Jump to content
IGNORED

Game in Ruins


iacas
Note: This thread is 6602 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
Yet another bit of drivel from our pal Geoff in response to what I thought was a rather "fair" article at titleist.com . Obviously Titleist has some bias. So does Geoff.

I still subscribe to Geoff's feed (daily amusement?), but I no longer comment there under my own name. He has a habit of deleting comments that disagree with him, and any signed by "Erik J. Barzeski."

I like what Crankpot has said so far. But I'm curious how long his comments will last. Get it?

So, an open question: what do you think of the Titleist article, Geoff's response article, and the comments? I'll keep mine short, but please elaborate and speak your mind.

1. Titleist's article, again, is fair. Titleist asks people to look at facts, Geoff plays off emotion and attempts to use facts to support his claims, just as the article says. JB Holmes' distance is touted, but Arron's 259 yard average is ignored despite winning an arguably more difficult tournament on far superior courses.

2. Geoff misses the point, intentionally misleads readers, and in general, fails to display much intelligence. If the only way you can make your point is by twisting the words and meanings of the article you're discussing, you haven't made a point at all.

3. Geoff has his loyal readers, so some of the comments erect, as Crankpot put it, straw men. Nobody was talking about old courses hosting majors, but someone brought it up. Crankpot goofs in a few places (mentioning Funk by name is one), but in general, is trying to be reasonable, I think.

I too am a scientist and a big fan of facts. I've yet to see a fact that even loosely shows me that the game is in ruins, let alone one that ties a "ruined" game to distance or technology.

In your responses, be honest, be frank, be thorough, but don't be rude to each other. No name-calling. You can disagree without being a jerk about it.

So again, what do you think about the three things?

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

My thoughts on the three things:

Titleist article: Good points made. I'm not sure what the intended effect is. Are everyday golfers (er, "Serious Golfers") supposed to read this and take up arms? Or is the real recipient of the message supposed to be the comb-overs in Far Hills? In any case, it's an interesting read.

Geoff's article: Same old. Equating the health of the Tour's TV ratings and contracts with golf as it is played by 25 million amateurs in the U.S., which is silly. Whether or not JB Holmes is smacking 350 yard drives while playing for several times the value of my house has nothing to do with how I relate to the game when I'm on the course. Do I want new technology? Heck yes. Not to make the game easier, but because a sport that has changes in technology over time stays more vital. Golf has changed a lot in the last 100 years, and it will keep changing. When innovation is killed, stagnation sets in.

The thing I don't get about the USGA, Geoff, et al: When we roll the equipment back, what date should we enter into the time machine's computer? 1995? 1986? 1960? How about the 1600s, so we can all use sticks and rocks? Instead of allowing for organic growth and change over time, you're going to pick a point in time and say, "There, that's where we want things to stay." Based on what criteria? I'd love to hear.

I'll give Geoff credit for making the good point about Feherty's verbal wet kisses for JB Holmes, and how they became a commercial. That's sad. I'd like to see all of the non-playing TV announcers have to give up endorsements contracts. It'll never happen, but I wish Johnny Miller and Feherty, etc., would drop their club deals so I wouldn't have to question the things they say about equipment. I also wish Jim Nantz would stop doing voiceovers for equipment companies. But this isn't journalism, I suppose, it's entertainment. That's why I usually have the sound down on the tube when I'm watching.

Comments on Geoff's article: Flame on. I couldn't care less once things devolve into comment wars. I'll spend more time on Craigslist if I want to read endless arguments. Comments have their place. But a forum (like this) is the place for posting the back-and-forth stuff. As to the content of the comments ... no comment.

in the bag today:
Driver: TaylorMade R9 10.5° (Fujikura Motore 65 stiff)
3-wood: Tour Edge Exotics XCG (Aldila DVS Fairway 75 stiff)
hybrid: Sonartec Md 21° (UST Proforce V2 Hybrid 85 stiff)
4-PW: Titleist 755 (Titleist TriSpec Regular)Wedges: Titleist Vokey Design 252.08 bent to 50.5° (Oil...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Golf has changed a lot in the last 100 years, and it will keep changing. When innovation is killed, stagnation sets in.

Agreed. If the decision was made to stop improvements of the ball, clubs, etc., to me it would take the fun out of golf? I love going to the course and seeing 30 players with 30 different flavors of clubs in their bag.

