Has technology taken from the skill of playing golf?

[JP golf]

So change your votes. 

Done.  Thanks Erik!  I didn't know I could ha ha.

[Kenny Lee]

Technology seems to really help the "old guys". I know a bunch of 70+ year-old dudes that can still bang their drive pretty damn far. It's pretty awesome.

[inthehole]

It amazes me to think of the scores the old guys like Sarazen and Hagen shot with the old hickory shafted clubs.    Nevermind the woods - we all know how hard they would be to hit CONSISTENTLY, but the irons were so rudimentary back then ... no bounce, no weighting technology - individually hand forged, so there was a lot of variation from club to club.   We're worried about kickpoint, flex, etc ... every hickory shaft would have been of a different flex - I'm sure some were better than others, some would slightly warp due to humidity, etc.    From what I've read, the old balls were inconsistent at best.

Not to even mention how shaggy the greens were back then ... our pro's play on pool table manicured greens ... players of old played on greens that were like our first cut today - they simply didn't have the equipment yet to cut putting surface grass super short.    No lazers to shoot yardages - they had to be able to read yardage by eye.    They didn't even carry 14 clubs routinely.    

AND THE BEST STILL SHOT BELOW PAR to win tournaments back then ... f'n astounding actually

[shanksalot]

  While equipment today makes the game easier I feel it would be just as enjoyable if technology had never changed the game. I played for years using Persimmons woods and blades all with steel shafts. I enjoy the game just as much today but not more than I did back in the first 20 years before the changes took place. If people never knew metal woods and SGI or GI irons with graphite they would be enjoying the game today and probably have the same equipment for many years instead of changing every few years or more. I played with the same clubs for two decades. 

Despite all the changes in equipment and other pertinent technology to help people learn and play the game better I think it is still a very hard game to play for many people. One of the things I think has hurt is televised golf events. People see the pros play and expect to be able to hit the ball like that. When they start to learn the game many of them find it way too hard to play and because of this and cost of rounds and equipment they don't stay with the game. For those of us who started out using wood woods and blades the changes have made it easier in many cases since mishits are  going almost as far as good hits. 

[DrvFrShow]

The quality of the iron sets for the prices have improved dramatically considering inflation. Back in 1970 you'd buy a set of irons for $150 and they'd essentially be crap widely varying in swing weight and balance. No two clubs felt the same. That's about $600 in today's money. Today the manufacturing tolerances are much tighter and with a quality set there is little variation. They'll build a set to your lie, shaft length, and the prices are really less than they were in 1970 and you get a better product.

Also playing wood - each piece of wood is different, dependent upon the grain, how the tree grew. With metal, you can make each club uniform, so the quality has improved. If I happened to break my favorite driver, chances are I can replace it with an identical one unless it's more than a couple years old.

I was hitting a 180 yd drive at the most total distance back in 1970 with my dad's Hogans. Today, I'm getting 215 to 225 yd carry distances. But still the better high school women smoke me on the course with a driver by a good 10 yds carry. So yes, the technology has made the game more enjoyable for me. It is still a very difficult game. Even if I had my game all together, I'd have great difficulty keeping up with the younger women.

I think the technology has brought more women into the game.

[Lihu]

I'm a little surprised that the response is almost 50/50 on the second question? It's true that the game is really hard, but my feeling is that it would be much harder without all the modern equipment and training methods that use a lot of modern measurement equipment.

I would imagine that the scores would be 5 or more strokes higher with the unforgiving old style blades and those tiny steel headed "woods" from as little as 20 years ago. I can't imagine playing anything near my current scoring average even if they made left handed clubs out of hickory?

[turtleback]

It amazes me to think of the scores the old guys like Sarazen and Hagen shot with the old hickory shafted clubs.    Nevermind the woods - we all know how hard they would be to hit CONSISTENTLY, but the irons were so rudimentary back then ... no bounce, no weighting technology - individually hand forged, so there was a lot of variation from club to club.   We're worried about kickpoint, flex, etc ... every hickory shaft would have been of a different flex - I'm sure some were better than others, some would slightly warp due to humidity, etc.    From what I've read, the old balls were inconsistent at best.

