Connect with us

Opinion & Analysis

Is equipment really to blame for the distance problem in golf?

Published

on

It’s 2018, we’re more than a quarter of the way through Major Season, and there are 58 players on the PGA Tour averaging over 300 yards off the tee. Trey Mullinax is leading the PGA Tour through the Wells Fargo Championship with an average driving distance of 320 yards. Much discussion has been had about the difficulty such averages are placing on the golf courses across the country. Sewn into the fabric of the distance discussion are suggestions by current and past giants of the game to roll back the golf ball.

In a single segment on an episode of Live From The Masters, Brandel Chamblee said, “There’s a correlation from when the ProV1 was introduced and driving distance spiked,” followed a few minutes later by this: “The equipment isn’t the source of the distance, it’s the athletes.”

So which is it? Does it have to be one or the other? Is there a problem at all?

Several things of interest happened on the PGA Tour in the early 2000s, most of which were entirely driven by the single most dominant athlete of the last 30. First, we saw Tiger Woods win four consecutive majors, the first and only person to do that in the modern era of what are now considered the majors. Second, that same athlete drew enough eyeballs so that Tim Finchem could exponentially increase the prize money golfers were playing for each week. Third, but often the most overlooked, Tiger Woods ushered in fitness to the mainstream of golf. Tiger took what Gary Player and Greg Norman had preached their whole careers and amped it up like he did everything else.

In 1980, Dan Pohl was the longest player on the PGA Tour. He averaged 274 yards off the tee with a 5-foot, 11-inch and 175-pound frame. By 2000, the average distance for all players on the PGA Tour was 274 yards. The leader of the pack that year was John Daly, who was the only man to average over 300 yards. Tiger Woods came in right behind him at 298 yards.

Analysis of the driving distance stats on the PGA Tour since 1980 show a few important statistics: Over the last 38 seasons, the average driving distance for all players on the PGA Tour has increased an average of 1.1 yards per year. When depicted on a graph, it looks like this:

The disparity between the shortest and the longest hitter on the PGA Tour has increased 0.53 yards per year, which means the longest hitters are increasing the gap between themselves and the shortest hitters. The disparity chart fluctuates considerably more than the average distance chart, but the increase from 1980 to 2018 is staggering.

In 1980, there was 35.6 yards between Dan Pohl (longest) and Michael Brannan (shortest – driving distance 238.7 yards). In 2018, the difference between Trey Mullinax and Ken Duke is 55.9 yards. Another point to consider is that in 1980, Michael Brannan was 25. Ken Duke is currently 49 years of age.

The question has not been, “Is there a distance problem?” It’s been, “How do we solve the distance problem?” The data is clear that distance has increased — not so much at an exponential rate, but at a consistent clip over the last four decades — and also that equipment is only a fraction of the equation.

Jack Nicklaus was over-the-hill in 1986 when he won the Masters. It came completely out of nowhere. Players in past decades didn’t hit their prime until they were in their early thirties, and then it was gone by their early forties. Today, it’s routine for players to continue playing until they are over 50 on the PGA Tour. In 2017, Steve Stricker joined the PGA Tour Champions. In 2016, he averaged 278 yards off the tee on the PGA Tour. With that number, he’d have topped the charts in 1980 by nearly four yards.

If equipment was the only reason distance had increased, then the disparity between the longest and shortest hitters would have decreased. If it was all equipment, then Ken Duke should be averaging something more like 280 yards instead of 266.

There are several things at play. First and foremost, golfers are simply better athletes these days. That’s not to say that the players of yesteryear weren’t good athletes, but the best athletes on the planet forty years ago didn’t play golf; they played football and basketball and baseball. Equipment definitely helped those super athletes hit the ball straighter, but the power is organic.

The other thing to consider is that the total tournament purse for the 1980 Tour Championship was $440,000 ($1,370,833 in today’s dollars). The winner’s share for an opposite-field event, such as the one played in Puerto Rico this year, is over $1 million. Along with the fitness era, Tiger Woods ushered in the era of huge paydays for golfers. This year, the U.S. Open prize purse will be $12 milion with $2.1 million of that going to the winner. If you’re a super athlete with the skills to be a golfer, it makes good business sense to go into golf these days. That wasn’t the case four decades ago.

Sure, equipment has something to do with the distance boom, but the core of the increase is about the athletes themselves. Let’s start giving credit where credit is due.

Your Reaction?
  • 216
  • LEGIT31
  • WOW4
  • LOL7
  • IDHT2
  • FLOP5
  • OB4
  • SHANK89

Adam Crawford is a writer of many topics but golf has always been at the forefront. An avid player and student of the game, Adam seeks to understand both the analytical side of the game as well as the human aspect - which he finds the most important. You can find his books at his website, chandlercrawford.com, or on Amazon.

70 Comments

70 Comments

  1. CW

    Jun 5, 2018 at 4:53 pm

    Just give them old equipment and let them try it out..
    There is a video about it on youtube.(probably more)

  2. Andrew Cooper

    May 23, 2018 at 6:59 am

    Adam, here is a random selection of players with driving averages 20 years apart – 1997 and 2017 (from PGA Tour and Champions Tour)

    Vijay Singh 281y and 289

    Kenny Perry 277 and 294

    Ernie Els 272 and 285

    Phil Mickleson 284 and 294

    Scott McCarron 284 and 292

    Jespet Parnevik 266 and 287

    Woody Austin 267 and 283

    Jeff Sluman 267 and 277

    Jeff Maggert 264 and 281

    Kevin Sutherland 266 and 290

    Do you really think these guys are better athletes (faster, stronger, more flexible) now than they were 20 years ago?

  3. Tom

    May 22, 2018 at 6:15 pm

    Dave Tutleman and others are “spot on”- forgive the pun. Rolling back both the COR and MOI on Drivers used on the tour would be a great improvement for fans interested in seeing shot making returning as a more significant factor on the tour-as well as in both Opens.

  4. steve

    May 22, 2018 at 5:03 pm

    WOW!!!! 65+ comments revealing the ‘secrets’ to acquire more distance. 300 yards here I come … 😀

  5. Andrew Cooper

    May 22, 2018 at 4:41 pm

    What would be interesting to know is how 42 players are averaging a smash factor of over 1.50 this season? The best average in 2014 was 1.485, which is now 141st in the rankings.

  6. Law Prof

    May 22, 2018 at 12:37 pm

    Used to be, back in the days of persimmon woods less than half the size of today’s hi-tech drivers, you had to throttle back on your swing, swing smoothly, or you might miss the ball altogether. The hi-tech clubs are driving the fast, ripping swings. But of course, it’s always been that way. The swings changed when the game went from feathery balls to gutta percha, and from gutta percha to the wound ball (and Vardon complained bitterly that all the technique was out the window) and from hickory to metal, and so on.

  7. Gary Raymer

    May 22, 2018 at 9:03 am

    Why doesn’t someone just take some old equipment and some modern equipment and put it on one of those robotic swing machines and compare the results?

    But it’s clearly not just the equipment, because just by watching videos its clear the current golfers swing noticeably harder than the golfers of 40-50 years ago.

    • Andrew Cooper

      May 22, 2018 at 10:57 am

      They can swing harder because the equipment allows them to.

  8. kirk clements

    May 22, 2018 at 7:41 am

    If you need to swing at a certain speed to take advantage of the face flexing then the distance advantage goes to those capable of flexing the face – get rid of the face flexand we will be fine.

  9. Jurren

    May 22, 2018 at 6:34 am

    Comparing 1980 pro’s with 2018 pro’s results is not proper a/b testing. Like others have said, there were extremely fit professionals in the 60ies that would make most of todays pro’s look lazy and fat, and vice versa. Also, no one ever said “Look at John Daly, my wife wants me to be as fit and work out like him”. John Daly who led driving distance for a long time, so being fit does not automatically translate to longer drives, of not being fit would outrule you from hitting long drives.

    Point I think is that todays equipment enables players to hit their drives at 100% without any fear of major misses, where in the past most people would hit their persimmon driver a bit more carefull (80-90%), which would translate a little bit into a slight loss of distance, but more important: Distance has become so much of a benefit in todays professional game, that the people that hit furthest stand a better chance to succeed than those that don’t, where in the past being long was usually offset by one or two misses per round (and hence much less of an advantage).

    • Monty

      May 22, 2018 at 1:15 pm

      Very astute comment Jurren about the equipment having greater tolerance on mis-hits, ie tighter dispersion, than the older equipment. The same is probably true of the balls that have less spin off the driver. So yes, players today can swing at near 100% effort without fear. Very good point!