The thing I don't get about the USGA, Geoff, et al: When we roll the equipment back, what date should we enter into the time machine's computer? 1995? 1986? 1960? How about the 1600s, so we can all use sticks and rocks? Instead of allowing for organic growth and change over time, you're going to pick a point in time and say, "There, that's where we want things to stay." Based on what criteria? I'd love to hear.

Great, great point.

I almost feel like Geoff and the rest of his lackeys are a bunch of hippies...in the way that manufacturers are 'Big Brother' trying to ruin the game. They think that the game of golf was perfect 10, 20, whatever years ago and that we should be happy as-is and start chanting 'be one with the golf course.' I think of Tommy Nakajima playing Augusta with a balata because of 'the way it echoed of the pines' when I think of Mr. Shackelford. Golf, like any other sport, will progress. St. Andrews has been around for hundreds of years and will continue to exist for a lot more...and I'm betting THE Open will still be held there.

Fairways and Greens.

Dave
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

It seems to me that discussions on distance bring out the debater in people like nothing else. People either like the bombers and revel in their abililty to hit it so far, or they downplay it and B*&ch; and moan about how the equipment is ruining the game. How someone handles the debate over distance is up to them. If the site of someone like JB Holmes puts your panties in a bunch and you believe that he is the antiChrist, well I disagree with you, but you are entitled to your opinion. YES YOUR OPINION! Please don't parade said opinion in front of me and tell me it's fact.

That is why I like the Titleist article and even though, sure they have an agenda, I truly believe that article to be a fact based, and as devoid of personal opinion as is possible. The article merely makes the point that sure people hit the ball farther now than 25 years ago, but that distance by itself is still not enough to be successful on the PGA tour. And that why is it that when someone hits it far thats equipment ruining the game yet when a shorter knocker wins nothing at all is mentioned.

That is what irritates me about Geoff's article. He does his best to put as much opinion as possible into his article then plays it off as fact. Its like saying "Sure the facts don't support anything I say yet its my opinion so all must swallow it without dissent." Its obvious that he is a "purist", whatever that really means. To me it means those bitter old guys at the course that consider any change to golf as bad. He loves to drop big names like that in itself makes his statements true. "Well if Jack thinks that it must be true." Yet what exactly did all those big names say? What is in their agenda? Change is good otherwise like people have said it gets stagnant.

Great courses will always be able to challenge great players. No golf ball, driver or set of ions is going to change that fact.

Danny    In my :ping: Hoofer Tour golf bag on my :clicgear: 8.0 Cart

Driver:   :pxg: 0311 Gen 5  X-Stiff.                        Irons:  :callaway: 4-PW APEX TCB Irons 
3 Wood: :callaway: Mavrik SZ Rogue X-Stiff                            Nippon Pro Modus 130 X-Stiff
3 Hybrid: :callaway: Mavrik Pro KBS Tour Proto X   Wedges: :vokey:  50°, 54°, 60° 
Putter: :odyssey:  2-Ball Ten Arm Lock        Ball: :titleist: ProV 1

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Something I'm sure we've considered, or Dave's considered somewhere along the line is putts per round. Sure, driving distance is different, but nobody is pushing for a ball that is more difficult on the putting greens. Jerry Pate was the leader in putts per round with 28.81 putts per round in 1980. Fast forward to 2005 and it was Brian Gay with 27.33 putts per round. So 25 years later theres been an improvement of over a stroke per round.

I think we need to roll back the putter. Perhaps the USGA will outlaw MOI putters in favor of blades only. When I say blades, I mean Titleist Bullseye's only. Putters are ruining the game.

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

I think Erik made some good observations on the two articles. Titleist's column was based on facts and reasoned from them, whereas Geoff's article sounded like my 11 year old sister arguing with me over something.

I don't think that an equipment rollback is the answer. I don't think there is an answer. Hell, there isn't even a question to answer. Sure, JB and Bubba and others can send the ball to Pluto, but you've still gotta putt the damn thing into the hole.

Golf will continue to evolve; some will get longer (be sure) and others will be more accurate, still others will find a different way to play. You can't stop progress.

Jeff Gladchun

In my bag:
Driver: TaylorMade R7 Quad, 9.5°, Aldila NV
3 Wood: Titleist 904F, 15°, YS-6+ StiffIrons: Titleist 695CB 3-PWWedges: Titleist Vokey 252.08, SM56.10 SM60.08Putter: Odyssey White Steel #5 Center-ShaftBall: TaylorMade TP Black / Titleist ProV1xHome Course: Oakland Hills...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator
I think Erik made some good observations on the two articles. Titleist's column was based on facts and reasoned from them, whereas Geoff's article sounded like my 11 year old sister arguing with me over something.

