Dustin Johnson Hits Jack's Old Clubs

[Keep It Simple]

When watching early video of Jack Nicklaus hitting driver, I have to think if he grew up with todays young talent taking advantage of modern nutrition and training, he would still be in the top ten for driving distance on tour.   He already had a JB Holmes kinda build back in the day.

[JonMA1]

On 8/30/2018 at 1:00 PM, Pretzel said:

Jack was definitely in good shape compared to a number of his contemporaries though, and he was the DJ of his time who won in part by hitting the ball longer than his competitors. The levels of fitness of modern golfers is just so far above that of the past ever since Tiger showed that it can make a difference. Most top golfers nowadays have very regular exercise routines, whereas golfers of days gone by (Gary Player excluded) just exercised by going out and playing golf.

Agreed. And I stand corrected about how close Jack was to DJ as far as distance.

Back in the 70's, a common belief was that weightlifting would hinder athletes, slow them down. I'd heard plenty of times from baseball coaches that "getting bulked up will mess up your arm". While I wasn't involved in golf as a youth, I can imagine that might have been the sentiment with that sport as well. After all, golf is 100% finesse (sarcasm).

[Buckeyebowman]

On 8/30/2018 at 8:05 AM, saevel25 said:

He would average 15-20 yards farther than Jack did in his Prime.

Jack averaged in the mid 270's.

DJ would average in the 290's.

I would like to see DJ hit about 50 golf balls with the driver. Just to see what would happen when he gets a better timing for it.

More like correctly assess Jack's ability. You forget, we like to romanticize the past to the point that we defend them against any information opposite to that.

All this may be true, but still does not answer the question, what might Jack have done, in his prime, with modern clubs and balls? There's no way to answer that question, so the point becomes moot!

A sufficiently skilled golfer can "learn" an older club. This has been done before, when Tour pros were asked to hit "old style" hickory shafted clubs. They said they need to "wait" a bit on the shaft to respond to what the hands were doing, but they learned to hit them straight and long.

[saevel25]

Just now, Buckeyebowman said:

All this may be true, but still does not answer the question, what might Jack have done, in his prime, with modern clubs and balls? There's no way to answer that question, so the point becomes moot!

If he was playing modern course set ups, probably fractionally better than he did in the 70’s.

modern club design does not benefit the best ball strikers as it does the worse ball strikers. 

[billchao]

9 hours ago, billchao said:

318 > 276 even when you factor in the ball. I found this article from Andrew Rice that compared different era golf balls. The tester there hit new Pro V1 about 14% longer than Tour Balata, so a rough estimate would put Jack's 276 at a modern equivalent of 314.

But it's also important to remember that the Tour Balata balls were over 20 years old at the time the article was written. The balls have likely degraded in some form over time so it's possible brand new balatas would be longer than 20 year old ones, meaning the distance factor could be less than 14%.

Jack was a long hitter in his prime. DJ is probably longer, but not by a ridiculous amount or anything. More like the difference between DJ and Rory or JT, all top tier players in terms of distance.

 

28 minutes ago, Buckeyebowman said:

All this may be true, but still does not answer the question, what might Jack have done, in his prime, with modern clubs and balls? There's no way to answer that question, so the point becomes moot!

I made an effort to estimate that earlier in the thread. You may have missed it, so I quoted it above.

A lot has to be assumed, but DJ hitting with Jack's clubs does fill in some pieces somewhat. I have more information now than I did when we were speculating in the other thread about swing speed.

26 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

If he was playing modern course set ups, probably fractionally better than he did in the 70’s.

modern club design does not benefit the best ball strikers as it does the worse ball strikers. 

It actually does, but not the same way it benefits amateurs. Because the equipment is more forgiving, the pros can "go after it" harder knowing that a slight miss won't hurt them as much. There's less risk involved and more reward to be gained by swinging faster, even if it means they'll miss the sweetspot slightly. The modern pro driver swing has kind of evolved partly because the equipment allows it.

Playing the less forgiving wooden clubs puts a greater need on hitting the sweetspot, so players were willing to sacrifice some extra speed for better control. I read somewhere that even back in the day they knew that swinging slightly upward with the driver could result in longer drives, but accuracy was more of an issue if they missed the center so players hit down on the ball for more spin and better control.

Plus, modern clubs are lighter and longer than clubs in Jack's day. That alone will increase swing speed. It's unlikely that Jack at 27 with modern equipment would only hit it fractionally better than Jack at 40 with vintage equipment.

And since @turtleback brought it up, Tiger in 1997 using older equipment averaged 294.8 yards. Tiger 21 years older using modern equipment is averaging 303.5 yards. Phil in '97 averaged 284.1 yards, in 2018 is averaging 299.6 yards. The equipment does contribute.

[ghalfaire]

12 hours ago, saevel25 said:

If he was playing modern course set ups, probably fractionally better than he did in the 70’s.

modern club design does not benefit the best ball strikers as it does the worse ball strikers. 

I hear the argument a lot the modern equipment doesn't benefit the good ball striker very much.  Maybe a nit but if you believe Jack as as accomplished a ball striker as DJ is then I'd have ask why is is driving average 14% greater than Jack's. I see 14% as significant but maybe not everyone does.

[billchao]

17 minutes ago, ghalfaire said:

I hear the argument a lot the modern equipment doesn't benefit the good ball striker very much.

That's an oversimplification IMO. More forgiving clubs disproportionately benefit poorer ballstrikers than better ones because they miss the sweetspot both farther and more often, but everyone benefits from more forgiveness. Nobody, not even tour players, hit the 100% perfect strikes.