  10. BD

    May 22, 2018 at 5:26 am

    What a lot of nonsense to suggest it’s athleticism that causing modern golfers to be so much longer.
    Has the author heard of, for example, Arnold Palmer who had the strength and physique of a Rocky Marciano. Yet, if this silly and uninformed article is to be believed, Palmer is much shorter than today’s golfers because he’s not nearly the athlete of the likes of Dufner, Lowry, etc.
    Yes some modern golfers are athletic. But the big difference, making them all hit the ball much further, is obviously equipment. As well as making golf courses of necessity much longer and golf much slower modern equipment has also reduced the premium on skill that was one of the joys of watching great golfers.

  11. steve

    May 21, 2018 at 11:02 pm

    “…distance problem…”?!! No, it’s the “…distance promise…” built into the newest equipment designs that drives the golf industry. The pros prove to gullible golfers that there is a 300 yard driver at the big box golf store…. for $450 or more. All pros are equipment salesmen… so obvious

  12. Adkskibum

    May 21, 2018 at 6:26 pm

    Yeah, sure, it’s all about the new breed being athletes, BS. Marc Leishman, Patrick Reed, Jason Dufner, Pat Perez, etc, as if they’re great physical specimens. Heck, even Phil called himself middle aged and overweight and he hits it as far as ever. The new breed may keep themselves in better shape, work out more, but that doesn’t explain the 30+ yard jump in driving distance. Jack, Arnie, Watson, Snead, Weiskopf, were all good athletes, hitting persimmon drivers and balata balls. It’s 80 to 90% the equipment and course manicuring.

    • Adam Crawford

      May 21, 2018 at 8:54 pm

      Hey Adkskibum, I think you hand-picked a group of players that wouldn’t fall into the category of “physical specimens”, but if you go through the list of the top 100 players in the OWGR, you’ll find that the overwhelming majority of them are in top shape. And it’s not just that golfers are in better shape, all athletes are in better shape. The advancements in sports medicine even in the past quarter-century are astounding. I’m not saying that it’s the athletes are 100% responsible for the increase, but it’s a variable we seem to ignore too frequently in this discussion.

  13. Ray Bennett

    May 21, 2018 at 6:09 pm

    The equipment didn’t help Tiger – distance wise. He could hit it further when he was an amateur using a small headed metal Cobra driver with a heavy 43″ steel shaft than when he was gym fit using a modern driver. During the final of his last US Amateur he carried a bunker 325 yards off the tee to set up a mid iron to the par 5.

    • Adam Crawford

      May 21, 2018 at 8:55 pm

      Hi Ray, exactly.

    • Greg V

      May 22, 2018 at 9:38 pm

      No, that just shows that he lost distance when he tried to build his body to be a Navy Seal.

  14. O

    May 21, 2018 at 5:48 pm

    I think Chamblee is right about his point that the modern era of players are just better athletes. But there are other factors too that I think have led to more distance I feel:

    1) FAST COURSE CONDITIONS: I think Chamblee may have touched on this (or Nobilo) but the courses are set-up to reward distance and not accuracy now days. Though I do not feel the pros should be playing in major-like rough on wayward drives, they should not be having their drives runout almost 60yds on modern fairways either. Courses play way too fast now days, here in Hawaii where it is more damp than in other places on the continent + common course conditions, you are lucky if your ball rolls out 10-15yds. Now thats a 20-40yd difference than the pros experience. This I feel has had a negative effect on distance and can be controlled.

    2) CLUB FITTING: I think clubs are so closely tailored to fit modern players so precisely that players have equipment that just works better for them on a consistent basis. From launch monitors, computerized fitting machines, interchangeable shaft hosels, club companies, shaft companies, etc. You cannot tell me that players in the 1980s were able to verify their distances, “spin rates”, try different shafts the way everyone down to the weekend warrior can today. Not to mention club fitting accuracy is so much much better and more accurate than before. This is where “technology” I feel has changed the game, the ability to so closely spec out perfect equipment for an individual and players should benefit from this understandably.

  15. BJ

    May 21, 2018 at 5:24 pm

    “Along with the fitness era, Tiger Woods ushered in the era of huge paydays for golfers. This year, the U.S. Open prize purse will be $12 milion with $2.1 million of that going to the winner. If you’re a super athlete with the skills to be a golfer, it makes good business sense to go into golf these days. That wasn’t the case four decades ago.”

    I don’t think this is very valid. Tiger’s on course earnings are about $111 million. Derek Jeter? $265 Million. ARod? $400 million. Peyton Manning? $244 million. Eli Manning? $187 Million. Kevin Garnett? $334 million. Kobe Bryant? $323 million.

    Yes, Tiger made golf wealthier. But professional golfers still aren’t going to make as much in prize money as similarly situated pros in the big three sports.

    One thing that I think doesn’t get mentioned as much as the club and ball is trackman. Merely knowing how to fit a driver to a player to produce the most distance for a player is huge, especially for the longer guys.

    Agronomy is better, too.

    • Brandon

      May 22, 2018 at 9:57 am

      I understand what you are saying about the salary but how many 5’8″-6’2″ athletes that you know that are physically capable of doing what the athletes you just named did, who are all 6’3″ 195+lbs and above? The money was one of the biggest reasons there was such a draw for people to do pro golf. The athletes you named are salary athletes, but remember, golf is an entrepreneur sport. You can make a training aid and get rich by exposure, you don’t have to play the game to get rich, you can organize events, you can teach, you can market and network to make money in golf. Tiger may have only earned $111 million on course but he is the second billionaire athlete ever and the first to reach that mark while competing in his craft.

      So which would you do if you were an average sized person? Would you thrash your body until you can’t walk from being hit by guys that can run 4.5 40s at 260-330 lb(see Jerome Bettis) and make about $75 million in a 8-10 year career or play a sport where you walk and acreage to put a ball in a gopher hole with a chance to win $1 million every week and if you win, you get companies throwing money at you to use your name and face to market their products and you can do this for 20+ years?

      I think the answer is obvious

  16. John

    May 21, 2018 at 4:04 pm

    Any idiot can see that lengthening golf courses merely plays into the hands of the big hitters. If anything, we should make the courses shorter but trickier and bring everyone into it. Problem solved.

    • Dave

      May 22, 2018 at 12:07 pm

      yep….basically todays players have decided to its better to hit 320 and 60% of the fairways than 280 and 75% of the fairways…..instead of choosing to use an 8-100gram shaft they choose to use 55-70 gram for the distance…back in the day there wasnt much of a choice for a stable lightweight shaft…..now there is….and the players have decided the loss of accuracy isnt as important as the loss of distance…..raise the rough…

  17. Bob Jones

    May 21, 2018 at 3:16 pm

    Golf is not what 2K professionals play. It’s what 25M recreational golfers play. When we all start hitting our 485-yard par 5s in two with a driver and a 7-iron, then something would be wrong. Until then, I don’t see anything needing to be done about distance.

  18. GD Alumni

    May 21, 2018 at 2:04 pm

    Not too sure who has the real problem here. Mostly, it’s the golf establishment and the good old boy network of the USGA and R&A along with Jack and some similar types that have their panties in a bunch.

    The sport is viable as a commercial venture because it is an entertainment vehicle. Go ahead and kill that if you dare.

    The USGA and the R&A have steadfastly refused to “bifurcate” for a wide variety of reasons, not the least of which is the influence of big businesses who sell products to golfers.

    The professional game is a different game and the refusal to accommodate that and adjust conditions of competition is ridiculous. Baseball, football, hockey and many others have rules or equipment regulations that recognize the differences between amateurs and professionals. It’s time for golf to do the same.

  19. CharlesB

    May 21, 2018 at 1:54 pm

    If I recall my golf history correctly, at one time bogey was “Par”, and then there was Par which replaced bogey. What we now need is a new definition of Par, call it Subpar.

  20. Bill

    May 21, 2018 at 1:12 pm

    When I was in high school (1992) the Donald Ross course we played had a bunker about 280 left I could sometimes hit into. From the tees we used in high school (which were the back tees but are now the white tees as a new set of back tees were added) now at the age of 44 I can occasionally fly drive over that bunker. I am the same person/athlete and hit the ball and drivers of today 20 yards farther. Senior tour players now hit the ball much farther than their prime. They are NOT bigger and faster and stronger. It is the ball and equipment of today. Period.