Not to even mention how shaggy the greens were back then ... our pro's play on pool table manicured greens ... players of old played on greens that were like our first cut today - they simply didn't have the equipment yet to cut putting surface grass super short.    No lazers to shoot yardages - they had to be able to read yardage by eye.    They didn't even carry 14 clubs routinely.    

AND THE BEST STILL SHOT BELOW PAR to win tournaments back then ... f'n astounding actually

Well, to be fair, the courses they were playing were WAAAAAAAAAY shorter than the guys play now.

[ygmondoux]

Well, to be fair, the courses they were playing were WAAAAAAAAAY shorter than the guys play now.

I know you were talking of Sarazen Hagen etc. But, I looked at a scoreboard from the Canadian Open that was played in the Montreal area in 1969 I think, it played 7067 yards par 71. 

Today it's a 7067 yards par 72, it's still a very tough course. Most of our best players (some NCAA players) play there with index of +5 +4 +4... Really good players. The course record that was set at the canadian open 1969 still stands: 64 by Al Balding. In the field: Arnold Palmer, Jack Nicklaus, Moe Norman, Sam Snead...

It's not a target golf course so you can use the driver on 14 holes. 

Let's say there's a 40-50 yards gap on drives created by today's technology since 1969.  40x14=560 50x14= 700

You could argue that it played between a 7627 and a 7767 par 71. 

Now, that's PGA long by today's standards. 

http://www.golfpinegrove.ca/en/

Edited October 26, 2015 by ygmondoux

[newtogolf]

I've been reading the responses and questioning my responses to the poll (yes, yes, no).  I think to some degree the answers are relative.

If I grew up in Hogan's era I'd have learned to hit the clubs he did and my performance relative to him would likely be no different than my performance today relative to Jordan Spieth or Tiger Woods.   Anyone using clubs from Hogan's era would likely perform worse than if they used modern clubs.

Hogan's swing remains the model swing for many of todays pro golfers and swing theorists despite the fact the clubs he used were primitive compared to those we use today, so one can conclude that regardless of when the clubs were made, the Five Keys applied then and today. 

[Lihu]

I've been reading the responses and questioning my responses to the poll (yes, yes, no).  I think to some degree the answers are relative.

If I grew up in Hogan's era I'd have learned to hit the clubs he did and my performance relative to him would likely be no different than my performance today relative to Jordan Spieth or Tiger Woods.   Anyone using clubs from Hogan's era would likely perform worse than if they used modern clubs.

Hogan's swing remains the model swing for many of todays pro golfers and swing theorists despite the fact the clubs he used were primitive compared to those we use today, so one can conclude that regardless of when the clubs were made, the Five Keys applied then and today. 

I'm not too sure about this one? Guessing our relative performance would have even been worse. There are literally thousands of players who are almost*** as good as the top players relatively speaking. During Hogan's time, there were a lot less, and they might have all been playing already. Guessing it's the older methods of learning the swing along with the actual playing equipment. Today, everyone pretty much uses at least a camera.

However, I do agree that we would perform a lot worse with older equipment.

***Heavily qualified. . .

[Moppy]

I am thinking it would be really hard to start golf late in life with the old equipment.

[RussUK]

I am thinking it would be really hard to start golf late in life with the old equipment.

+1. Im still young (35) and still sruggle with much ofthe new tech let a lone "ye oldie" clubs, Thing is my Uncle gave me an old battered persimon driver when i was 10 and i could hit it ok. Then again when you are that young you dont have any other thought other than "kill the ball!"

Do you think in 10-20 years golfers will be saying "i cant believe they used 460cc Titanium drivers back in the day"?

[Lihu]

I am thinking it would be really hard to start golf late in life with the old equipment.

Agree it's harder when older in general, but it's also hard at any age you start.

