John Your Opinion on "Today's" Game
 

John,

Hope you are well! I was listening to Jack Nicklaus talking with Peter Kessler dude on the radio. Jack said "I think today's game 80% about POWER where as in my day it was 80% precision." He went on to say that Hogan and Player wouldn't be able to compete today . . .and maybe even he couldn't. He said that the top 5 money winners weren't in the top 100 in driving accuracy and had chosen Power over Accuracy because it benefited them.

What do you think about that? Do you think courses should be set up different or left the same? Does a short to medium length hitter have a chance out there?

Thanks man!

B

Are you sure he said Hogan couldn't compete? Maybe he meant with respect to length...?

Exactly . . .

well i am old school.these young guns have no idea how to work the golf ball.it is the same type of setup every week now on tour.the l.a. open is a great example,back in the 80s if you broke par you would always finish in the top 5.now they have lengthed it and have hardly any rough and 13 under wins this year.the tour sure doesnt reward the true ballstriker anymore.
personally i think the great champions of the past would still be a force in todays game.it was more there will and mind that made those guys the great players they where.jack always made the putt when it was on the line.these young kids have no idea how golf use to be played,that is why hilton head and weschester have the highest winning scores on tour and they are both the 2 shortest courses.funny huh accuracy over length.look at 12 at augusta how hard a 145 yard hole plays.takes alot of talent to build a 7600 yard golf course,i think not,narrow the fairways grow the rough and firm up the greens and we would see who the best players in the world would be.i bet there would be a few changes at the top.

Thanks man! Who would you say are the best ball strikers out there these days?

Best of luck! And thanks for sharing your thoughts and time with us!

O IC. Thought I smelled poop for a second.

...

(BTW....)

Wow thanks for that John....kinda disappointing tho....

...

Ya I think I remember everyone raving about Hilton Head last year or w/e....short course, high winning score.....everyone seemed to really appreciate the setup.

So with that....

Why do you think the tour wouldn't wake up and do it right? Why aren't they accommodating ballstrikers anymore? Why do they choose to continue to setup courses for the bombers?

it is really hard to answer this one.kenny perry is probably the best and he happens to have the best right arm in golf.i look at this question as in day in day out.i would put myself up there and davis love.but any given week there is always someone having a great ballstriking week.also another tgm guy joe durant is top 3

Gary Player held a clinic at a local course after the The Open and was asked if the old time greats Hogan, Trevino, Snead , Player etc) would have been able to compete with today's power hitting top players. He said without a doubt they would be a force to be reckoned with. He felt that the differences in equipment would have influenced their games and a Champion in one era would be a Champion in another. He said Nicklaus would have been as long as Tiger if he had modern equipment in his hands when in his prime and when he played against him he was hitting it way past him but still managed to compete.. Having played with the greats from several eras he felt could answer this question with authority. The real question as far as he was concerned was how the modern players would cope with playing with Persimmon , balata balls and poor quality by modern standards steel shafts against the former greats on the old set ups. He felt it would be easier going from old to modern than the other way round . The biggest difference is the modern ball in his opinion.

Hue, unless I misunderstood the comments Player and a few others who have commented on this, was making the point indirectly that the swings of past Champions would have been different than they were cause of the equipment.

The Generation Gap
 

Leave it to Gary Player to turn the tables.

How would the 'old guys' do against the 'young guys?' Nay, says Gary, the real question is the reverse!

Thrust!

...Parry!

Point!

...Counterpoint!

"Mirror mirror on the wall, who is the fairest of them all?"

Clearly, there are more really good players today than ever before. But...are there any more great players? I think not. These precious few -- The Chosen Ones -- stand out in every generation. And this handful would stand out in any generation.

"All you can ask of anyone," said Bobby Jones, "is that they beat the fellows who were around when they were around."

speaking of the old guys...
 

I came across this clip of Ted Kroll(a player from the 40's I believe)and I was particularly impressed with his hand action...just a great swing...hope you enjoy. http://www.megspace.com/sports/moeto...roll_clip.html

Hip-NO-Tized
 

Awesome!!! That is one beautiful motion. Just looking at that for about an hour should do something good for your motion. Thanks dude! Very nice contribution on your first post.

my pleasure 12 piece...
 

played golf yesterday with Yodasluke and Bagger Lance, your ears must've been burning, they had great things to say about you...my dad(known here as Augusta Brad) and I had a half day lesson with the YODA himself this past Saturday and we have caught the fever!!! We were in a small 3 sided tin hut - pouring down rain, about 29 degrees outside and life could not have been better. Bar none, the best golf lesson, ever! Can't wait to keep on truckin...

