Jump to content
Marty2019

No Tee - Solution for "Excessive" Driving Distance?

68 posts / 4781 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

On 5/26/2020 at 4:39 PM, billchao said:

They're not all conforming. They make high COR heads. The USGA conforming clubs they sell are specifically listed as "USGA conforming."

I mean when you hit 75 yrs old and your driver distance drops to 170 yds, due to loss of flexibility, arthritis, etc., and you're just out there for fun why not? Some courses have par 3s that are 175 from the forward tees. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

2 hours ago, DrvFrShow said:

Some courses have par 3s that are 175 from the forward tees. It 

I don’t get that either. My wife hits her driver 130 max and some par 3s are too far. She shouldn’t be hitting driver when I’m hitting a 6 iron.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 hour ago, boogielicious said:

I don’t get that either. My wife hits her driver 130 max and some par 3s are too far. She shouldn’t be hitting driver when I’m hitting a 6 iron.

You hit your 6 iron only 130 max? Bruh.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

5 minutes ago, colin007 said:

You hit your 6 iron only 130 max? Bruh.....

No. 175yds. Read again.😯

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

2 hours ago, colin007 said:

You hit your 6 iron only 130 max? Bruh.....

 

2 hours ago, Vinsk said:

No. 175yds. Read again.😯

More like 160-165

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Lol it was a joke...I was hoping to avoid the emoji for extra dry effect

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Forgive my ignorance on this - I did not grow up with this sport. I do not watch golf much, and I do not have that deep sense of its history that some others of you do...

I am not aware of course records being rapidly and repeatedly broken.  What specifically is the issue with the longer distances (and what is wrong with lengthening courses for pro tees? Is it the obvious issue of limited land?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 minute ago, Cantankerish said:

Forgive my ignorance on this - I did not grow up with this sport. I do not watch golf much, and I do not have that deep sense of its history that some others of you do...

I am not aware of course records being rapidly and repeatedly broken.  What specifically is the issue with the longer distances (and what is wrong with lengthening courses for pro tees? Is it the obvious issue of limited land?)

My opinion is it's the land issue... lack of land.  Some courses have bought parcels of land to lengthen their tees.  Not all courses have that option.  Also, lengthening messes with the course architect's original vision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 5/26/2020 at 11:40 AM, turtleback said:

But you didn't just ask for tight fairways and heavy rough.  You asked for tighter fairways and heavier rough for some guys (the bombers) than other guys (the hunters), based on distance.

The speed of the green is the same for everyone, so your attempted analogy in inapt.

Don't tighter fairways and heavier rough affect every golfer on the course? Of course, some of that thinking has changed over the years. They'll give them medium rough and invite them to try an approach to the green rather than just gouge a wedge onto the fairway. Then, they'll shave all the rough around the green, allowing the ball to run forever if the green is missed. 

And yes, the speed of the green is the same for everyone. You seem to assume that every golfer's putting skill is the same, or the skill at placing shots on the green that don't get above the hole. That also is inapt.  

On 5/28/2020 at 4:51 PM, boogielicious said:

I don’t get that either. My wife hits her driver 130 max and some par 3s are too far. She shouldn’t be hitting driver when I’m hitting a 6 iron.

What tee is she playing? Admittedly, some courses don't really set things up fairly for women. My buddy got his Sis involved with golf a few years back. She is now a full fledged golf nut, and has made a couple of lady friends who are the same. On occasion, we guys will give them strokes and scramble against them. They have beaten us a time or two, but it's surprising how often the matches end up tied. That just means we got the bet right! 

One issue we find, especially on older courses, is when the senior men's tees are crammed into the same box as the lady's tees! We are all seniors, and it is not fair! Which prompted one of our group to say, "OK, there are the senior men's tees and the lady's tees. Where are the senior lady's tees?!" I think that's a valid question.

As far as some of those older courses go, I've talked to course managers about distancing the senior men's tees from the lady's. I've told them that they don't have to build us distinct tee boxes. Just give us a closely mown area on one side of the fairway or the other, and put the markers there. Give the ladies a 60-70 yard advantage, Or, give the senior ladies their own teeing ground. So far, nothing has changed. So, I guess my arguments are unpersuasive.

Edited by Buckeyebowman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

15 hours ago, Buckeyebowman said:

Don't tighter fairways and heavier rough affect every golfer on the course? Of course, some of that thinking has changed over the years. They'll give them medium rough and invite them to try an approach to the green rather than just gouge a wedge onto the fairway. Then, they'll shave all the rough around the green, allowing the ball to run forever if the green is missed. 

 

I'm not sure if you really just don't get it or are just being disingenuous, at this point.  You have called for tighter fairways and longer rough and maybe bunkers in the landing zone of big hitters.  No, that DOESN'T affect every player on the course.  It only affects guys that hit it that far.  Hitting it far and accurate has almost always been a Hallmark of great players.  One of the things that made Bobby Jones great was the way he could dominate the par 5s.  Same with Arnie.  Same with Jack.  

If the fairway is 30 yards wide at the 280 mark, it should be (at least) 30 yards wide at the 320 mark.  And if so, it is ALREADY harder for the guy who hits it 320 to hit the fairway because of simple geometry.  But you're not content with that, you want to slim that fairway down to 20 or 25 yards at the 320 mark and make it even harder.  As if there is something wrong with hitting it far.

There really are 2 different aspects to this whole discussion.  One is the problem of increasing distances making classic courses obsolete for top level play if they don't have or can't acquire extra land to lengthen the course.  I'm not sure that problem is solvable without equipment restrictions.  But there's another, insidious in my opinion, aspect where folks want to use this general distance problem to change the competitive balance of the game and effectively, punish one particular skill - hitting the ball long.  And considering that the long guys don't, on average, gain more strokes off the tee than other players gain by the strengths of THEIR games, I see no justification for interfering with the competitive balance of the game by punishing one particular skill. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

These guys will just practise hitting driver off the deck more and be right back to bombing them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Papa Steve 55 said:

These guys will just practise hitting driver off the deck more and be right back to bombing them. 