That's what I've been saying: that there isn't a question TO answer. But I never quite put it that way. Well said.

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

Something I'm sure we've considered, or Dave's considered somewhere along the line is putts per round. Sure, driving distance is different, but nobody is pushing for a ball that is more difficult on the putting greens. Jerry Pate was the leader in putts per round with 28.81 putts per round in 1980. Fast forward to 2005 and it was Brian Gay with 27.33 putts per round. So 25 years later theres been an improvement of over a stroke per round.

i think putters are the least important from a technological point of view. yes, you have crazy MOI numbers with the newest tri-balls and ping docs, but long putters and belly putters are, IMO, worse for the game than MOI numbers.

but maybe the biggest factor in the improvement in putts per round and general putting is that these guys putt on some amazing greens compared to 25 years ago. i laugh when the guys complain on the west coast about putting on "bumpy" poa greens...if they want bumpy, they should come play my local muni. improvements in agronomy have given these guys on tour some fantastic greens with relatively little grain. and because they're so fast, you just have to bump them to get them going on line. i actually like johnny miller's suggestion that making the greens SLOWER might identify the better putters because you actually have to make a good stroke on the ball...and bad technique would be easier to identify this way. off-topic, but what i'd like to see is bunkers that are actual hazards...they're so well-groomed that it's not a penalty for the majority of tour players. make them bumpy, give them pluggable lies, whatever. yes, i know that brings the luck factor into it, but i'd love to see these pros try to hit some of the bunker shots i get at my local club.

G5 10.5*, grafalloy blue pro launch S
BB 3W 15*
904f 19* 5W, graphite design ys-6 S
585h 19*, aldila nv 75-S
idea pro 23*, blue by you S mp-30 4-6; mp-33 7-pwCleveland 900 rtg 52*, wrx 60* spin milled vokey 56*/10Yes! heather putter b330s

Link to comment
Share on other sites


off-topic, but what i'd like to see is bunkers that are actual hazards...they're so well-groomed that it's not a penalty for the majority of tour players. make them bumpy, give them pluggable lies, whatever. yes, i know that brings the luck factor into it, but i'd love to see these pros try to hit some of the bunker shots i get at my local club.

This is something I think about a lot. Wayyy back in the day Oakmont Country Club used to furrow their bunkers, making it impossible to get a good lie.

For Christ's sake! bunkers are supposed to be hazards, things to be avoided, but these days touring pros would rather be in a bunker than greenside rough. I think that the USGA and PGA should consider furrowing bunkers.

Jeff Gladchun

In my bag:
Driver: TaylorMade R7 Quad, 9.5°, Aldila NV
3 Wood: Titleist 904F, 15°, YS-6+ StiffIrons: Titleist 695CB 3-PWWedges: Titleist Vokey 252.08, SM56.10 SM60.08Putter: Odyssey White Steel #5 Center-ShaftBall: TaylorMade TP Black / Titleist ProV1xHome Course: Oakland Hills...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


For Christ's sake! bunkers are supposed to be hazards, things to be avoided, but these days touring pros would rather be in a bunker than greenside rough. I think that the USGA and PGA should consider furrowing bunkers.

Thank you for putting a smile on my face and stating something that is so true. Not only does rough need to be a penalty, but the bunkers as well. How many times do you hear the commentators say "Well, he's better off in the bunker. That's really not a bad leave." Not a bad leave? Come on. Penalize them for the love of God.

Fairways and Greens.

Dave
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

I'm glad you agree. Golf is obviously evolving, but I believe that this is one aspect we should strive to preserve. Making bunkers the "easy leave" is just retarded. I don't care what they have to do... fill the thing with pebbles or something, furrow them... glass shards... whatever. Just make it a penalty.

I remember a quote from Bobby Jones (sorry this is just from memory, not verbatim): "The difference between sand hazards and water hazards is like that of a car crash and an airplane crash. You can walk away from a sand hazard with not much harm done, but with a water hazard the damage has been done." Remember, Bob played before the advent of the sand wedge. Anyways, you can surely tell this is an area I'm a little passionate about and I think it needs to be addressed.

Jeff Gladchun

In my bag:
Driver: TaylorMade R7 Quad, 9.5°, Aldila NV
3 Wood: Titleist 904F, 15°, YS-6+ StiffIrons: Titleist 695CB 3-PWWedges: Titleist Vokey 252.08, SM56.10 SM60.08Putter: Odyssey White Steel #5 Center-ShaftBall: TaylorMade TP Black / Titleist ProV1xHome Course: Oakland Hills...