Burn baby burn!
 

You keep good company man. I ate mexican at my favorite spot yesterday . . . ears weren't the only thing burning.

What did you learn in the shed?

My father and I argue about how the old players wouldn't make the cut in the modern game. I agree with Jack; the modern game is a game of power. The short ball players only shine like twice a year on short courses with tight fairways. The majority of golf fans do not want shorter courses, tighter fairways, distance resistant balls, or any other restrictions on length. We love watching the best players bomb it long, and flop it onto the greens. In this new era, golf can -almost- be described as a sport.

I don't have a problem with how far the guys now can hit the ball, but I do think the penalty for not hitting the fairway should be much more severe then it is now. I think that something is wrong with the course setups when Tiger can be #179 in fairways hit and #1 in greens in regulation. Sometimes he hits it so far offline that he gets in the rough that has been walked down and ends up with an easier shot than the guys that just miss the fairway by a yard or two. I don't have anything against Tiger, in fact I think he is the best player in the game today. But if more of a premium were put on hitting the fairways and less advantage were given to strength he might not be so dominant. I don't mean to rant but just had to get that off of my chest.:confused:

I'd have to agree with NIcklaus, to a point.
 

This is my 9th year on tour as a caddy. Started with John Riegger and now with Brian Gay, both Yoda students. I would have to agree with most of what Nicklaus was quoted as saying. The tour doesn't play very many "Old School" courses anymore. I think Nicklaus and Snead would still be great players today because of their length. Hogan and Player would not be as dominant, but it all depends on the course. I'd say Hogan would beat Tiger 4 out of 5 times at Harbor Town or Westchester, but Tiger would beat Hogan 5 out of 5 at Boston or Torre Pines. The course set up has dictated the way the game is played today. A player who can carry the ball 280 or more can take most of the trouble out of play and hit short irons if he is in the rough. Pretty standard set up each week, water the fairways and don't water the greens. Hey, people come to see the long ball, lets face it. It doesn't seem to take much brains to be a tour official. It's like I always joke, "I tried to become a tour official, but scored too high on the test, so I became a caddy." Thanks Yoda for helping my player, he's on the right track.

Eddie

Master Caddy
 

Welcome aboard, Eddie, and thanks for this first post. Keep'em coming!

Brian and I talked by phone Monday night -- he just in from the Honda and me just in from Sweden -- and he mentioned how well you guys work together. I look forward to meeting you when the PGA TOUR hits Atlanta at the end of the month.

Meanwhile, looks like you go at noon tomorrrow at Bay Hill. That sure beats the 6:45 a.m. first-off at Doral. Good luck!

Tiger's strongest asset is his short game. If I could choose one aspect of his physical game, it would not be his driving or long iron play, it would be his saving/short game.

And Hogan regularly drove the ball over 270 yards in his prime with no ProV1's and persimmon driver, etc.

what was sam sneads ss?
 

What I think gets lost in all this current day distance discussion is that while people hit it further they do so without any real increase in swing speed. I saw a TGC show in the mid/late 90's that was discussing John Daly... they measured his swing speed at 141 at the time. Jack Nicklaus said "that is similar to mine when I was younger" he said he was around 140 if he swung full out. I have a tape at home of the McLean analysis of Hogan (pre TGM days) and in it McLean says Hogan's swing was measured using the video frames and estimated to be around 136. What was Snead... certainly at least that. Jack, Sam and Ben were using 43 inch drivers with steel shafts. I find it hard to believe that with today's equipment and balls they wouldn't be as long as today's longer players.

I believe Gary Players comment is very interesting. What would happen if the current crop of players had to work the ball. I'm guessing the answer would be the best would adapt and some of the others would be working at shoetown....but I think it is naive to assume that the distance achieved today comes from something physical that was lacking in players from previous years. I'm 59 and I hit it as far as I did when I was 20 fercryinoutloud.....because the ball and the clubs I use are very different then the stuff I had when I was 20.

Personally, I think the game was different when I was younger..not better, not worse ... just different. But the great players... whether it be Alan Robertson, young Tom, Vardon, Walter H, Bobby Jones, Sarazen,Hogan, Nelson, Snead, Jack, Arnie, Player, Trevino,Watson, or Woods... would be great players if they were playing with rocks and sticks. They'd just figure out a way to beat you, even if the game is different.