  21. Tourgrinder

    May 21, 2018 at 1:09 pm

    Wow! Time for another revisionist history article written by someone probably younger than 40, with some incorrect perspectives. Lesson 1: You simply can’t separate the fitness issues and the equipment issues. Yes, I’ll agree that overall fitness has definitely improved. No doubt. But so has equipment and agronomy and ‘pool table’ fairways. You can’t separate the distance stats into categories. If you took Dan Pohl out of 1975 or 1980 by way of my time machine, I’ll bet you he’d be right up there with Mullinax and all the other big hitters, Koepka and DJ. If you put Tony Finau in 1980 with a 43″ long MacGregor persimmon driver with a heavy steel shaft and a balata Titleist on a fairway that looks like today’s roughs, his drives would be right there with those of 1980 Dan Pohl. Every era has its long hitters and short hitters. In my time machine again, I could take a George Bayer from the late 50s or early 60s and put him into 2018 and I’ll bet Adam Crawford, or anyone else, a $1 million that he’d be outdriving DJ, Finau or Mullinax. Go ahead — google George Bayer, read about him and his record. And take a look at his fitness. Likewise, I could take the fat and out of shape John Daly or Colt Knost and they’d fit right in with the “lack of fitness” good golfers of yesteryear. Frankly, for flexibility and being limber, I’ll still take a 25- or 30-year-old Sam Snead over DJ’s flexibility any day. Tiger Woods didn’t re-invent fitness for golfers, he just spread the popularity due to his success. Gary Player didn’t re-invent it either. There are always going to be fit guys like George Bayer or Gary Player or Dustin Johnson…and there are always going to be guys who prefer to put their feet up and have a drink, such as Jimmy Demaret, John Daly or Pat Perez.

  22. Dave Tutelman

    May 21, 2018 at 1:04 pm

    From Brandel Chamblee: “There’s a correlation from when the ProV1 was introduced and driving distance spiked.” Chamblee was smart enough to say ‘correlation’, but the context of his remarks implied causation. But something else happened at the same time that is much more arguably causation.

    In 2000, Titleist introduced the ProV1. In 1998, the USGA ratified the rule-breaking that had been happening for a few years, by setting the limit on COR at .83. From a perfectly rigid face, the balls at the time would have had a COR of .77. So from somewhat before the ProV1 to somewhat after, we could expect a spike just due to the rapid increase of driver COR in the hands of Tour players. An increase in COR will demonstrably increase distance. Crawford’s graph shows a slope (spike?) from 1995 to 2005 of 2.6 yards per year, more than twice the 1980-2018 average.

    Let’s look at the clubface, not the ProV1, Mr Chamblee.

  23. BWJ

    May 21, 2018 at 12:46 pm

    It’s mostly equipment. I’m 62 and hit it farther now than I did when I was a mini tour pro in my 20s. USGA/R&A dropped the ball on this. It’s like putting aluminum bats in major league baseball. Also, it has reduced the requirement of the true shotmaking dimension of the game as far as I’m concerned. So it’s not apples to apples record comparisons like other sports enjoy that set their equipment standards 50 or 100 years ago. Let Ams play the hot gear. Pros should be using wood and balata.

  24. Tucsonsean

    May 21, 2018 at 12:45 pm

    Just a couple random observations beyond the ones already made. I’m not bothered by the pros hitting it so much farther than me. They’re the top .001 percent of all golfers (according to Frank Thomas); I expect superior performance. But a closer look at some statistics reveal that they often hit little over 50% of their fairways. Also, when CBS used ShotTracker for tee shots this week, even the longest carry was usually less than 270 yds.–there’s a lot of roll in those 300+ yard drives. Forget legislating the equipment or the ball. Simply make the courses more challenging, accuracy-wise, with challenging rough and less tightly mown fairways. In 2013, Merion was predicted to be no match for the pros at the Open, and no one–including the winner–broke par.

  25. Myron miller

    May 21, 2018 at 12:41 pm

    It truly is a lot of factors, but remember for close to 20 years now, the USGA has tested golf balls for maximum speed hit off the tee with a robot. All golf balls are limited to a given velocity off the tee at a given swing speed (which if i remember correctly was 110mph). That works to a max distance of just under 260 yards. And at one time, that was pretty much the average swing speed for the tour. And this distance limit supposedly if we believe the USGA has held true since then. So the ball speed off the face hasn’t changed in over twenty years. yet, the distance amounts have grown noticeably. Why, well, consider the fairways cut way shorter. Average swing speed is closer to 118 -120 mph now with the max hitters over 125-130. no penalty for rough, rough shorter and USGA grooves rule clearly did not do what they said.

    Also remember the experiment in Denver a few years ago where they in a practice session provided people with a replica of a persminon wood similar to Arnies that he used in the final round to drive the green on the first hole. Rory of all the players came the closest to driving the green (they could use their own golf balls). And he was about 15+ yards short. Now if it was the golf balls, Why when they were using their own golf balls, couldn’t they hit the green if it was entirely the golf ball? Golf driver technology has advanced tremendously since the persimmons. Why has everyone gone to the new metal drivers (even davis love gave up after a few years). they just are that much better. And the biggest difference is NOT distance, but accuracy. Mishits go almost as far and seriously farther than persminnon. Even pro’s don’t hit it perfectly all the time. But they are close and a metal driver prvoides enough error correct that close is good enough.

    Also as he indicates, many players today are ripped from working out. Not many look like the Walrus any more. They all spend so much time in the workout trailers. And that really can make a difference, especially as they age.

    • Andrew Cooper

      May 22, 2018 at 3:22 am

      PGA Tour average driver swing speed is 113mph (Trackman).

  26. Dave Tutelman

    May 21, 2018 at 12:27 pm

    Adam Crawford makes a bunch of good points based on data from 1980 to 2018. I don’t know if there was a corresponding increase from 1968 to 1980. But it’s probably safe to say that, if there was an increase, it certainly wasn’t faster than 1980-2018. In the esteemed 1968 book “Search for the Perfect Swing”, Alastair Cochran cites the COR for a hard drive as 0.67. Today it is 0.83, based on control in the Rules of both the ball and the club. Let’s see what distance this would account for JUST DUE TO THE EQUIPMENT-BASED COR CHANGE.

    I ran some trajectories using TrajectoWare Drive software (which is based on a modern golf ball’s aerodynamics). For tour-style clubhead speeds of 115-125mph, this is worth 30 yards of carry distance. If we prorate this distance to just the 1980-2018 interval, using Crawford’s straight line, that is still a difference of 23 yards — due entirely to equipment, just an improvement in COR. And that is roughly half of the difference of 44 yards total improvement that Crawford’s straight line has between 1980 and 2018.

    • Tom Philbeck

      May 22, 2018 at 11:48 am

      Dave,

      It’s not just the COR change from .67 to .83(which is big), it’s also the change in the effect of missing the sweet spot-gear effect. IMO this is just as big a factor as the COR change- grip it and rip it just wouldn’t work back in the day.

      As for a personal taste, I prefer to see skill shots to the green become a bigger factor once again on the outcome.

  27. STEVE

    May 21, 2018 at 12:20 pm

    I don’t think we should overlook the fact that modern grooves on wedges contribute to the so-called “bomb and gouge” methods of touring pros. PGA players no longer fear the rough as modern wedges an still spin the ball when it hits the green — a trait pretty much limited to really low-handicap and tour players, thereby widening the gap to mid and high handicap golfers. With no or little fear of roughs (outside of US Opens) PGA players can swing for the fences.

  28. Dave Tutelman

    May 21, 2018 at 12:09 pm

    OK, distance has increased. But everybody (apparently including the author) equates this with a problem. I’m not so sure. I tend to agree with Justin’s comment that people watch professional golf to ooh and aah over what they do — especially hitting the ball so far. Don’t kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. Distance does not threaten golf for the average player, not at all. Distance enhances revenue to the golf industry when we’re talking about tour distance. And remember, distance doesn’t threaten golf, it just threatens par — a distinction that seems to be lost on the USGA.

    • Adam Crawford

      May 21, 2018 at 9:01 pm

      Hi Dave, I actually don’t think it’s a problem. I addressed this deeper last year in this piece (http://www.golfwrx.com/435236/how-golf-can-learn-from-the-nbas-3-point-line/). I think that it could become a problem if courses continue to change to the game by getting longer. I don’t think longer courses is good for anyone (pros or ams) and I think if you look at the scores on tour (and from conversations I’ve had with multiple tour players) that some of the toughest courses are the ones that play around 7,000 yards. Thanks for your comment!

  29. Sideshow Rob

    May 21, 2018 at 12:01 pm

    When I started golf in 1978 I was a pretty long hitter for the time. I could hit it 300 a few times a round and that was considered long. In fact I played tournament golf for years and never met anyone who hit it longer. Now here I am at age 55 and I can hit it at least 30 yards further than I could at age 20 when I could really send it compared to everyone else. Bigger stronger faster and better athletes??? Give me a break! I have played through this entire era and I can assure you I’m not a “better athlete”. It’s equipment. Period.