But first they'll take a little hack at the turf on the tee box and create their own little mound of a tee.  Unless that is forbidden by the new rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Double Mocha Man said:

But first they'll take a little hack at the turf on the tee box and create their own little mound of a tee.  Unless that is forbidden by the new rules.

Sure, find a little clump of dirt and place it on that. Make sure you make a couple more with your practice swings for the next guy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Double Mocha Man said:

But first they'll take a little hack at the turf on the tee box and create their own little mound of a tee.  Unless that is forbidden by the new rules.

A la Laura Davies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Affiliates

    SuperSpeed
    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo
  • Posts

    • Played in our club championship this past weekend.  Shot 89 both days from silver tees.  Not that great but an ok tournament score for me and better than I did last year. Played Tuesday and shot 83 off silver which was net 70, so 2 under my cap.  Played combo's Wednesday and had my best round in years with an 80, net 65 and got my first eagle since relocating after retiring.  Also got 3 birdies in the same round.  Played again Friday and shot 84, net 72 with a couple of birdies.  Leaving the driver out of the bag for the last few rounds has certainly helped in the penalty department.  I recently replaced my 3W and the new shaft in it is so stable I feel I can trust it so much more.  Have ordered a new driver shaft with a similar spec but slightly lighter than 3W shaft, so hopefully will be able to have a similar stability with the driver and a few extra yards in the fairway.
    • Find them quite tricky. Hit them like an iron or flatter like a wood? Also my G400 hybrid has no swing weight which helps swing speed but makes me nervous. Also it just dont have a good feeling to it. Proper Woods are so fun to hit. 
    • noticed that myself, never seen him do that half takeback like JT before in his routine... then today at Wyndham, wasn't doing it.  His fidgeting does seem to have gotten worse the last couple years, at least he's not grabbing the towel 10,000 times anymore 😂.   Curious what someone else with far more knowledge on the golf swing thinks though of the commentators remark today, I believe it was Trevor Immelman and Aaron Oberholser who both agreed that if he just switched to playing a cut off the tee, it would solve a lot of his issues.
    • This is a really deep question, possibly with no right answer. I think that usage and accuracy of equipment are the main components in deciding what you want, and price just follows suit. I kind of divide it into three categories: toy (not accurate or not simulators), recreational sim (more accurate, but comes with limitations on certain data and isn't as accurate as the final category), and professional sim. The toy category is comprised of sub 500 dollar options (the measuring device itself) that measure a couple of things. The OptiShot line is the prime example. It only measures the club going over an array of infrared sensors (2 lines of sensors). It can track face angle, speed (kind of), and perceived strike location based on which sensors are triggered at what time. It doesn't even require the use of a ball to get its data, so it can be quite inaccurate. The other options here would be Mevo or SC300, though neither of these truly offer sim capabilities but are more accurate than an OptiShot as they use ball data. The rec sims only have 2 that I can think of. The Mevo+ and the SkyTrak. They operate in very different ways, with the Mevo+ operating on radar and measuring mostly the ball for the first part of flight, and the SkyTrak operating on optics measuring the point of impact, both ball and club. These are both fairly robust devices for the price (probably around 3k each for a full sim) but both have drawbacks and it could be argued over which is better. From my small knowledge about launch monitors it seems that for indoor simulation the optic driven devices excel, but outdoors radar is king, i.e. SkyTrak for indoors and Mevo+ for outdoors. On to the big dogs, the professional sims. Once again there are really two choices at the moment, and like the previous category, one is radar driven where the other is optic driven. Trackman is the premium radar system available and comes in just under 20k USD on price. Big bucks for big performance. The GCQuad (or GC2+HMT) is king for optical launch monitors and can be had for around 12k USD, but with the putting analysis and head monitoring add on, it also comes in just under 20k. Same thing here, gotta pay to play. These prices don't include the bay (mat/projector/screen) so you can really spec them as you please. The GC2 without the HMT upgrade kind of splits the difference between recreational and professional launch monitors, and the price follows suit. A certified preowned unit can be had for around 5500 USD. It really does split the difference in the optical category, being a big step up from a SkyTrak, but comes up short to the GCQuad or if you were to add the HMT unit. I know this is a lot of info, although it's just the basics when it comes to launch monitors/sims. For the actual question: If I had a room with a tall enough ceiling in my house, I would probably go for the SkyTrak at first. One of the biggest reasons is that it has compatibility with "The Golf Club 2019" which is a video game that I have on home computer. That package comes at an up-charge, but between the official courses designed by the game developer, and the many recreated courses done by fans (even has Augusta in there), there are something like 180,000 courses to play. That's a big draw for me.  There is something to be said for course packages/subscriptions and which best fits your interest/needs. I might grow tired of the SkyTrak, or find it lacking in accuracy at some point and then it would be a GCQuad for me. Snce it would be indoors only, I would prefer an optical system.  There is plenty of info online, and plenty of reviews to go along with them. I have only used the GC2s that are in my local golf galaxy, so I don't experience with most of these, but this is most of the info I have gathered. I hope this helps in some way, and if you have any questions, I can try to answer them.
    • View this round on GAME GOLF  
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Cantankerish
      Cantankerish
      (46 years old)
    2. Dimes44
      Dimes44
      (37 years old)
    3. Donald Belcher
      Donald Belcher
      (84 years old)
    4. jimnm
      jimnm
      (41 years old)
    5. Zachase715
      Zachase715
      (28 years old)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...