• Announcements

    • iacas

      GAME GOLF Ryder Cup Contest   09/22/2016

      Join our GAME GOLF Ryder Cup Challenge to win an autographed GAME GOLF, a Pebble Steel watch, and many more great prizes!
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Robster 7

Why aren't there any women playing on the men's tour?

126 posts in this topic

The accepted reason is power but there are lots of women who hit it just as far as some of the average PGA Tour players so I just don't understand why they can't compete. In a sport where it actually is possible for them to compete on a level playing field, unlike other more physical sports, I just don't understand why they don't?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Want to get rid of this advertisement? Sign up (or log in) today! It's free!

Originally Posted by Robster 7

The accepted reason is power but there are lots of women who hit it just as far as some of the average PGA Tour players so I just don't understand why they can't compete. In a sport where it actually is possible for them to compete on a level playing field, unlike other more physical sports, I just don't understand why they don't?

Sorry, but that's not right.

They're just not long enough. Just looking at driving, the top 3 women on the LPGA would barely make it into the bottom 5 in driving average on the PGA tour. They're obviously proportionally shorter with the rest of their clubs too.

Contrary to popular belief, most aren't as solid in the short game either, but again, a lot of that comes from the same lack of speed that keeps them shorter with the full swing....

0

Share this post


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

Ok but there are quite a few who average over 270yds, more than Mike Weir (Masters Winner) so what I'm basically saying is that they have the game in terms of distance so why doesn't it transfer? Are we saying they're simply not good enough?
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And another question would be, if they can't hit it as far as men, why not? There are plenty of big women out there on the LPGA and anyway its not about brute force but about technique.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eric has a good post about watching an LPGA event in person, and the differences in short game between the two tours. Basically, it said PGA players, for the most part, had a much greater variety of shots around the greens.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Robster 7

And another question would be, if they can't hit it as far as men, why not? There are plenty of big women out there on the LPGA and anyway its not about brute force but about technique.

Actually it is about brute force. Testosterone versus Estrogen is huge in the growth of muscle mass in males versus females. Study done showed that by the end of Puberty, males have on average twice as much muscle mass as woman. That is a big advantage. Not to mention, height as well.

Though with resistance training, women can close the gap, but overall men have a higher potential for muscle gains. Not to mention, men are just bigger than females overall. I also wonder about how the hips are designed, since there is a big difference there, that women have a disadvantage in the golf swing in how the hips work, not sure.

But, its not technique, women are getting the same treatment as men. There are woman golfers being taught by the same people who teach male golfers.

But purely its genetics.

Look at Anika, she lifted weights for years, got into the best shape of her life, and she was still hitting it as far as the lower end of the distance spectrum for male golfers. There's just that genetic gap that adds that extra distance. That would be huge in an LPGA event. If the bottom end of the distance spectrum for a PGA golfer is the top end of the LPGA, that is a big time advantage.

0

Share this post


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

Clubhead speed.

/thread (j/k)

I have more clubhead speed than most LPGA players, yet mine pales in comparison to most PGA guys. Imagine an LPGA player playing a 630 yard par 5. That might be Ugly....driver, 3-wood, hybrid just to try and hit a GIR. Not a very high percentage hole there...

0

Share this post


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

This is, to be blunt, a stupid question.

If you think there is no physical difference between men and women, you are sadly mistaken.  Look as Saevel25's posts and you'll get your answer.

Why do you think men and women don't compete against one another in swimming, basketball or tennis for that matter?

0

Share this post


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

The very best women of today, with extensive physical training and practice, using today's most advanced training methods, may be able to compete with the pro men of a few decades ago (and today's typical male golfer).  But not the men pros.  The men of today also have those same training advantages and the physical advantage.

Maybe if the courses were all executive length.

0

Share this post


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

What keeps them back? Lack of a short game in quality and variety, and putting. Power.

IMHO, a woman with a high quality short game who makes putts could make the cut on some courses - those that are not long and do require accuracy. But that's a handful of times on the PGA Tour.

I think Anika missed the cut by a stroke at Colonial -- she did not make enough putts. I can't remember if she was close enough on approaches to give her a chance at a lot of birds, but I do remember her missing putts that would have had her playing on the weekend.

0

Share this post


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

Originally Posted by Robster 7

The accepted reason is power but there are lots of women who hit it just as far as some of the average PGA Tour players so I just don't understand why they can't compete. In a sport where it actually is possible for them to compete on a level playing field, unlike other more physical sports, I just don't understand why they don't?

Don't feed the trolls.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first thing that I thought about was a potential disparity in carry distance. It seems like in most of the LPGA events that I've watched, the players may get 260-270 out of a drive, but with a fairly significant amount of roll. This would make sense; they have lower swing speeds resulting in 1) less spin and therefore 2) a much shallower angle of descent. After a quick google search, I came across these tables, which I thought were pretty interesting. They were put together using Trackman data for LPGA and PGA tour players.

And for comparison:

The most striking difference to me is the average carry distance. 220 yards vs. 269. 220 won't get you to some fairways on PGA tour courses.

2

Share this post


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

Originally Posted by 460CompMark

they are not strong enough, mentally and physically.

I agree with the physical part, but I think some of the LPGA players over the years had/have the mental game to play with the boys.

0

Share this post


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

Originally Posted by 460CompMark

playing with the boys is one thing, but making the cut is another.