  30. @LivenearPar_Golf

    May 21, 2018 at 12:00 pm

    And yet *CRICKETS* when it comes to these guys getting 60 yards of roll? Come on WRX you on the pga payroll now too? #redherringgolfballs

  31. The Law Prof

    May 21, 2018 at 11:39 am

    I don’t doubt the athletes are better conditioned; as the money has increased in all professional sports, making them a more lucrative option vis-a-vis other jobs, it has driven a fitness revolution. Additionally, fitness techniques have advanced over the recent decades, so it’s natural that this would affect golfers at the highest levels.

    But some of the reasons the author gives to support his case are either poorly thought out or not explained at all. First, he gives no explanation why the gap between longest and shortest hitters would DECREASE if it were purely driven by equipment. Wouldn’t the longest hitters also benefit from equipment advances? Perhaps long hitters would benefit MORE from certain types of equipment advances–who can say? Mr. Crawford just makes this statement and leaves it standing without explanation or a logical rationale. That’s poor reasoning and sloppy journalism. Second, Mr. Crawford explains that golf is a more desirable professional sport versus football, basketball and baseball because golf salaries have increased “exponentially”, thus attracting top athletes today. While it’s probably not technically true, actual exponential growth in the mathematical sense, OK, I’ll give him some journalistic license and go with it, so let’s call it exponential. He cites the enormous increase in purses. OK, fine, there’s been an increase. I looked up some numbers, though. The median point for PGA tour golf winnings, for the top 125, was about $1.7 million last year. This is a huge number, but would it be driving the finest athletes in the world into golf? The average NFL salary is $1.9M, the average MLB salary is $3.2M, and the average NBA salary is $5M! Crawford needs to admit that the potential to hit it big in golf did not occur in a vacuum, it occurred in a society where other sports were increasing as well–and in many cases, a good sight more than professional golf!

    I’m a 53-year-old man, relatively sedentary, who has not lifted a weight in 25 years. I gave up the game entirely for two decades and recently took it up again when a teenage son got the golf bug. I was a good (but not great) golfer back in the day, low single digits in the 80s and 90s, but plagued by short-hitting, at my golfing peak averaged maybe 230 yards in the days of 200cc persimmon woods. I was in excellent shape back then in my 20s and 30s (the 230 yard driving days) and a former college athlete (not golf). The last round of golf I played last week, as a middle-aged mediocrity still not swinging as well as I once did, on the final hole, I decided to reach back and hit my huge titanium, graphite-shafted driver a little harder: it went somewhere between 280 and 290 yards. There is no way I could’ve hit a shot like that back when I was in great shape, no way I could’ve even swung that hard with those clubs and expected to hit the ball that well. You can swing these clubs HARD and still hit the ball reasonably well, and the balls just WILL NOT hook and slice as wickedly as the old balatas did. There’s an enormous difference in tech, just take it from me, a golf time capsule from the 80s. It’s huge, the equipment difference.

    • Adam Crawford

      May 21, 2018 at 9:04 pm

      Hi Law Prof, thanks for the comment. I don’t disagree that the multi-talented athletes could make more money in other sports like basketball, football, and baseball. The main difference with other sports for a prospect who has the potential to be a top golfer is that the career in golf has the potential to be half a century. No other sport can say that.

      • The Law Prof

        May 21, 2018 at 11:34 pm

        That’s true, golfers at the top, who can keep it rolling, the real elites or the late bloomers, like Rocky Thompson back in my day, could earn big bucks for 30, 40, maybe 50 years. And that is very different from virtually any other sport. Only one I can think of that comes close is motorsports, where a handful of people have managed to push a career at the elite level into their 50s (though the last person who did that with any success died doing it: Dale Earnhardt, Sr.) So point granted, at least regarding longevity of the career.

        By the way, what did you mean by the gap between shorter hitters and longer hitters necessarily decreasing with equipment advances? What am I missing? Because for all my snottiness, I admit you may well know a lot more about such a phenomenon than me, as I know nothing about those sort of statistics. Why would this be so?

        • Adam Crawford

          May 22, 2018 at 1:56 pm

          The logic is that if equipment was truly the main and most dominant variable, then driving distance for the previously shorter hitters would increase faster or more significantly than the longer hitters because, in theory, they are getting the most help from the equipment. A possible counter point is that the gap has increased because players are having longer careers. Ken Duke is in his late forties where as Michael Brenan (shortest hitter in 1980) was considerably younger.

          • Greg V

            May 22, 2018 at 9:52 pm

            No, in fact with the higher COR of today’s drivers, the longer guys are even longer as compared to the shorter. The higher COR has made them exponentially longer.

  32. dat

    May 21, 2018 at 11:38 am

    Combination of factors. Would take a combination of solutions to reign in distance if the tour sees it as a problem.

  33. Andrew Cooper

    May 21, 2018 at 11:35 am

    Better athletes? Probably, but that’s a long down the list. At the top is definitely equipment, specifically the ball, which completely changed with the pro v1. Much lower spin, much straighter. That allowed players to totally change their technique and approach with driver. They could launch it up, because they didn’t have to worry about keeping the flight down. Young players today are all very aware and trained in optimising launch angle to max out yardage. Less spin also allows players to swing more or less 100%, especially when combined with modern driver technology. The approach is no longer about swinging within yourself and putting the ball in play, but about hitting hard as you can. That’s why they can swing faster-not simply because they’re better athletes. Also rarely mentioned but a big factor is course set ups and faster fairways. A lot of the newer courses are set up to encourage long hitting, unlike many classic courses where placement of tee shots was important. So better athletes? Swing speed average is still 113mph, which is fairly unimpressive given the long drive guys are 140-150mph.

  34. AJ

    May 21, 2018 at 11:32 am

    It’s NOT just the ball.
    Driver heads are now 460cc. Made of Titanium and other materials made to be light, thin, and springy. Yes there is a rules limit on COR and CT, but the speed is there, compared to a 250cc Persimmon head, or even compared to a 250cc steel head.
    We also have graphite shafts. And these shafts, coupled with the lightweight 460cc heads, are at anywhere from 44 to 46 inches average on most drivers. Driver of the 80’s, before the metal wood revolution, were all mostly 43 to 44 inches. So the length of club adds a bit more to the distance.
    The ball is longer, fore sure, with multiple layers and materials. But it helps the average joe.

    You can’t take way the internet and the iPhone from people now, so you can’t take away the golf technology we have.
    If the Tour is worried about distance and too many rounds breaking course records – it needs to stop advertising “Live Under Par” as the game was not about just scoring low, it was just about who came out on top. So the Tour should make the courses more difficult by leaving the rough very thick and keeping the fairways soft and not let them run out like this.
    There is nothing wrong with our equipment. The guys are bigger, stronger, fitter than they have ever been before. People say they all look like linebackers and giant pitchers – well, there’s a reason why they called Jack the Golden BEAR – because he was a chunky big dude when he started tearing up the Tour at the beginning of his career, and that has not changed. It’s just that there are many of them like that now.
    So leave the equipment alone. If you take away the equipment now, average joes will quit the game in droves, and where will the industry be then?

    • Barney

      May 21, 2018 at 8:55 pm

      Jack grew up in Columbus, Ohio, and graduated from Upper Arlington High School-home of the ever feared Golden Bears-a perennial powerhouse in all Ohio sports. This is the derivation of the moniker.

      • AJ

        May 22, 2018 at 3:00 am

        But he did play football, and he was built. Not a slender guy by any stretch of the imagination, as can be seen from the footage of his early days

  35. Ric

    May 21, 2018 at 11:12 am

    All have a valid point here but driver and a wedge isn’t interesting golf.The course isn’t much of a challenge as it once was, 21 under isn’t fun either. Make the course tougher !!!!! Don’t let it be overpowered . More bunkers,trees,narrower fairways ,tall thicker grass, smaller greens with more contour and more water. Golf should be about shot making!

  36. James T

    May 21, 2018 at 10:26 am

    I’m not giving away any secrets but my new driver is giving me an extra 25-30 yards, turning 7 iron approaches into wedge approaches. Nothing has changed about me except I’m getting older every day. And my technique might be a little better.

    • Mike R

      May 21, 2018 at 11:18 am

      If that is the case, then your old driver was ill-fitted for your game. A club cannot be 25-30 yards longer than a previous model (unless your previous was 15+ years old). You are more optimized, the ball speeds shouldn’t be all that much different on centered shots.

    • Draw down

      May 21, 2018 at 2:07 pm

      If you are going to prevaricate, make your story a little more believable.

      • James T

        May 21, 2018 at 3:05 pm

        Prevaricate. Now there’s a good word you don’t hear every day. Thanks.

        My “new” driver is actually 8 years old and I immediately gained 20 yards with that. Just recently I purchased a new “new” driver and, after going through various shafts, have settled and picked up an additional 10 yards. But I will admit, sadly so, that I have never been fitted, neither 8 years ago nor a few weeks ago.

