Jump to content
IGNORED

Causes of Distance Boom


iacas
Note: This thread is 6742 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

  • Administrator

I was reading

Hank Haney's little piece in a recent Golf Digest . He said:
PGA Tour players are hitting their drives farther than ever because of four factors:

Let's assume that those are the only four factors: agronomy, the ball, club technology, and strength and technique. Suppose distance has increased x yards since 1995. What % of that distance increase do you attribute to each of the factors above?

They're gonna be guesses, of course, but make your best guess. I think it'd be interesting to see how everyone thinks. My List
  1. Agronomy - 20%. Today's courses are faster than even ten years ago. 100 yards of roll at the British Open, easily 50+ on average at the U.S. Open. Tiger has talked quite frequently about how difficult it is to fit a drive into a fairway that runs as hard as they do these days.
  2. Ball - 15%. I think pros could have been hitting it this far years ago... they just wouldn't have had the spin around the greens. The multi-layer technology we see today has combined low spin off the drivers with high spin on the shorter clubs. That's the revolution (no pun intended): merging of the old "distance" balls when the ball is compressed a lot (driver) with the old "player's" balls (Tour Balata, etc.) when the ball is compressed a little (wedge).
  3. Club - 15%. I think this is a surprisingly small percentage because 10 years ago we still had Titanium drivers. But what was Tiger's average back then and what is it now? A few things go into this, though, and I'm assuming that some factors are kept the same. Shafts have gotten longer (43 inches then, 45 inches now) which alone will result in a significant MPH increase in clubhead speed. Drivers have also gotten lighter, again resulting in more clubhead speed. They've done so because heads are larger and you can "miss" now and still get reasonable results, but Tiger still hit a smaller driver pretty well back in the day...
  4. Strength, Technique - 50%. I'm going to add "general science and understanding" to this one. Tiger of 10 years ago was hitting much lower tee shots. The biggest boon to distance has been the launch monitor, and super-precise ones at that. Plus, again, the Tiger factor plays into strength: Hank Kuehne looks like he could play linebacker in the NFL. Is it any wonder he hits the snot out of the ball? Tiger's own swing speed has increased on the order of 10 MPH since he came on Tour. The average Tour swing speed in 1995? 110 MPH. The average now is 119 MPH. That translates into a ball speed advantage of nearly 15 MPH which alone is about 15-20 yards in distance. It's not all strength or I'd list this as 80% - some of it is the aforementioned lighter, longer drivers that allow this swing speed increase.
Again, those are my guesses, but with at least some scientific basis... what are yours?

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I'd move about 5% from #4 to the ball... The compression, dimples, etc tuned to personal swing IMHO makes up for at least %20.... maybe even take a few from the #3 into ball as well...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I was reading

15% Not much I can add here, the fairways today roll the ball a LONG way.

Ball - 15%. I think pros could have been hitting it this far years ago... they just wouldn't have had the spin around the greens. The multi-layer technology we see today has combined low spin off the drivers with high spin on the shorter clubs. That's the revolution (no pun intended): merging of the old "distance" balls when the ball is compressed a lot (driver) with the old "player's" balls (Tour Balata, etc.) when the ball is compressed a little (wedge).

20% - Again... not much to add. The ball has made an impact in distance and that shouldn't be discounted from the equasion. Had Nicklaus played the ProV1, he'd have gained distance. He might not have enjoyed the more piercing flight (not as workable) but he would have been longer, no question.

Club - 15%. I think this is a surprisingly small percentage because 10 years ago we still had Titanium drivers. But what was Tiger's average back then and what is it now? A few things go into this, though, and I'm assuming that some factors are kept the same. Shafts have gotten longer (43 inches then, 45 inches now) which alone will result in a significant MPH increase in clubhead speed. Drivers have also gotten lighter, again resulting in more clubhead speed. They've done so because heads are larger and you can "miss" now and still get reasonable results, but Tiger still hit a smaller driver pretty well back in the day...

15% - Yep... drivers are longer (often 45") which is a huge bump, lighter, and way more forgiving. Proper fitting has made a big difference.

Strength, Technique - 50%, and I'm going to add "general science and understanding" to this one. Tiger of 10 years ago was hitting much lower tee shots. The biggest boon to distance has been the launch monitor, and super-precise ones at that. Plus, again, the Tiger factor plays into strength: Hank Kuehne looks like he could play linebacker in the NFL. Is it any wonder he hits the snot out of the ball? Tiger's own swing speed has increased on the order of 10 MPH since he came on Tour. The average Tour swing speed in 1995? 110 MPH. The average now is 119 MPH. That translates into a ball speed advantage of nearly 15 MPH which alone is about 15-20 yards in distance. It's not all strength or I'd list this as 80% - some of it is the aforementioned lighter, longer drivers that allow this swing speed increase.

50% Strength. I'm with you on strength being a huge factor. Put the tour player of twenty years ago next to today's player and people would see a difference... a big difference. Current players are taller on average and cut.

Again, those are my guesses, but with at least some scientific basis... what are yours?

Basically, technology and course upkeep have made a huge difference in distance.

I like to remember something and I think it is very important: You still have to make birdies and pars to win at golf. You have to play better than the rest of a very large field to win regular season events and the majors. The game of golf is still the same as it was many years ago. The fact that players can hit the ball longer is almost inconsequential. There aren't many long drive champions making the cut week in and week out on tour. There is a premium placed on putting the ball in the fairway, hitting the green, getting up and down and making putts. That is golf and that is how you win. Records are made to be broken and it has happened in every other sport in the world. Sprinters are faster today than they were 50 years ago and its not just the shoes that gets them to the finish line in under 10 seconds either. Removing the ability to break records and play well requires us to get rid of today's athlete and then we might as well go home. I think people's wish for "the good old days" is stifling and not realistic to the modern athlete. Why does Tiger hit the ball so far? Cause he's a freak of nature. Its not just the ball people.

Jeff

10.5° Callaway FT-iZ Tour

18°, 20°, 23° Adams Idea Pro Prototype Hybrid

4-9 Titleist 690.CB
48° Titleist Vokey Tour Nickel
54°, 58° Titleist Vokey Tour Oil Can

Scotty Cameron NP2, 33"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 6742 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-15%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope.
  • Posts

    • Day 134 (26 Apr 24) - played Minnesott today, worked with the mid-irons and approaches (especially the 7i).  Scoring was a little higher, but I was focused on making the needed adjustments to the swing to achieve desired distances.  
    • I honestly believe if they play longer tees by 300-400 yards, closer to or over 7,000 yards, more rough, tougher greens, women's golf will become much more gripping.  BTW, if it weren't for Scottie killing it right now, men's golf isn't exactly compelling.
    • Day 542, April 26, 2024 A lesson no-show, no-called (he had the wrong time even though the last text was confirming the time… 😛), so I used 45 minutes or so of that time to get some good work in.
    • Yeah, that. It stands out… because it's so rare. And interest in Caitlin Clark will likely result in a very small bump to the WNBA or something… and then it will go back down to very low viewership numbers. Like it's always had. A small portion, yep. It doesn't help that she lost, either. Girls often don't even want to watch women playing sports. My daughter golfs… I watch more LPGA Tour golf than she does, and it's not even close. I watch more LPGA Tour golf than PGA Tour golf, even. She watches very little of either. It's just the way it is. Yes, it's a bit of a vicious cycle, but… how do you break it? If you invest a ton of money into broadcasting an LPGA Tour event, the same coverage you'd spend on a men's event… you'll lose a ton of money. It'd take decades to build up the interest. Even with interest in the PGA Tour declining.
×
×
  • 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...