Opinion & Analysis

Distance for dinner: Have OEM distance claims gone too far?

Published

11 years ago

Jan 29, 2013

Bigger, faster, stronger….longer. That might as well be our adopted cultural motto. This doesn’t just apply to sports, mind you. People have always been very quick to pull out the measuring tape to compete with others in most ways, shapes and forms.

The measure of a person always seems to be measurable, doesn’t it? Or at the very least, more about the catchy sizzle then the substantive steak. This isn’t even a very recent phenomena. Our desire to reduce ourselves to this dates back to our origins. Not that we need to go back that far, but one certainly doesn’t need to think hard to come up with a few examples.

Baseball fans might remember Tom Glavine and Greg Maddux telling us that “chicks dig the long ball” in a famous 1990s commercial that spoofed on the popularity of the home-run-hitting Mark McGuire, as oppose to their brand of crafty pitching. How about the Cadillac CTS-V commercials in 2010 detailing the exact times its car was able to circle the famous Nurburgring circuit in Germany in order to call it the world’s fastest production sedan? To this day, I wonder how many CTS-V owners drive their car in such a manner, or if it would have mattered if their car had come up a few seconds short of a BMW M5 in the commercial. Would they still have bought it?

Want to go back further? How about the railroad and mining tycoons of the Guilded Age, trying to outdo each other by building the world’s biggest houses. Or before that, European and American naturalists and archeologists arguing over which side of the pond was more manly by comparing how big the respective fossils they found were (yes this actually happened, and actually involved Thomas Jefferson). Golfers want to hit the ball further then their friends. They just do. Original equipment manufacturers (OEM) know this, and for the past few years, they have been selling clubs to us has been like shooting fish in a barrel.

But the questions we want to ask, or should be asking ourselves is: Why do we believe we are going to hit the ball longer? And are distances really increasing to back up OEMs claims and promises?

First, why do we believe the claims? Well, we believe because we want to believe, and because what we see on TV can be a bit confusing. With a drive, the average golfer hits the ball roughly a bit longer than the length of two football fields. If we are to focus more closely on males between the ages of 18 to 49, which for many markets is the target consumer, I’m going to guess that would go up a little bit. I don’t have exact facts to back this up but I’d certainly think 220 yards is reasonable to guess.

If you were to ask the average golfer from that bracket, he would probably tell you that pros hit the ball 300 yards regularly, and based on that they’d probably think he is way behind their potential for how far they can hit. Naturally, he’d be wrong. Pros don’t hit the ball 300 yards regularly, in fact my colleague just printed that the average PGA pros carry distance carry the ball roughly 269 yards. Think about that for a second. Joe Couch-Potato hits the ball within 82 percent of the average pro. Ummm, isn’t that pretty good?

If I can humor you for a second with tales from my youth, I could tell you that I was a fairly athletic teenager. I ran track for my high school team, and was a decent junior baseball player. The fastest I ever threw a baseball when clocked was 73 mph, and the fastest I ever ran the 100-meter dash was in (if I remember correctly) 12 seconds. Neither is that terrible. I’d venture a guess that most people couldn’t top either, and both those marks are about the same percentage off the average pro as your average drive compared to a golfing pro. What would you tell your friend if he told you he was going to buy new shoes so he could get closer to the 10-second 100-meter dash? You’d probably tell him he’s crazy.

Further diluting things is total distance, which is completely irrelevant. The courses amateurs play are completely different then the ones pros play, and total distance is all but meaningless. Every 340-yard drive you see is suspect, because the fairways the pros play are similar to the greens the average golfer plays. Again, if I can tell you tales of my own exploits, my carry distance with driver is very similar to the average pro, roughly 265 yards. I can tell you that I have had days where I’ve averaged more than 300 yards off the tee when playing hard and fast courses, and days where I’ve hit balls that have stuck in the ground. Carry distance is all that matters really. Next time you play your local municipal, imagine how much further you’d hit it if the fairways were as hard as the greens. Pros can get 50-plus yards of roll, remember that.

Iron shots aren’t much more reliable, because not a tournament goes by where the casual fan will see a pro line up a shot and hear the announcer say, “Here’s Kuchar, hitting 7-iron from 195,” and naturally the thought process is that pros absolutely murder their irons. This again is a bit of a misnomer, as all announcers really have to go by is the word of the players caddy, or an educated guess. And it’s not like caddies are always going to tell the truth; why not make his pro seem superhuman?

Another important data point is the release the pros get on greens, so be sure to pay attention to where the ball lands. It’s not uncommon for a pro to hit 5-iron to a 225 yard par 3. Notice that a lot of times, the ball lands on the front of the green rolls to the back. The pro might be carrying it 200 yards as oppose to 225. Still long, but not ridiculous. Chances are that you hit the ball further comparatively then you believe you do, and new clubs might not really change that.