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Administrator
This is something I think about a lot. Wayyy back in the day Oakmont Country Club used to furrow their bunkers, making it impossible to get a good lie.

I've said as much on the podcast. I'm tired of seeing guys go for the green in two on a par 5 and literally aiming at bunkers. They're too well groomed. Not only are they perfectly raked, but they all have exactly the same texture, etc. My course, the worst thing about it, is that some bunkers have more sand than others, some are wetter than others, etc.

There aren't enough water hazards that come into play on the PGA Tour, so the darn bunkers may as well be. I wish, too, that when a pro hit a shot so far offline it got a great lie where the fans walked that the lightest fan in the area (a child) was allowed one "stomp" to put the ball in a worse lie. Pros are basically rewarded for having fans and hitting a ball way offline while you and I would just find a horrible lie (if we found the ball at all). But that's all neither here nor there... yet it's something these folks like Geoff continue to fail to ignore.

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've said as much on the podcast. I'm tired of seeing guys go for the green in two on a par 5 and literally aiming at bunkers. They're too well groomed. Not only are they perfectly raked, but they all have exactly the same texture, etc. My course, the worst thing about it, is that some bunkers have more sand than others, some are wetter than others, etc.

i believe this is what some refer to as the "tiger bounce"...since he has so many people following him, his wayward shots always seem to hit someone and bounce back in play, or he airmails the green and the ball doesn't bound too far back because it hit some fan. while this is all anecdotal, there seems to be some truth to it and it affects some players more than others.

but i'm in agreement with the last few posts that bunkers are way too easy for the majority of the pros. yes, they practice more than we do, but they also get much better lies than we do. paul azinger, one of the best buker players out there, has even said on air that he wouldn't mind if bunkers were tougher to play out of. and i always laugh when the announcers on tv talk about a fried-egg lie in the bunker as "bad luck" or "poor thing" instead of, "that's what you get for missing the green!"

G5 10.5*, grafalloy blue pro launch S
BB 3W 15*
904f 19* 5W, graphite design ys-6 S
585h 19*, aldila nv 75-S
idea pro 23*, blue by you S mp-30 4-6; mp-33 7-pwCleveland 900 rtg 52*, wrx 60* spin milled vokey 56*/10Yes! heather putter b330s

Link to comment
Share on other sites


First I wanna ask, what's up with the comment about Crankpot moving over here because it's more his speed??? Why involve us like that?

Titleist's article was pretty fair and factually based so I don't see a problem with it. Since Geoff is a one man blog I don't put too much weight on what he has to say, it's just one mans opinions. In my opinion, if he presented his arguments a little more cut and dry instead of emotion driven he probably wouldn't catch as much grief from people but then again we're essentially reading a guys diary. Which is why I don't spend much time on his site. While I don't agree with Geoff on his rant here, he's perfectly entitled to it and if we don't agree then so be it, gatta love the 1st Ammendment.

It's not up to the manufacters to manage the game, that lies with the governing bodies. For example, bicycle manufacturers are constantly trying to make the equipment lighter and stronger inorder to gain an advantage against their competition. In fact at the Tour de France a couple years ago one cycling team was required to add weight to their bikes in order to meet the minimun weight requirements imposed by the cycling federation.

I don't see that Golf is in ruins and Golf is no different than any other sport where the manufacturers want what is best for their players and the players want what's best for themselves. So there is no one to blame, it's simply evolution of a sport, like what steel shafts and balata balls did for the sport many years ago.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
First I wanna ask, what's up with the comment about Crankpot moving over here because it's more his speed??? Why involve us like that?

I used to pester Geoff with those pesky "facts" and stuff similar to what Crankpot had to say, so the comment is more directed at me than anything.

Dave will vouch for me on that one. He'll also vouch for the fact that many of my comments were deleted, and that I was subsequently blocked. Several times, in fact, which is why I've taken to using an, uhmmmm, a pseudonym. Can you guess which one?
Titleist's article was pretty fair and factually based so I don't see a problem with it. Since Geoff is a one man blog I don't put too much weight on what he has to say, it's just one mans opinions. In my opinion, if he presented his arguments a little more cut and dry instead of emotion driven he probably wouldn't catch as much grief from people but then again we're essentially reading a guys diary. Which is why I don't spend much time on his site. While I don't agree with Geoff on his rant here, he's perfectly entitled to it and if we don't agree then so be it, gatta love the 1st Amendment.