        I’d be fitted but I don’t want to antiquate the golf courses I play. 🙂

        • Scott

          May 21, 2018 at 3:20 pm

          Very hard to believe your story. For it to be true, you had ill-fitting equipment and now stumbled upon something that works or you went from hitting an iron off the tee to finding a driver you could hit. Either way, I am calling shenanigans.

  37. Justin

    May 21, 2018 at 9:52 am

    Let’s face it, seeing the pros hit the ball a mile is what draws most people. Even the commentators ooh and ahh over it. It’s all about money. The PGA is a business. They could easily make the fairways tighter, rough taller, and greens firm and fast. But who wants to see them bogey or shoot par to win other than the serious golf fan.

  38. Brett Weir

    May 21, 2018 at 9:43 am

    Driver COR and golf ball speed were at their USGA max years ago yet golfers are still getting longer and longer. Must be the conditioning (and a little help with launch monitors too)…

  39. juststeve

    May 21, 2018 at 9:43 am

    Give a well trained athletic golfer my old persimmon driver and a wound golf ball and see how far he hits it. In this case it is the arrow, not the Indian.

  40. Greg V

    May 21, 2018 at 9:19 am

    I happen to believe that the equipment enables these modern golfers to hit all out, all the time. Sure, they are more golf athletic, but give them persimmon and balata and let’s see what they can do with that.

    In any event, separating equipment from the player is difficult. As you show, average distance has increased significantly, and the length of modern tour courses has not kept pace. The question is: what do we do about it?

  41. Greg Keller

    May 21, 2018 at 9:13 am

    The article is spot on, it’s not one thing, there are better athletes, the ball is better, equipment is better, trackman, etc. The problem is that there is no way you can roll back all of that stuff. Maybe a ball rollback would bring classic courses back into play. I’m interested to see how Shinny plays in a couple weeks. This is a course that I would hate to see fade into the sunset.

    I think that the biggest thing, and maybe this will change as the times change, is that the shots that we remember as “great shots” in the history of the game all were long iron shots. Nicklaus’s 1 iron at the ’72 Open, Hogan’s one iron at Merion in ’50, shoot, even Tiger’s 6 iron from the bunker at the Canadian open in 2000. Are we going to revere massive drives that set up 9 irons into par 5’s the way we do those classic shots? Is there going to be a plaque at Augusta where Sergio hit a great 192 yard second into the 15th to win in ’17 after a 330 yard drive the same way there is for Sarazens 235 yard 4-wood on the same hole? I think we all know how hard it is to hit those long second shots into tight targets and that’s why they have the aura around them. I just don’t think we are going to have those any more with 460cc drivers, solid-core balls and trackman coupled with fitness guru’s and courses that are wide open and 8000 yds.

    • Adam Crawford

      May 21, 2018 at 8:51 pm

      Hi Greg, thanks for your comment. Right, I don’t think it’s one thing in particular but the narrative lately has been that it’s all the equipment (the ball, the clubs, the course, etc.).

  42. john

    May 21, 2018 at 9:05 am

    First, Athlete conditioning in ALL sports has dramatically increased in the past 30 years.

    Second, the golf ball is dramatically longer than the old balata.

    Third, driver technology is much better than the persimmon.

    That being said, look at the length of most pros irons today, most use blades so technology takes a back seat there

  43. Tom Newsted

    May 21, 2018 at 8:55 am

    I couldn’t agree more with this story. Tiger’s lasting legacy on the game may not be his amazing number of tournament and major wins but how he brought fitness into the game. The “I am Tiger Woods.” commercials influenced many of today’s best players. If we were to ask Rory, Day, Johnson and many others if trying to be like Tiger influenced there game they would all say yes. In addition to that we can point to some technology improvements in ball, club head and shafts but that doesn’t mean we need the USGA, PGA and the RNA dictating what should and should not be legal.
    The answer to this issue is the course not the player. Right now many of the courses that are used on the PGA tour have long fairways with some slight bend to them. Even with the layout of Shinnecock Hills this year the fairways are open and long hitters have these nice runways to land their tee shots on. The key is divided fairways. Take the area between 290 -340 yards of each fairway and make it an area you don’t want to land in. In the case of Shinnecock let the wild grasses grow across that area. In the case of courses in water tight areas like the southwest use zero scaping to create the same effect. (Make sure your boulders are big enough to keep Tiger’s gallery from moving them.) By doing this you take the big stick out of the players hands and force them to be more creative. Players like Johnson, Watson and Day will be forced to hit 3-wood and lay up.
    The argument that comes up would be cost but I think in the case of most courses it wouldn’t be that much. You re introduce the native grass to the area in question and go from there. These would make holes much more challenging and exciting. The hazards and the risk reward give each hole character. Holes like #12 at Augusta or 17 at TPC Sawgrass create great drama and they are par 3 holes. Despite what Tiger says we don’t need 8000 yard courses to keep things interesting we need course designers to step up their game and meet the challenges of the 21st century.

  44. Bernard

    May 21, 2018 at 8:43 am

    The athletes are better, the driver is way better but the ball is a lot straighter and more aerodynamic. Great for enthusiasts but it’s dulled down what always separated the tour from everybody else. Their command of spin and flight control. It’s taken some bite out of some iconic tournaments and relegated impressive “talent” to splitting fairways at 350 yards. “Distance issue” really is not about distance at all. It’s about the death of spin control and artistry needed to win with it. 350 will be average in a few years, I’ve seen Joe’s at the range doing it with control, so tell me, how exactly does driver /wedge golf make the game more interesting in the long term? Folks credit Tiger for all this but what is always ignored is that he’s probably the best iron player ever and used spin control to great effect. The tour learned the wrong lesson, it’s John Daley’s tour now not Tiger’s.

    • scott g

      May 21, 2018 at 11:32 am

      Bernard is dead on the mark. The technology has changed to the point where the pros leave nothing in the bag. They are not penalized for swinging as hard as they can. Most work out which gives them additional strength and swing speed. They play courses that seldom restrict the “bomb and gouge” game professional golf has become. If I had a dollar for every article in a golf magazine that proclaimed how to gain 10 yards, I’d have retired years ago. Let’s face it, this sells equipment, not the game. If these guys (pros) are really that good, they should welcome a test of their skills. Bring back the spinny ball, deaden the ball, shorten the courses, shorten the time it takes to play a round, lower the cost of course maintenance. Recent articles have purported that the average golfer has not made any gains in distance. The problem is they have spent thousands on new equipment and they would be better off improving their swing and ball contact (lessons). Just because something sells doesn’t mean its good for the game.

    • Davewn

      May 21, 2018 at 11:55 am

      The author neglected to mention modern mowers, agronomy and golf course setup’s roles in driver distance. They claim “firm and fast” conditions test the players, but there is no reason to cut fairways shorter than the average muni green and roll them to make them play like green, fuzzy blacktop. These guys don’t need “speed slots” and 50 yards of roll. If you want to see spin control and accuracy rewarded, water and/or grow the grass on the fairways, recreate the “flier lie” in the first cut of rough, and simultaneously play the greens firm and fast. After the players’ tears dried, I’m sure you’d see more of a premium placed on accuracy and less on bomb and gouge. The question is, does the average golf fan want this?

      • O

        May 21, 2018 at 6:08 pm

        100% agree with Davewn! In summary the pros are not “hitting” it 340-360yds, maybe they are carrying it longer on average, BUT the ball is rolling out to 330-370yds on a weekly basis which is absolutely absurd. And yes agreed their fairways are playing faster than most of the greens we golf on. I do not see how fast/firm fairways is a test of skill, but I see that on the greens.

        From an equipment stand point, i do not feel “rolling back” anything is necessary. As someone playing sports, you are always looking for the equipment to achieve your best, why should you be penalized for finding that? You cannot help the fact that modern brains/machines have allowed that to happen, its the world we live in. ESPECIALLY from a fitting perspective!

      • Adam Crawford

        May 21, 2018 at 8:49 pm

        Hi Davewn, thanks for taking the time to comment. While I didn’t address mowers and course conditions in this piece, I did address it in another distance study I wrote last year (you can find that story here: http://www.golfwrx.com/435236/how-golf-can-learn-from-the-nbas-3-point-line/). I think course conditions have a TON to do with the increase in distance. The fairways on the PGA Tour are likely the same speed as the greens that Hogan putted on in his U.S. Open victories. But we can’t argue that the athletes have a lot to do with the increase.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Opinion & Analysis

Myrtle Beach, Explored: February in South Carolina

Published

on

As I gain in experience and age, and familiarity breeds neither contempt nor disdain, I understand why people return to a place. A destination like Myrtle Beach offers a sizable supply and diversity of restaurants, entertainment venues, and shops that are predicated on the tenets of the service industry. Greet your customers with a smile and a kind word, and they will find comfort and assurance. Provide them with a memorable experience and they will suggest your place of business to others.

