Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 3031 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

Posted
Does being tall in height give an advantage? Amongst the group of friends I play with, I'd say 4/5 are approx. 5'8" ish, with 4/5 being 6' or slightly over! Now it could be coincidence? Or it could be height advantage? But the taller ones are the big hitters, up to 40 yards longer on drives, and hitting 8irons over 150yrds, and although were all capable of beating each other, the taller guys tend to win more? And I don't think this is coincidence! Just wondering what others views are of this? And if anyone can name a really good short arse golfer?

Gaz Lee


Posted

Absolutely, it's a huge advantag from a distance standpoint. It's pure leverage and physics. The higher you can get your hands the more (and easier) speed you can generate. Shorter guys can still generate plenty of power but it takes more torque and rotation to get it for them.

As for short and good golfers, there are a lot fewer of them than tall ones but Player and Trevino are the two best who come to mind.

  • Upvote 1

Posted
Sheer physical power does help, of course. But it isn't everything, because timing and co-ordination play bigger roles. Ian Woosnam is 5'4" and in his prime was one of the biggest hitters on tour.

The more I practise, the luckier I hope to get.


Posted

Probably doesn't make much difference until you get to a higher skill level. I see plenty of crappy tall golfers, they don't hit it far or accurate.

Dave :-)

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

Taller golfers have a naturally larger swing arc, which if applied correctly, should lead to more distance than a shorter golfer. The key words being, 'when applied correctly.'

But there's also a thing as being too tall. That's why basketball players, in general, have a hard time being good at golf - issues of body sway, too high of a center of gravity, etc come into play.

Interestingly, back in the day (meaning the 60s & 70s), the longer hitters were the under-6 footers with solid, almost stocky bodies. Nicklaus for example. The tall players were the good putters, like George Archer.


Posted
Hmm, I'm not bitter, but I guess what I lack in height I will need to make up for in technique![quote name="Dave2512" url="/t/75159/being-tall-an-advantage#post_1003423"]Probably doesn't make much difference until you get to a higher skill level. I see plenty of crappy tall golfers, they don't hit it far or accurate. [/quote] Haha, yes crappy golfers come in every shape and size! [quote name="chasm" url="/t/75159/being-tall-an-advantage#post_1003421"]Sheer physical power does help, of course. But it isn't everything, because timing and co-ordination play bigger roles. Ian Woosnam is 5'4" and in his prime was one of the biggest hitters on tour.[/quote] I never realised woosy was only 5'4" ? But it's hard to tell of tv, my friend went to the British open last year and said he was surprised at how big most of the guys were,.. Particularly tiger woods,... Not just tall, but physically powerfully built!

Gaz Lee


Posted
  1. Quote:

I never realised woosy was only 5'4" ?

Yep:

  1. Ian Woosnam
    Golfer
  2. Ian Harold Woosnam OBE is a Welsh professional golfer. Nicknamed 'Woosie', 'Woosers', or the 'Wee Welshman', Woosnam was one of the "Big Five" generation of European golfers, all born within 12 months ... Wikipedia
  3. Born : March 2, 1958 (age 56), Oswestry, United Kingdom
  4. Height : 5' 4" (1.64 m)
  5. Nationality : Welsh
  6. Weight : 168 lbs (76 kg)

Posted

But it's hard to tell of tv, my friend went to the British open last year and said he was surprised at how big most of the guys were,.. Particularly tiger woods,... Not just tall, but physically powerfully built!

All relative. I will be bigger than most when I go see them at the BMW later this year. I was surprised how small they were during the Masters when they did a segment on jacket size. A lot of them were 38-40R sized.

Dave :-)

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
All relative. I will be bigger than most when I go see them at the BMW later this year. I was surprised how small they were during the Masters when they did a segment on jacket size. A lot of them were 38-40R sized.

Good point! It's funny as I always considered myself quite short, (5'8.5") yet when I see others the same size, they don't look so short! Must be the eye level to top of head distance we don't see on ourselves! Anyway I digress, tall people do have an advantage so I want an extra 3 adding to my hc when I play someone 6' or over!

