the other 200 years of the sport's history? It's a moment in time that's remembered fondly by some people at the top of the administration side of the game. Simple as that.
 
It's cyclical. There have been segments of golf history where the average length of a professional golfer played the average length of championship courses perfectly, be it the gutta percha era, the Dot era, the smaller ball era, or the balata era. One can also look at the persimmon era. Then there were always freaky players like Nicklaus & Tiger who come along & reset the game. But it's gone too far now in favor of average length of player v. average length of championship golf courses. It's simply becoming untenable.

The courses the USGA uses for example for the US Open rota are typically of an older era which can only be lengthened to a finite amount, if at all. The two newer courses in the recent past have made them go gun shy due to the debacle at Chambers Bay & the decidedly un-US Open at Erin Hills. Look at the upcoming sites, it's obvious that a slowed down ball was in the works (https://golfweek.usatoday.com/lists/u-s-open-future-sites-through-2051/). It typically takes years or decades to become a course to be a major location for many reasons. Kohler has performed the best of these newer courses, but it was also designed at the nascent period of hotter balls & bigger drivers & Dye understood he needed to lengthen it out to 7800ish yards to cope.

e - to widen the scope, consider the Florida swing & how old the golf courses are on which the tourneys are played plus current length:

Honda - PGA National; built in 1981; 42 years old; 7048 yards
Bay Hill - Bay Hill; built in 1961; 62 years old; 7300 yards
Players - TPC Sawgrass; built in 1980; 43 years old; 7245 yards
Valspar - Innisbrook 'Copperhead;' built in 1974; 49 years old; 7340 yards

Average age & length of the Florida swing courses is 49 years old & 7233 yards. These courses can only be lengthened a certain amount & I would guess most of them are tapped out, especially Honda & Bay Hill (to a lesser extent, Copperhead) as they are routed inside gated communities often with houses on both sides of the holes. There's no plans for any of these four tournaments to move from these courses for the foreseeable future due to infrastructure, logistics, & tradition. But they are basically too short these days. They would need to be each three hundred to four hundred yards longer to be in sync with the current length of the pros.

These courses are on the cusp of being virtually obsolete, veritable pitch & putt courses for much of the field. The only way to legitimately make the courses more fearsome is to reduce the yardage off of the tee. The choice was to tone down the golf ball & leave the clubs alone in the meantime.

Tl/Dr: the ball had to be slowed down to allow for the courses to be played with a semblance of what the architect designed for the course.
 
Last edited:
Feel like it’s a big advantage for LIV to continue with whatever ball the player wants. Fans want to see 400 yard drives, not 5 irons for second shots on par 4.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.