My first tour of Myrtle Beach took place in the mid-1980s, and consisted of one course: Gator Hole. I don’t remember much from that day, and since Gator Hole closed a decade later, I cannot revisit it to recollect what I’d lost. Since then, I’ve come to the Grand Strand a few times, and been fortunate to never place a course more than once. I’ve seen the Strantz courses to the south and dipped my toe in the North Carolina courses of Calabash. I’ve been to many in the middle, including Dunes, Pine Lakes, Grande Dunes among them.

2024 brought a quartet of new courses, including two at the Barefoot Resort. I’d heard about the North Myrtle Beach four-pack of courses that highlight the Barefoot property, including layouts from Pete Dye, Tom Fazio, Davis Love III, and Greg Norman. I had the opportunity to play and shoot the Dye and Fazio tracks, which means that I’ll have to return to see the other two. Sandwiched between them were the TPC-Myrtle Beach course, also from Tom Fazio, and the Pawley’s Plantation trace, by the hand of Jack Nicklaus. I anticipated a bit of the heroic, and bit of the strategic, and plenty of eye candy. None of those architects would ever be considered a minimalist, so there would be plenty of in-play and out-of-play bunkers and mounds to tantalize the senses.

My nephew arrived a few days early, to screen a few more courses. As a result, you the reader will have an extra quarter of mini-reviews, bringing the total of courses in this piece to eight. It was inconceivable that CJR would play four courses that I had never played nor photographed, but that was the case. His words appear at the end of this piece. We hope that you enjoy the tour.

Main Feature: Two Barefoots, a TPC, and Pawley’s Plantation

Barefoot Dye

What Paul “Pete” Dye brought back from his trips to the United Kingdom, hearkened back to what C.B. MacDonal did, some 65 years prior. There is a way of finding bunkers and fairways, and even green sites, that does not require major industrial work. The Dye course at Barefoot Resorts takes you on a journey over the rumpled terrain of distant places. If there’s one element missing, it’s the creased and turbulent fairways, so often found in England and Ireland. The one tenet of playing a Dye course, is to always aim away from temptation, from where your eyes draw you. Find the safe side of the target, and you’ll probably find your ball. It then stands that you will have a shot for your next attempt. Cut the corner, and you might have need to reload. The Barefoot course begins gently, in terms of distance, but challenges with visual deception. After two brief 4s and a 3, the real work begins. The course is exposed enough, to allow the coastal winds to dance along the fairways. Be ready to keep the ball low and take an extra club or two.

TPC-Myrtle Beach

If memory serves, TPCMB is my first trek around a TPC-branded course. It had all the trappings of a tour course, from the welcome, through the clubhouse, to the practice facilities and, of course, the course. TPC-Myrtle Beach is a Tom Fazio design, and if you never visit Augusta National, you’ll now have an idea of what it is like. You play Augusta’s 16th hole twice at TPCMB, and you enjoy it both times. Fazio really likes the pond-left, green-angle-around par three hole, and his two iterations of it are memorable.

You’ll also see those Augusta bunkers, the ones with the manicured edges that drop into a modestly-circular form. What distinguishes these sand pits is the manner in which they rise from the surrounding ground. They are unique in that they don’t resemble the geometric bunkering of a Seth Raynor, nor the organic pits found in origin courses. They are built, make no mistake, and recovery from them is manageable for all levels of bunker wizardry.

Barefoot Fazio

If you have the opportunity to play the two Tom Fazio courses back to back, you’ll notice a marked difference in styling. Let me digress for a moment, then circle back with an explanation. It was written that the NLE World Woods course designed by Fazio, Pine Barrens, was an homage to Pine Valley, the legendary, New Jersey club where Fazio is both a member and the architect on retainer. The Pine Barrens course was plowed under in 2022, so the homage no longer exists. At least, I didn’t think that it existed, until I played his Barefoot Resort course in North Myrtle Beach.

Pine Valley might be described as an aesthetic of scrub and sand. There are mighty, forced carries to travers, along with sempiternal, sandy lairs to avoid. Barefoot Fazio is quite similar. If you’re not faced with a forced carry, you’ll certainly contend with a fairway border or greenside necklace of sand. When you reach the 13th tee, you’ll face a drive into a fairway, and you might see a distant green, with a notable absence: flagstick. The 13th is the icing on the homage cake, a callout of the 8th hole at Pine Valley. Numero Ocho at the OG has two greens, side by side, and they change the manner in which the hole plays (so they say.) At Barefoot Fazio, the right-side green is a traditional approach, with an unimpeded run of fairway to putting surface. The left-side green (the one that I was fortunate to play) demands a pitch shot over a wasteland. It’s a fitting tribute for the rest of us to play.

Be certain to parrot the starter, Leon’s, advice, and play up a deck of tees. Barefoot Fazio offers five par-three holes, so the fours and fives play that much longer. Remember, too, that you are on vacation. Why not treat yourself to some birdie looks?

Pawley’s Plantation

The Jack Nicklaus course at Pawley’s Plantation emerged from a period of hibernation in 2024. The greens were torn up and their original contours were restored. Work was overseen by Troy Vincent, a member of the Nicklaus Architecture team. In addition, the putting corridors were reseeded with a hardier, dwarf bermuda that has experienced great success, all along the Grand Strand that is Myrtle Beach.

My visit allowed me to see the inward half first, and I understand why the resort wishes to conclude your day on those holes. The front nine of Pawley’s Plantation works its way through familiar, low country trees and wetlands. The back nine begins in similar fashion, then makes its way east, toward the marsh that separates mainland from Pawley’s Island. Recalling the powerful sun of that Wednesday morning, any round beginning on the second nine would face collateral damage from the warming star. Much better to hit holes 11 to close when the sun is higher in the sky.

The marshland holes (12 through 17) are spectacular in their raw, unprotected nature. The winds off the Atlantic are unrelenting and unforgiving, and the twin, par-three holes will remain in your memory banks for time’s march. In typical Golden Bear fashion, a majority of his putting targets are smallish in nature, reflecting his appreciation for accurate approach shots. Be sure to find the forgiving side of each green, and err to that portion. You’ll be grateful.

Bonus Coverage: Myrtlewood, Beechwood, Arrowhead, and King’s North

Arrowhead (Raymond Floyd and Tom Jackson)

A course built in the middle of a community, water threatens on most every hole. The Cypress 9 provides a few holes forcing a carried drive then challenge you with water surrounding the green. On Waterway, a drivable 2nd hole will tempt most, so make sure the group ahead has cleared the green.

Myrtlewood (Edmund Alt and Arthur Hills) and Beechwood (Gene Hamm)

A middle of the winter New Englander’s paradise. Wide open fairways, zero blind shots and light rough allow for shaking off the rust and plenty of forgiveness. A plethora of dog legs cause one to be cautious with every tee shot. Won’t break the bank nor the scorecard.

King’s North @ Myrtle Beach National (Arnold Palmer)

A signature Arnold Palmer course, waste areas, island greens and daring tee shots. Highlighted by the 4th hole Par 5 Gambler hole, if you can hit the smaller fairway on the left you are rewarded with a short approach to get to the green in 2. The back 9 is highlighted by an island green par 3 and a finisher with over 40 bunkers spread throughout. A challenge for any golfer.
Your Reaction?
  • 2
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP1
  • OB0
  • SHANK1

Continue Reading

19th Hole

Vincenzi’s 2024 Players Championship betting preview: Pete Dye specialists ready to pass tough TPC Sawgrass test

Published

on

The PGA Tour heads to TPC Sawgrass to play in one of the most prestigious and important events of the season: THE PLAYERS Championship. Often referred to as the fifth major, the importance of a PLAYERS victory to the legacy of a golfer can’t be overlooked.

TPC Sawgrass is a par-72 measuring 7,245 yards and featuring Bermudagrass greens. Golfers must be patient in attacking this Pete Dye course.

With trouble lurking at every turn, the strokes can add up quickly. With a par-5 16th that is a true risk-reward hole and the famous par-3 17th island green, the only safe bet at TPC Sawgrass is a bet on an exciting finish.

THE PLAYERS Championship field is often referred to as the strongest field of the year — and with good reason. There are 144 in the field, including 43 of the world’s top 50 players in the OWGR. Tiger Woods will not be playing in the event.

THE PLAYERS is an exceptionally volatile event that has never seen a back-to-back winner.