I can't wait until golf becomes appealing to "real" atheletes and Bubba distance becomes the norm. Hitting fairways is not entertainment. I'm sure you run to the tv to watch Fred Funks boring game.

=;

If Bubba distance becomes the norm, then it will be no big deal, and will be just as boring to you as Fred Funk is now.

I will offer an opinion for whatever it is worth. For me, golf as a spectator sport, is enjoyable when I get to see great players facing and overcoming challenges on the course. Driver/wedge players tend to eliminate these challenges. There is nothing wrong with enjoying the modern long ball game, but it IS a different game. Some folks like Indy auto races, some like going to Drag Strips. But they are two different things. The neat thing about golf is that shotmakers and bombers can coexist on the same track, allowing different fans to enjoy different aspects of golf.

I don't mind the fact that the bombers dominate the game, but the ball strikers are certainly still gettin' their share. I love it when a Luke Donald comes out on top.

Great discussion...
 

I had a couple of thoughts that might add something to the discussion. I've read a Hogan quote that said "If I knew then what I know now, I would have been trying to hit the ball in the hole from the fairway." We've all seen Nicklaus (or even Faldo, for a more recent example) strategically pick apart a golf course and win. I believe that this is a lost art, and part of the difference between the players of the past and the players now. Course management mattered more because of the length of the courses. These days the longer courses make the test more one of execution then strategy. This is where I personally believe that Hogan would still have been competitive, because of his precision execution. That being said, a few years ago, I stepped up to the first tee in a mini-tour event with a two iron in my hand, and my playing partner looked at me and said "what the hell are you fixin' to do with that?" I find the statement very compelling about the two shortest courses on tour having high winning scores. Consider the US Open in Tulsa a couple years back with all those doglegs, or the Ryder cup at Valderamma, as support of that observation. Fantastic discussion, thank you all.

Good post. How would you define "presicion?" Fairways and Greens? or Scoring? There are a lot of rounds that I can remember scoring well, but there are also a lot of round I can remember that I didn't putt well but felt satisfied because tee to green it was good.

Where would you put the "premium"? High rough narrow fairways? Tough greens like Pinehurst? Jack said that the ball should be "standardized." Is that an option?

I would love to see a tournament where the tour guys had to play with 1970's equipment. It would be interesting to see who would rise to the top. My $ would be on Eldrick though.

I think the hype of the power game doesn't match the actual reality of what's going on in professional golf. Yes power counts, but the reality is only 19 players currently on tour average over 300 yards a drive. The median distance for the 190 PGA Tour players that are currently listed for driver distance is about 288 yards. And several guys have won tournaments this year i.e. Luke Donald, Aron Oberholser, Rod Pampling, Kirk Triplett and David Toms, and none of these guys can be described as "bombers".

For all the hype about "bombers" the guys that take home the big checks consistently on the PGA Tour hit the most greens in regulation with fewest putts per round. At the end of the day great golf is still about consistent ball striking and great putting. That hasn't really change as much as people think it has.

Good post....welcome to the forum.

That's more or less true actually....but Augusta is gonna play 7445 yards.

...I dunno how exactly it'll play....but that's damn long yardage...

I guess we'll have to just wait and see what happens.

just to let eveyone know,the pgatour rules staff and the usga have no clue how to setup a golf course for the tour players.why do you think that adding length to a course makes it play harder,it doesnt.why do you think places like hilton head and wechester have the highest winning scores on tour each year.decision making is why.when you have 490 yard par 4 there is not any decision envolved,just tee it high and let it fly.number 13 at doral is another good example 245 into the wind,wow what a tough decision on what i will hit,it can be only 1 club in my bag 4 wood.good thing the guys at the masters didnt lenthen #12 the guys have enough problem now with a 155 yard shot.
the tour has really changed from the 80s,we use to play with flier lies with rock hard greens.now we have so much rough that you would have to replace your line on your weedeater every 30 min..the truly great strikers of the ball have a huge diadvantage now.when i miss a fairway i am in the thickest rough,when the so called bomber misses he has missed by 20 or more yards,where the gallery has matted the rough if there was any..if the tour went back to having a light rough where you could catch aflier with really firm greens and fast fairways,eveyone would see a big difference in the results on who is winning golf tournaments.then giys would have to think there way around a golf course,which in todays game has been lost.why do you think #17 at tpc is playing so hard,guys have to think,come on it is a really easy shot you are only at the max hitting an 8 iron.
so ther you have it,but it will never happen the tour and the tv networks have certain players they need to keep golf on tv.