Yeah, but it isn't the mental game that's holding them back in that case. If anything, I've seen a lot more mental collapses on the PGA tour than LPGA. Although Kim may take the cake with that 1 footer...

0

Share this post


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

Yeah Im not sure she's fully recovered from that either.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by RonTheSavage

Yeah Im not sure she's fully recovered from that either.

Would you be?

0

Share this post


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

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
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2016 TST Partners

    GAME Golf
    PING Golf
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • I like it. Especially compared to nearly all past US Ryder Cup kits. Actually before I dish out too much praise, do they have a huge Stars and Stripes flag emblazoned on the back?
    • I would say it depends on what club you're talking about. For drivers I would say that the best performing drivers of all time have been made within the last five years. Aerodynamics, material science, and the proliferation of launch monitors and data driven design have resulted in improvements across the board in distance and forgiveness as of late. I know that I personally saw a decent improvement on my G10 when I switched to a G30, in that I gained between 10 and 15 yards without sacrificing accuracy. This is on the high end of what aerodynamics can provide though, simply because higher swing speeds receive a greater benefit from decreased drag. Depending on the individual you may not see much difference so long as the driver itself was made within the last ten years or so. For irons I would be inclined to say that the main difference in the irons of yesteryear and the irons of today is forgiveness. The irons made today are much easier to hit than previous irons, simply because they aren't as drastically punishing on mis-hits as the old blades. The PING Eye2 irons seemed to be the first "widespread" GI iron that sparked the trend towards irons that were easier for the layman to hit. That being said, I found my s55 irons (their "blade" from several years ago) to be more forgiving than the Eye2's. Based on that and observations from other clubs I have hit I would say the average golfer would be best suited by irons made within the last 10 to 15 years that are in good condition with sharp grooves. If you play muscleback irons though, there's pretty much zero difference between modern "true" musclebacks and those of yore, though the current muscle-cavity irons (like the iBlade and MP-15) will likely be at least a bit easier to hit than the older blades while maintaining a similar style.  Wedges are the only thing that I would argue the "latest and greatest" provides a tangible benefit for. The reasoning for this is entirely different however, in that it's based solely off the condition of the grooves in older wedges. As wedges grow old, and get used, the grooves wear to the point that there becomes a noticeable performance difference - especially when playing out of the rough. For this reason alone do I say that the average golfer (assuming they golf at least once a week during the golfing season) is best suited by wedges no older than two or three years old.  Putters are the odd man out here. I don't think it matters in the slightest when your putter was manufactured, so long as you keep a reasonable grip on it so that it doesn't slip out of your hands. I personally am a fan of the newer milled putters for the feel they provide, but it doesn't mean I couldn't probably putt nearly as well with an original Anser putter in the same style. I think the average golfer is best suited by whatever putter style and features allow them to consistently roll the ball along their target line, with no age requirement. In summary, considering the advancement of technology, I would feel comfortable putting these "maximum age caps" on equipment for the average weekend golfer to get the most out of his/her game: Drivers: ~10 years old or newer Irons: ~15 years old or newer Wedges: ~3 years old or newer Putter: Whatever works best for you That being said, you may still enjoy the game with any kind of equipment out there. I just think that equipment that follows these guidelines will let the average weekend golfer get about as much as they can out of their game without necessarily breaking the bank. Like @iacas said, you may find incremental improvements by purchasing the R1 over an old G5 but the question then becomes whether or not this improvement is worth the price difference. This question can only be answered by the person buying the club. It can't be denied, however, that a driver from the 1960's will be severely outclassed by the G5 and the R1, making either of them a much better choice than the 1960's driver. Interestingly enough, I have had the desire to go the opposite way for a while now. I bought the s55's my last go around, and I'm thinking that my next set of irons will be a more "traditional" muscleback iron (since the s55 is mostly a CB), along the likes of the MP-4 irons by Mizuno. I hit the ball consistently enough that I don't care about the lack of forgiveness, and I believe that the wonderful look and feel of those irons, along with the little bit of extra vertical control (can thin it slightly to make punch shots even easier) would offset whatever I lose in forgiveness. I know that I would most certainly never go to an iron like the AP2, the G, or the M2. The chunky look of the club (along with the offset) gets into my head nowadays and makes me feel uncomfortable standing over the ball in a manner similar to how I used to be intimidated by the look of blades at address. I would gain forgiveness, but at the price of distance and trajectory control - an unacceptable trade for me considering I value distance and trajectory control much more highly than forgiveness.
    • My newest clubs are pretty old. Maybe 2006? I don't really remember. The other day, just for the heck of it,  I played using my old Bazooka Iron Woods. (2i-LW) Shot my normal score. Those Ironwoods are probably 15-16 years old. I don't think at this stage of my life, that a new set would make that much difference. 
    • My irons are from 1978, driver and woods from 2004 (same G5 as you)....at my current playing level, I don't feel like my clubs are holding my scores back. I will be updating my wedges to something designed this century in the near future but I'll probably regrip and keep playing my grandfather's old Eye irons a couple more years. There's something to be said about being familiar with your equipment too. The control you talk about with your driver comes from hitting a lot of balls with it and getting to know how it responds to different things. That's tough to give up considering that it could take weeks to develop that relationship with a new driver...at least that helps me cure the new toy bug and keep the wallet closed. :)
    • Hah, I was thinking the same thing when I saw that pic go up on the landing page.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Images

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. mahariji_slice
      mahariji_slice
      (35 years old)
  • Blog Entries