Past Winners at TPC Sawgrass

  • 2023: Scottie Scheffler (-17)
  • 2022: Cameron Smith (-13)
  • 2021: Justin Thomas (-14)
  • 2019: Rory McIlroy (-16)
  • 2018: Webb Simpson (-18)
  • 2017: Si-Woo Kim (-10)
  • 2016: Jason Day (-15)
  • 2015: Rickie Fowler (-12)In this article and going forward, I’ll be using the Rabbit Hole by Betsperts Golf data engine to develop my custom model. If you want to build your own model or check out all of the detailed stats, you can sign up using promo code: MATTVIN for 25% off any subscription package (yearly is best value). 

5 Key Stats for TPC Sawgrass

Let’s take a look at five metrics key for TPC Sawgrass to determine which golfers boast top marks in each category over their last 24 rounds.

1. Strokes Gained: Approach

Strokes Gained: Approach has historically been far and away the most important and predictive stat at THE PLAYERS Championship. With water everywhere, golfers can’t afford to be wild with their iron shots. Not only is it essential to avoid the water, but it will also be as important to go after pins and make birdies because scores can get relatively low.

Total SG: Approach Over Past 24 Rounds

  1. Tom Hoge (+1.37) 
  2. Scottie Scheffler (+1.20)
  3. Tony Finau (+0.99)
  4. Jake Knapp (+0.83)
  5. Shane Lowry (+0.80)

2. Total Driving

This statistic is perfect for TPC Sawgrass. Historically, driving distance hasn’t been a major factor, but since the date switch to March, it’s a bit more significant. During this time of year, the ball won’t carry quite as far, and the runout is also shorter.

Driving accuracy is also crucial due to all of the trouble golfers can get into off of the tee. Therefore, players who are gaining on the field with Total Driving will put themselves in an ideal spot this week.

Total Driving Over Past 24 Rounds

  1. Rory McIlroy (22)
  2. Akshay Bhatia (25)
  3. Keith Mitchell (25) 
  4. Adam Hadwin (34)
  5. Sam Burns (+39)

3. Strokes Gained: Total at Pete Dye Designs

TPC Sawgrass may be Pete Dye’s most famous design, and for good reason. The course features Dye’s typical shaved runoff areas and tricky green complexes.  Pete Dye specialists love TPC Sawgrass and should have a major advantage this week.

SG: Total (Pete Dye) per round over past 36 rounds:

  1. Patrick Cantlay (+2.02)
  2. Scottie Scheffler (+1.90)
  3. Min Woo Lee (+1.77) 
  4. Sungjae Im (+1.72)
  5. Brian Harman (+1.62) 

4. Strokes Gained: Ball Striking

Prototypical ball-strikers have dominated TPC Sawgrass. With past winners like Sergio Garcia, Henrik Stenson, Webb Simpson, Rory McIlroy and Justin Thomas, it’s evident that golfers must be striking it pure to contend at THE PLAYERS.

SG: Ball Striking Over Past 24 Rounds

  1. Scottie Scheffler (+2.02)
  2. Tony Finau (+1.51)
  3. Tom Hoge (+1.48)
  4. Keith Mitchell (+1.38)
  5. Will Zalatoris (+1.18)

5. Par 5 Average

Par-5 average is extremely important at TPC Sawgrass. With all four of the Par-5s under 575 yards, and three of them under 540 yards, a good amount of the scoring needs to come from these holes collectively.

Par 5 Average Over Past 24 Rounds

  1. Scottie Schefler (+4.31)
  2. Erik Van Rooyen (+4.35)
  3. Doug Ghim (+4.34)
  4. Wyndham Clark (+4.34)
  5. Matt Fitzpatrick (+4.31)

6. Strokes Gained: Florida

We’ve used this statistic over the past few weeks, and I’d like to incorporate some players who do well in Florida into this week’s model as well. 

Strokes Gained: Florida over past 30 rounds:

  1. Scottie Schefler (+2.43)
  2. Erik Van Rooyen (+1.78)
  3. Doug Ghim (+1.78)
  4. Wyndham Clark (+1.73)
  5. Matt Fitzpatrick (+1.69)

7. Strokes Gained: Total on Courses with High Water Danger

With water everywhere at TPC Sawgrass, the blow-up potential is high. It can’t hurt to factor in some players who’ve avoided the “eject” button most often in the past. 

Strokes Gained: Total on Courses with High Water Danger over past 30 rounds:

  1. Scottie Schefler (+2.08)
  2. Rory McIlroy (+1.82)
  3. Tony Finau (+1.62)
  4. Patrick Cantlay (+1.51)
  5. Will Zalatoris (+1.49)

THE PLAYERS Championship Model Rankings

Below, I’ve compiled overall model rankings using a combination of the five key statistical categories previously discussed — SG: Approach (25%), Total Driving (20%), SG: Total Pete Dye (14%), SG: Ball-striking (15%) SG: Par 5 (8%), SG: Florida (10%) and SG: High Water (8%).

  1. Scottie Scheffler 
  2. Shane Lowry 
  3. Tony Finau 
  4. Corey Conners
  5. Keith Mitchell
  6. Justin Thomas
  7. Will Zalatoris
  8. Xander Schauffele
  9. Cameron Young
  10. Doug Ghim
  11. Sam Burns 
  12. Chris Kirk
  13. Collin Morikawa
  14. Si Woo Kim
  15. Wyndham Clark

2024 THE PLAYERS Championship Picks

(All odds at the time of writing)

Patrick Cantlay +2500 (DraftKings):

Patrick Cantlay is winless since the 2022 BMW Championship but is undoubtedly one of the most talented players on the PGA Tour. Since the win at Wilmington Country Club, the 31-year-old has twelve top-10 finishes on Tour and is starting to round into form for the 2024 season.

Cantlay has done well in the most recent “signature” events this season, finishing 4th at Riviera for the Genesis Invitational and 12th at Bay Hill for the Arnold Palmer Invitational. The former Tour Championship winner resides in Jupiter, Florida and has played some good golf in the state, including finishing in a tie for 4th at the 2023 Arnold Palmer Invitational. His history at TPC Sawgrass has been up and down, but his best career start at The PLAYERS came last year when he finished in a tie for 19th.

Cantlay absolutely loves Pete Dye designed courses and ranks 1st in the field in Strokes Gained: Total on Dye tracks in his past 36 rounds. In recent years, he’s been excellent at both the RBC Heritage and the Travelers Championship. TPC Sawgrass is a place where players will have to be dialed in with their irons and distance off the tee won’t be quite as important. In his past 24, rounds, Cantlay ranks in the field in Strokes Gained: Approach.

Despite being winless in recent years, I still believe Cantlay is capable of winning big tournaments. As one of the only United States players to bring their best game to Marco Simone for the Ryder Cup, I have conviction that the former top amateur in the world can deliver when stakes are high.

Will Zalatoris +3000 (FanDuel):

In order to win at TPC Sawgrass, players will need to be in total control of their golf ball. At the moment, Will Zalatoris is hitting it as well as almost anyone and finally has the putter cooperating with his new switch to the broomstick style.

Zalatoris is coming off back-to-back starts where he absolutely striped the ball. He finished 2nd at the Genesis Invitational and 4th at the Arnold Palmer Invitational where his statistics were eye opening. For the week at Bay Hill, Zal gained 5.0 strokes on approach and 5.44 strokes off the tee.

Throughout the early part of his career, Zalatoris has established himself by playing his best golf in the strongest fields with the most difficult conditions. A tough test will allow him to separate himself this week and breakthrough for a PLAYERS Championship victory.

Shane Lowry +4000 (DraftKings):

History has shown us that players need to be in good form to win the PLAYERS Championship and it’s hard to find anyone not named Scottie Scheffler who’s in better form that Shane Lowry at the moment. He finished T4 at the Cognizant Classic followed by a solo third place finish at the Arnold Palmer Invitational.

The fact that the Irishman contended at Bay Hill is a great sign considering he’s really struggled there throughout his career. He will now head to a different style of course in Florida where he’s had a good deal of success. He finished 8th at TPC Sawgrass in 2021 and 13th in 2022. 

Lowry ranks 6th in the field in approach in his past 24 rounds, 7th in Strokes Gained: Total at Pete Dye designed courses in his last 30 rounds, 8th in par 5 scoring this season, and 4th in Strokes Gained: Total in Florida over his past 36 rounds.

Lowry is a player who’s capable of winning big events. He’s a major champion and won another premier event at Wentworth as well as a WGC at Firestone. He’s also a form player, when he wins it’s typically when he’s contended in recent starts. He’s been terrific thus far in Florida and he should get into contention once again this week.

Brian Harman +8000 (DraftKings):

(Note: Since writing this Harman’s odds have plummeted to 50-1. I would not advise betting the 50).

Brian Harman showed us last season that if the course isn’t extremely long, he has the accuracy both off the tee and with his irons to compete with anyone in the world. Last week at Bay Hill and was third in the field in Strokes Gained: Approach, gaining 5.54 strokes on the field in the category.