The modern driver is able to be swung faster and is more forgiving than the old wooden clubs and that's an advantage for everyone.

[Vinsk]

1 hour ago, ghalfaire said:

I'd have ask why is is driving average 14% greater than Jack's. I see 14% as significant but maybe not everyone does.

Because DJ is a better athlete than Jack ever was. Talent may be equal. But I doubt Jack spent the time DJ does with physical training. You can’t just say it must be the equipment.

[skydog]

1 hour ago, Vinsk said:

Because DJ is a better athlete than Jack ever was. Talent may be equal. But I doubt Jack spent the time DJ does with physical training. You can’t just say it must be the equipment.

I would say DJ is more physically talented at the game than Jack was. The difference is the mental aspect- Jack was born with the clutch gene and DJ- more often than not- folds under pressure. Based solely on talent, DJ could/should have 5-7 majors right now.

[Vinsk]

10 minutes ago, skydog said:

I would say DJ is more physically talented at the game than Jack was. The difference is the mental aspect- Jack was born with the clutch gene and DJ- more often than not- folds under pressure. Based solely on talent, DJ could/should have 5-7 majors right now.

DJ is playing against a much, much stronger field than Jack ever did.

[skydog]

2 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

DJ is playing against a much, much stronger field than Jack ever did.

Ok...no doubt. Strength of field doesn’t change whether you rise or wilt under pressure. Some people are clutch and some aren’t.

[Vinsk]

1 minute ago, skydog said:

Ok...no doubt. Strength of field doesn’t change whether you rise or wilt under pressure. Some people are clutch and some aren’t.

Having a handful of players to take advantage of your wilting is a lot less difficult than having 50.

[skydog]

4 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Having a handful of players to take advantage of your wilting is a lot less difficult than having 50.

Case in point of how I said this board likes to constantly downplay Jack’s accomplishments for some reason...even in a story that should do nothing but actually confirm how good Jack was. But ok sir. 

[Vinsk]

23 minutes ago, skydog said:

Case in point of how I said this board likes to constantly downplay Jack’s accomplishments for some reason...even in a story that should do nothing but actually confirm how good Jack was. But ok sir. 

I didn’t downplay Jack’s accomplishments at all. I put them into perspective. What Jack accomplished in his time is phenomenal. Nobody ever said it wasn’t. You guys consistently want to compare Jack to today’s players. Jack is the second greatest golfer of all time. Not sure where you feel any of this is downplaying. Let it go bro. It’s just the way it goes with sports. Jack was fantastic, amazing and the next best of all time. But he never hit the ball like DJ can...and he wasn’t as good as Tiger. Period. Geesh.

[billchao]

Let's get back on topic, guys. This thread is not about tournament results or strength of field.

[skydog]

58 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

Let it go bro. It’s just the way it goes with sports. Jack was fantastic, amazing and the next best of all time. But he never hit the ball like DJ can...and he wasn’t as good as Tiger. Period. Geesh.

I don’t debate any of this one bit....in fact I literally just said DJ has more talent than Jack did. Which is why I said his one major is underachieveing relative to his talent base regardless of the SOF. My point was that if we agree that DJ has more talent than the 2nd GOAT, than he is sure as hell underachieving. And for some reason you saw that as an in to downplay Jack via the SOF topic even though that had nothing to do with my point. Should he have 18 majors- heck no- but he should have a lot more than 1.

 

Anyways....back on topic to whatever the perceived topic of this thread is. 

Edited September 1, 2018 by skydog

[70sSanO]

I love Jack.  At 66 he is someone I really looked up to and admired.  Tiger is a better golfer.  DJ is a better athlete than Jack due to the need to be physically athletic in today's game.

He can out drive Jack in Jack's prime everyday of the week.  That said, DJ with the 60's lifestyle may not have even won one major.  With all of DJ's skills he really is a disappointment and just folds under pressure too often, or just doesn't show up.

People forget that no one from the 60's can compete with today's athletes in any sport.  I'd be surprised if there aren't a dozen or more of today's pros that could outdrive Jack with old equipment.

John

Edited September 2, 2018 by 70sSanO

[Buckeyebowman]

20 hours ago, 70sSanO said:

I love Jack.  At 66 he is someone I really looked up to and admired.  Tiger is a better golfer.  DJ is a better athlete than Jack due to the need to be physically athletic in today's game.

He can out drive Jack in Jack's prime everyday of the week.  That said, DJ with the 60's lifestyle may not have even won one major.  With all of DJ's skills he really is a disappointment and just folds under pressure too often, or just doesn't show up.

People forget that no one from the 60's can compete with today's athletes in any sport.  I'd be surprised if there aren't a dozen or more of today's pros that could outdrive Jack with old equipment.

John

Errrr! I think you may have gone over the line with that last sentence. I still have a 4 wood (remember those?) from a set of persimmons I had made for me in the 70's. I stuck it in the bag thinking it might suffice for a 5 wood.

I hit it at the range and on the course and compared to modern clubs, I cannot describe to you how "dead" it felt! Yet, I could play it when I was younger. And this is a club that has been kept in the house. Not out in the garage or down the basement subjected to extremes of temperature and humidity.

The clubs aren't even close, never mind the balls! I'd like to see what DJ could do with a MacGregor Tourney driver and a MacGregor Tourney ball! One of the worst golf balls ever made, BTW!

Go ahead, Win a bunch of majors with that! Of course it can never happen, which is what makes these comparisons so frustrating. What might Hogan, Snead, Nelson, or Jones done with modern stuff?

But I guess if there was an internet when hickory shafts changed over to steel, there might be the same discussion!

Edited September 3, 2018 by Buckeyebowman