Gaz Lee


  • Moderator
Posted
But it's hard to tell of tv, my friend went to the British open last year and said he was surprised at how big most of the guys were,.. Particularly tiger woods,... Not just tall, but physically powerfully built!

Your friend doesn't spend enough time with other athletes, I gather. Pro golfers (the ones that work out) are definitely strong, but they're lean. Big is definitely not an adjective I'd use for their physique.

Bill

“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.” - Confucius

My Swing Thread

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
Your friend doesn't spend enough time with other athletes, I gather. Pro golfers (the ones that work out) are definitely strong, but they're lean. Big is definitely not an adjective I'd use for their physique.

Kevin Stadler? And he's only the most extreme example. Plenty of tour pros are clearly overweight.

The more I practise, the luckier I hope to get.


  • Moderator
Posted
Kevin Stadler? And he's only the most extreme example. Plenty of tour pros are clearly overweight.

You didn't read my post, did you?

Bill

“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.” - Confucius

My Swing Thread

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
You didn't read my post, did you?

I did. But if I didn't understand it, please enlighten me.

The more I practise, the luckier I hope to get.


Posted

Even some of the slim guys are a little soft. Though it seems like training is becoming more prevalent on the tour each year.

Dave :-)

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted
I did. But if I didn't understand it, please enlighten me.

I mentioned specifically about the ones that work out. You know the ones the golf announcers are always raving about how big and strong they are?

Bill

“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.” - Confucius

My Swing Thread

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted
I mentioned specifically about the ones that work out. You know the ones the golf announcers are always raving about how big and strong they are?

OK, but working out and being overweight aren't mutually exclusive. I know that Westwood, for example, has spent a good deal of time in the gym in the last few years, and "lean" isn't a word I'd apply to him.

The more I practise, the luckier I hope to get.


  • Moderator
Posted
OK, but working out and being overweight aren't mutually exclusive. I know that Westwood, for example, has spent a good deal of time in the gym in the last few years, and "lean" isn't a word I'd apply to him.

Then I apologize for being ambiguous.

Bill

“By three methods we may learn wisdom: First, by reflection, which is noblest; Second, by imitation, which is easiest; and third by experience, which is the bitterest.” - Confucius

My Swing Thread

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 3031 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

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

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • Day 11, 1/11/26.  Today was putting, along about 6' of carpet, with coins on the ground to keep me cognizant of what I'm doing.  I think this is the at-home drill from LSW. (Ugh, missed two of the last four days -- 1/10 and 1/8)
    • Day 9: 2026.01.11 Hit some balls at the range, concentrating on weight distribution at address, got some on film.
    • Day 468 - 2026-01-11 Loooooong day. Did some work in the patio door (as a mirror) when I got home.
    • I caught a video on this driver; the face tech seems crazy. Looking at the heat map for ball speed, hitting it basically anywhere on the face only loses a few percent ball speed. The surprising and counter intuitive part to me was that for flat faced clubs, ball speed loss is directly proportional to distance loss. For clubs with bulge and roll this is apparently not true. The surprising part of that story being that the max distance potential looks to be a tiny pee sized area for this driver, and I feel in general for drivers. The counter intuitive part being (the myth?) that blade irons have a pee sized sweet spot and missing that tiny spot causes dramatic losses. And that modern drivers, maybe 2017 on, have massive sweet spots and are ultra forgiving. Where in reality, if this heat map data is valid and reliable, it might be a bit of the opposite. This insane tech driver appears to have a pea sized "sweet spot" while Mizuno Pro 241 irons are 28% more forgiving compared to the average of all clubs measured. Not compared to other players irons, compared to all clubs from all categories, players to SGI! The Pro 241 being essentially just a solid chunk of metal with no "tech" at all. Which for me devolves into a whole mess of what is forgiveness really? And in measurable and quantifiable results how many yards, or feet, does that translate into?  
    • Wordle 1,667 3/6 🟨🟨⬜⬜⬜ ⬜⬜⬜🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • 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.