John: I agree with your comments . It does seem that if you are going to miss a fairway you are better off missing it by a large margin. Also I agree with you about the TV networks having favourite players and this influencing the game. I was a spotter for ABC at The Open at St George's . When Ben Curtis took the lead the radio went mad with " Who the hell is Ben Curtis " comments . Shortly after he was put on the clock. I thought it was disgusting and undoubtedly a ruse to put him off his game and hand it to Tiger. Can you imagine Tiger being put on the clock just when he took the lead in the final round in a major? It would never happen. The same kind of thing happened to Garido when he was leading the Volvo PGA at Wentworth.
What does a player need to make $$$ wise to make a reasonable living on the US tour? How much does it cost just to play the Tour per year.

Some great points there John. If only they listen and act on the player's feedback. Golf is a thinking person's game.

I think the great players, I mean the cream of the crop e.g. Tiger Woods, would still win no matter how the course is set up. However, as you said, there would be a lot of other players winning if courses were set up like they were 20 years ago.

Thanks! :)

I'm waiting for the latest version of the TGM book to come out in April, but I've already learned quite a bit here and I'm eager to learn more.

And once again in the Players Championship a "Bomber" didn't walk off with the trophy. I think Stephen Ames averaged less than 280 yards a drive. He also played one of the best final rounds of golf I've seen in a while.

As far as Augusta I'm with you, I'm very curious to see how the new setup affect scoring and who will play well.

Despite all this Luke Donald, Stephen Ames, Kirk Tripplett, David Toms and Aron Oberholser have enjoyed tour victories this year. Aside from Tiger the only guy that has really "muscled" a golf course and won is J.B. Holmes. At it's essence golf is a game of ballstiking and course management. I don't think that's entirely lost despite how courses have been set up.

Old player
 

I think that everyone talks about how much more power that today's players have and that it just isn't all that much more. Sure fitness is a bigger part of the game now but there have always been people who are just naturally strong. The major difference is equipment and I believe that if the players of yesteryear had today's equipment in their prime that many of them would hit similiar lengths on drives.

A case in point is Palmer who used mainly brute arm strength to swing a club and yet he drove a 315 yard par 4 during a british open and this was with the "old" style balls and a persimmon driver.

ce_me_golf,
I like your opinion about the "Bombers." I think there should be differing opinions about this topic. As for last week at The Playa's Championship, Ames is not a bomber and he did win, but that course is listed at 7093 yds. That tourney is a "Major" and they set it up like a major. Length on that course isn't that important. I caddy for Brian Gay, ranked 162 (276.9 yds) and 18 (66.8 %) and I really liked our chances on that golf course. We missed the cut, but the most he hit into a par 4 was a 5 iron, with the exception of #18 @ 447 yds which was into the wind all week. Number 9 @ 583 yds was into a strong wind and the other 3 par fives were all downwind. It was just ironic that the PGA Tour Staff only sets up their biggest event of the year correctly and doesn't do it more often in other towns. On that golf course, length only really helps a guy hit a couple of clubs less into holes, there isn't any trouble that a bomber can carry that a short hitter can't. Keep the post coming.
Eddie

Palmer was long....

Long drives happen in any era.

Averages have gone up though.

That's for your support. Personally, for me hitting a golf ball pure is one of the sweetest feelings in sports. I'm very interested in see who contends for the Masters, especially with all the course changes. And I wouldn't be surprise if a guy who can think his way around the course is not near the top of the leaderboard on Sunday. Yes, Augusta is long but shot placement is crucial.

I think we can both agree that guys are hitting it longer than ever. What I don't see is that length necessarily translating into better golf or even more winning golf. The guy who had the longest driving average on tour last year Scott Hendt, couldn't keep his tour card. And Hank Kuehne reknown for his driving distance is having trouble this year making cuts.

Driving it long is the sizzle but ball striking and course management skills are the steak. Me, I'd rather eat steak! :)

On the clock...
 

"Can you imagine Tiger being put on the clock just when he took the lead in the final round in a major?"

Sorry, I just had to do it, and maybe it isn't precisely what happened, nevertheless, I will admit, who would've thunk it.??? :eyes:

JP