In addition to the strong iron play, Harman also gained strokes off the tee in three of four rounds. He’s also had success at Pete Dye tracks recently. He finished 2nd at last year’s Travelers Championship and 7th at the RBC Heritage.

It would be a magnificent feat for Harman to win both the Open Championship and PLAYERS in a short time frame, but the reality is the PGA Tour isn’t quite as strong as it once was. Harman is a player who shows up for the biggest events and his odds seem way too long for his recent track record.

Tony Finau +6500 (FanDuel):

A few weeks ago, at the Genesis Invitational, I bet Hideki Matsuyama because I believed it to be a “bet the number” play at 80-1. I feel similarly about Finau this week. While he’s not having the season many people expected of him, he is playing better than these odds would indicate.

This season, Tony has a tied for 6th place finish at Torrey Pines, a tied for 19th at Riviera and tied for 13th at the Mexico Open. He’s also hitting the ball extremely well. In the field in his past 24 rounds, he ranks 3rd in Strokes Gained: Approach, 3rd in Strokes Gained: Ball Striking, 6th in Par 5 average and 15th in Total Driving.

Finau’s problem has been with the putter, which has been undeniably horrific. However, this week he will see a putting surface similar to the POA at TPC Scottsdale and PGA West, which he’s had a great deal of success on. It’s worth taking a stab at this price to see if he can have a mediocre week with the flat stick.

Sungjae Im +9000 (FanDuel):

It’s been a lackluster eighteen months for Sungjae, who once appeared to be a certain star. While his ceiling is absolutely still there, it’s been a while since we’ve seen Im play the type of golf expected of a player with his talent.

Despite the obvious concerns, the South Korean showed glimpses of a return to form last week at the Arnold Palmer Invitational. He tied for 18th place and gained strokes off the tee, on approach, around the green and with the putter. When at his best, Im is a perfect course fit for TPC Sawgrass. He has remarkable precision off the tee, can get dialed in with his irons on shorter courses and can get up and down with the best players on Tour.

This number has gotten to the point where I feel comfortable taking a shot on it.

Billy Horschel +20000 (FanDuel):

Billy Horschel is a great fit on paper for TPC Sawgrass. He can get dialed in with his irons and his lack of distance off the tee won’t be a major detriment at the course. “Bermuda Billy” does his best work putting on Bermudagrass greens and he appears to be rounding into form just in time to compete at The PLAYERS.

In his most recent start, Billy finished in a tie for 9th at the Cognizant Classic and hit the ball extremely well. The former Florida Gator gained 3.32 strokes on approach and 2.04 strokes off the tee. If Horschel brings that type of ball striking to TPC Sawgrass, he has the type of putter who can win a golf tournament.

Horschel has been great on Pete Dye designed courses, with four of his seven career PGA Tour wins coming on Dye tracks.

In a season that has seen multiple long shots win big events, the 37-year-old is worth a stab considering his knack for playing in Florida and winning big events.

 

Your Reaction?
  • 30
  • LEGIT10
  • WOW4
  • LOL2
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP3
  • OB1
  • SHANK6

Continue Reading

19th Hole

Vincenzi’s LIV Golf Hong Kong betting preview: Trio of major champs primed for big week

Published

on

LIV Golf is set to begin its fourth event of the season at Hong Kong Golf Club in Hong Kong, China. This marks the first time that LIV Golf will travel to China for an event.

Hong Kong Golf Club is a par 70 measuring 6,710 yards. LIV will be using the “Fanling Course” for the event.

While speaking with Asian Tour player Travis Smyth, he gave me a rundown on what it takes to be successful at Hong Kong Golf Club.

“Hong Kong golf club, it’s pretty old school, like super short and tight. And I, I don’t think it falls into like a bomber’s hand. I think you’ll see a lot of guys hitting it to roughly the same spots on the majority of the holes. There’s a few holes where Bryson will be able to unleash a few but not many. When I played here, I hit Hybrid on Par 4’s off the tee maybe like seven times.”

Travis also said that the tight fairways and penal potential misses will keep the bombers at bay.

“It’s just that sort of course you’re hitting it like anywhere from 220 to 240 off the tee. And then from there you have a range of holes where it’s like kind of some sort of wedge or nine. It’s not very long.”

Around the green game will also be tremendously important at Hong Kong Golf Club.

“The greens are small as well and it’s usually quite hard to get up and down if you miss the greens. Someone like Cameron Smith I could see doing really well there. He played well in the international series. but just someone that’s, you know, pretty dolled in with their, their scoring clubs, he’s probably going to do well there.”

Players dialed in with their game from tee to green with control over the golf ball should fare extremely well.

“You can’t really scramble from the trees either. So, you really just have to. I’d, yeah, just whoever’s the best ball striker that week, you can’t really strap it around and fake it around there. You got to hit it straight. The tree lines are dead, there’s some hazards and stuff. It’s a short, tight quirky course, not what any of these guys are probably used to.”

Despite it being short, don’t be surprised if it gives players some real trouble.

“It should be fun viewing because there’ll be a lot of opportunities. They’ll feel like they can go low around there because it’s short but, you know, you make a few bogeys, and you get quite frustrated, and you start pushing off the tee and find some trouble and stuff. It can eat you up as well.”

Smyth finished 2nd at Hong Kong Golf Club to qualify for the 2023 Open Championship at Royal Liverpool.

Past Winners at Hong Kong Golf Club

  • 2023: Ben Campbell (-19)
  • 2022: Wade Ormsby (-17)
  • 2018: Aaron Rai (-17)
  • 2017: Wade Ormsby (-11)
  • 2016: Sam Brazel (-13)
  • 2015: Justin Rose (-19)
  • 2014: Scott Hend (-13)
  • 2013: Miguel Angel Jiminez (-12)

The top of the board once again will be a major threat this week. Jon Rahm is still in search of his first win on LIV and has been knocking at the door in each of his first three starts. Brooks Koepka hasn’t yet contended but is playing steady golf and has yet to shoot a round outside of the 60’s this season. Joaquin Niemann is the hottest player on the planet and has shown no signs of slowing down.

However, on a golf course that can neutralize the big hitters, this is an event that seems a bit more up for grabs than we’ve seen in the first three LIV events.

LIV Golf Stats YTD

 

2024 LIV Hong Kong Picks

Cameron Smith +2000 (Bet365, BetRivers)

It’s been a slow start for Cam Smith this season. In his three starts on LIV, he’s finished T8, T15, T41 and has yet to look like the Cam that is one of the best players in the world. Hong Kong Golf Club should be the perfect course fit to get the former Open Champion out of his slump.

Hong Kong Golf Club is tight off the tee, and many players won’t be able to hit driver. That will neutralize some of the best drivers of the golf ball in the field and propel players like Cam, who are almost unbeatable from fairway to green. Cam’s driver has been a weakness throughout his career, and it’s been especially pronounced this season. He’s tied for 51st in fairways hit thus far on the season. Taking driver out of his hand this week could be exactly what he needs to get on track.

Despite the poor tee balls, Smith still ranks 1st in putting and 5th in birdies made. He’s also a great scrambler, and with small greens at the course, having to get up and down is inevitable. If he can play from the fairway this week, he should have a major advantage in the other facets of the game.

Louis Oosthuizen +2000 (DraftKings)

Louis Oosthuizen should be an absolutely perfect fit for Hong Kong Golf Club. The South African has been remarkably consistent over the past few months dating back to the fall, where he won two consecutive DP World Tour events and also finished 2nd at the International Series Oman. In his three LIV starts this year, Louis has finished T8 at LIV Mayakoba, 50th at LIV Las Vegas and T2 at LIV Jeddah.

Louis is relatively short off the tee and that won’t hurt him this week. He is one of the best putters and scrambler on LIV, and his silky-smooth swing looks as dialed in as ever at the moment. He’s yet to win a LIV event, but a victory for Louis seems imminent.

Patrick Reed +5000 (FanDuel)

Patrick Reed is another play who’s yet to win a LIV event but has been a winner throughout his entire career. The former Masters champion should love Hong Kong Golf Club as it will play to his strengths on and around the greens.

Reed played on the Asian Tour this fall and finished T15 at the Hong Kong Open and T7 at the Indonesian Masters. The experience in Asia this season should be a benefit for Reed acclimating to the travel and conditions this week.

The 34-year-old should benefit from taking driver out of his hand and similar to Smith, can beat anyone in the world if the tournament become a short game competition.

*Featured Image and Stats Image courtesy of LIV Golf*

Your Reaction?
  • 12
  • LEGIT8
  • WOW4
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP1
  • OB1
  • SHANK7

Continue Reading

WITB

Facebook

Trending