[shanksalot]

The quality of the iron sets for the prices have improved dramatically considering inflation. Back in 1970 you'd buy a set of irons for $150 and they'd essentially be crap widely varying in swing weight and balance. No two clubs felt the same. That's about $600 in today's money. Today the manufacturing tolerances are much tighter and with a quality set there is little variation. They'll build a set to your lie, shaft length, and the prices are really less than they were in 1970 and you get a better product.

Also playing wood - each piece of wood is different, dependent upon the grain, how the tree grew. With metal, you can make each club uniform, so the quality has improved. If I happened to break my favorite driver, chances are I can replace it with an identical one unless it's more than a couple years old.

I was hitting a 180 yd drive at the most total distance back in 1970 with my dad's Hogans. Today, I'm getting 215 to 225 yd carry distances. But still the better high school women smoke me on the course with a driver by a good 10 yds carry. So yes, the technology has made the game more enjoyable for me. It is still a very difficult game. Even if I had my game all together, I'd have great difficulty keeping up with the younger women.

I think the technology has brought more women into the game.

 I have to disagree with you on each club being the same. If so then why do the guys who take care of the pros bring a half dozen clubs for them to try at the practice range? Shouldn't they just need one club? Even today there  is differences in every club made. Between the weight of the head and shafts and the variance in loft of the head. I have talked with club fitters who have measured the heads of many OEM's and have found 2-4* variance in stated loft. A 10* head could be actually off plus or minus two degrees. Today the after market graphite shafts are very close in tolerance but the made for OEM shaft is not as uniform. They also have taken apart OEM irons and the stated weight versus actual weight is not the same often varying by 2 grams or more between heads. They add swing weight in the hosel to make them conform to the specs so the total sw of each club is pretty much the same but off the shelf before assembly they are usually not to spec. 

[Lihu]

 I have to disagree with you on each club being the same. If so then why do the guys who take care of the pros bring a half dozen clubs for them to try at the practice range? Shouldn't they just need one club? Even today there  is differences in every club made. Between the weight of the head and shafts and the variance in loft of the head. I have talked with club fitters who have measured the heads of many OEM's and have found 2-4* variance in stated loft. A 10* head could be actually off plus or minus two degrees. Today the after market graphite shafts are very close in tolerance but the made for OEM shaft is not as uniform. They also have taken apart OEM irons and the stated weight versus actual weight is not the same often varying by 2 grams or more between heads. They add swing weight in the hosel to make them conform to the specs so the total sw of each club is pretty much the same but off the shelf before assembly they are usually not to spec. 

4 degrees seems quite a bit of variance from an investment cast mold? Maybe a low precision one for very large parts. Golf club heads are tiny compared to stuff that is normally investment cast. Also, a 2gm variance is about 1% of the weight. This is a company that does generic golf casting.

[pganapathy]

Yes, Yes, Yes

Equipment is making things easier and more idiot proof (view SGI irons that get a ball airborne almost irrespective of where on the face you hit it.  However, the enjoyment for me is not from the better equipment but from the nice shots you play, and that for me is a centred hit and a good result.

Think the improvement in tech is spoiling the game.

[DrvFrShow]

The forgiveness in the GI and SGI irons are not as much as one would like. They're great for slow swing speeds where the margin of error for a shot is pretty large. Sure they're great at helping a player get the ball up in the air. But I'll tell you this. A 6 iron approach shot from 175 yds does not have much margin for error. You'd better present that club face square and on a good path otherwise you'll be in the tall cabbage. Your playing partner might hit that club 145 yds and still be somewhere in the fairway or in the short rough with an errant shot. It's been my experience that the benefits one receives from GI and SGI irons go down as one becomes a longer hitter.

[nevets88]

When we start strapping ourselves into exoskeletons and click a few buttons to indicate stuff like deg/sec rotation, direction and curvature, that's when it's gone too far. You can equip yourself w/all the nonconforming equipment you want, have all the money in the world, all the time in the world, and it's still... stinking... hard.