The first amendment doesn't protect people who slander, either, and the war for the public's consciousness - their very opinions - is hardly something to be taken lightly by certain camps.

And dude, if his blog is "one person's diary" then The Sand Trap is eight people's diaries all rolled into one, and I think we're just a bit more than that.
I don't see that Golf is in ruins and Golf is no different than any other sport where the manufacturers want what is best for their players and the players want what's best for themselves. So there is no one to blame, it's simply evolution of a sport, like what steel shafts and balata balls did for the sport many years ago.

Geoff believes there are people to blame. In fact, he seems to think the problem lies with everyone but himself... but that's neither here nor there.

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

Oh, and we can't just roll the clubs and balls back to an earlier standard. We also need to:

*Go back to older mowing equipment, types of grass and agronomy standards. Because the GCSAA is really just out to make money, after all. Let's see those greens at Augusta rolling like shag carpet!

*Limit physical fitness. If you don't have at least 25% body fat, you're off the tour.

*Roll back the golf instruction. The Leadbetters, Harmons, Haneys, etc. are out. Instead, all golf instruction will come from that creepy guy who hangs at the end of the range hitting sh--ks and hiding practice balls in his bag.

*Reduce the tournament purses. These guys have too much incentive. Win the U.S. Open? Here's a check for $6,500, and a parking voucher. Congrats!

*Clothing must be restrictive, uncomfortable and made of burlap. These synthetic dry-fit shirts and comfy shoes make a mockery of the game.

Why can't everything just be like the way it used to be? You know, the good old days when the PGA had to pay to have the Ryder Cup televised and golf was considered a snobby sport for rich people. That was great...

in the bag today:
Driver: TaylorMade R9 10.5° (Fujikura Motore 65 stiff)
3-wood: Tour Edge Exotics XCG (Aldila DVS Fairway 75 stiff)
hybrid: Sonartec Md 21° (UST Proforce V2 Hybrid 85 stiff)
4-PW: Titleist 755 (Titleist TriSpec Regular)Wedges: Titleist Vokey Design 252.08 bent to 50.5° (Oil...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
Why can't everything just be like the way it used to be? You know, the good old days when the PGA had to pay to have the Ryder Cup televised and golf was considered a snobby sport for rich people. That was great...

I

agree . Dig the Tom Morris, man. Dig him!!!! And you can, too, cuz he's been buried for like a hundred years.

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

Equipment improvement, supposed or otherwise, powers many aspects of the game, from golf magazine and website advertising to sponsorship of pro players.

If that money was not available to the golf industry, there would still be high dollar tournaments and plenty of pro players. Finances might be a bit more lean, but there are other commercial sponsors who would fill in. Golf publications would sell at a higher cost. Ad agencies and web hosts would have to look somewhere else for business.

There certainly has been improvement in average driving distance for pro golfers, if not so much in putting. Newer and better equipment can give a golfer an edge. I tremble in fear when a competitor rips the headcover off a gleaming $500 driver.

Why on earth would anybody want to fence golfers away from the benefits of technology? And reduce the flow of money back into the game? Is that insane? Self defeating?

Maybe not. I can understand why some people would want to limit progress. Maybe you can too.

Look at us! Just about all of on this forum have a long list below the signature line of our posts boasting of the clubs we carry. (Yup, me too, though my face is a little red at listing my outmoded golf machinery in public; I feel kind of like sitting at a stoplight in my 1990 Chevy next to a guy in a beemer.)

We don't brag about conquering the Blue Monster in 85 strokes, or surviving Bethpage Black. Or about having gone two rounds with the Old Course. No, first we brag about our equipment! We--most of us--climb into the cockpit of our golf carts for a round of motor-golf, and get out now and then just to show off our latest super-duper Wham-Bang made of space age composites and sporting the latest computer-designed power flange. What happened to golf? Are we just equipment-horses for the manufacturers?

Is golfing status conferred by the weapons we carry instead of the way we use them or our love for the game?

But finally, does any of this really matter as long as we have fun? So what if we are gear-mad philistines?

Carry Bag, experimental mix-- 9* Integra 320, TT X100 Gold shaft
MacGregor Tourney 2-iron circa 1979

High grass club: #5 Ginty
Irons: 3,4,8,9 Cleveland 588P RTG Proforce 95 Gold shafts
Hogan fifty-three Hogan 5612

Ping Kushin

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Note: This thread is 6602 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


×
×
  • 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...