The second question is: Are people really hitting it longer then they did? OEMs definitely want you to think so. It would be easy to pick on TaylorMade or Callaway, who seem to be at the forefront of the cold war of distance, and I will try to minimize the finger pointing. But both are engaged in campaigns of convincing players there are several yards to be found. TaylorMade in 2012 had its much publicized (and successful) “17” campaign, based on the premise that players would gain 17 yards by switching to its Rocketballz 3-wood. TaylorMade even had its players wear soccer-style jerseys on the course during last year’s WGC event at Doral promoting this, truly a first in golf marketing (note: the campaign was nixed mid round by the PGA Tour).

Callaway has responded by signing every big hitter this side of Art Sellinger to its staff, and airing ads where Alvaro Quiros smacks balls over the Bellagio fountains in Las Vegas. I can only imagine what they have in store for uber-driver Jamie Sadlowski! But the question really is, despite the theatrics, are players really hitting it further?

Distance numbers for amateurs are tough to come by. But not so much on the PGA Tour, where one would think technology would be just as beneficial. In 2012, Bubba Watson led the Tour in driving distance at 315 yards, Charlie Beljan was second at 311. In 2010, Robert Garrigus led the tour at 315 yards, and Watson was second at 309. In. 2008 Watson led the tour at 315 yards. Garrigus was second at 311. What about 2006? The one and only Watson led at 319 yards and J.B. Holmes was second at 318. Wait? Were people longer in 2006? Or what about in 2004, when Hank Kuehne set the still standing record of 321 yards and John Daly was second at 314 yards, a number that would have still ranked second in 2012?

This is before adjustable-lofted drivers, full acceptance of 460cc heads, speed slots and most other features you see listed as performance attributes of 2013 drivers. With all the supposed advancements, why aren’t we seeing evidence on the tour? Sure, more people are hitting it further these days and averaging 300 yards, but you could just as easily argue that is a case of simple Darwinism than equipment, as a result of the “Tiger Proofing” of courses (think about it, if all food in the world was on 10-foot shelves, chances are humans would have a higher vertical leap 100 years from now right?). But the longest guys don’t seem to be driving it further. To take it even a step further, in Jack Nicklaus’ “Golf my Way,” he says his driving distance was “250 and up.” This was with a sub-43-inch steel-shafted driver, wound balls and wooden heads.

How far would Nicklaus carry the ball with a 45-inch graphite-shaft, a modern titanium driver head and a Pro V1X? Probably Watson long, and these are all advancements that are a decade old right now. Fact is, Nicklaus could’ve probably changed nothing other than his golf ball and he would’ve carried as far as the average pro does today, or at least very close. So how far have we really come?

Irons are another fun discussion. I recently bought a set of refurbished Ping Eye2 irons and plan on using them in the 2013 season. The pitching wedge is 50.5 degrees. Read that again! My new pitching wedge is almost two-degrees weaker than my Mizuno JPX-800 gap wedge! When I started playing golf roughly eight years ago, most pitching wedges were around 46 to 47 degrees, and now in 2013, it is common for them to be 44 to 45 degrees. The loft of my first ever 7-iron (a Tommy Armour 845 Silver Scot) was 36 degrees, as compared to my last 7-iron, a Mizuno JPX-800 which was 32 degrees. That’s over a 10 percent difference in lofts! Taking that a step further: I could hit my last 7-iron 165 yards and my original 7-iron 150 yards with the exact same swing!

These are important things to remember when considering an iron purchase. Next time you hit clubs in the store further than your original set, make sure to check the specs. To come back to Jack Nicklaus’ yardages, in “Golf my Way,” he claimed he hit his 7-iron 140 to 155 yards, which doesn’t sound like a lot. But remember his 7-iron was really a modern 8-iron at least, and at worst relatively close to a 9-iron! Suddenly his yardages with a wound ball don’t seem so bad! So again, how far have we come with technology? Or really, is it more a clever way of selling?

Another random thing I remember from my youth was a Fox Network special where a masked magician revealed many of magic’s secrets. At the relatively anticlimactic end, he said that he did it not to shame anyone, or make himself famous. He did it to push other magicians to come up with new material, to force them to come up with new tricks. I wish we as consumers would force that upon golf manufacturers. I wish all golf publications and reviewers would mention things like loft and shaft length in their reviews, but many do not currently do that.

Golfers everywhere have spent $799 for new irons under pretenses they might not understand, and ended up with a 4-GW set that performs the exact same as their previous 3-PW set. It’s time we stopped whipping out the measuring stick and forced golf manufacturers to come up with something that really benefits us. This will not happen until golfers out there truly understand what is being sold to them and how flawed their basis of comparison is. Until then, OEMs will continue to feed us distance promises that don’t quite jive. I hope, in my most ambitious sense of optimism, that this can start us along that path.

Your Reaction?

LIKE0
LEGIT0
WOW0
LOL0
IDHT0
FLOP0
OB0
SHANK0

Related Topics:

Up Next

Singh: Ruthless and immoral, or simply careless?

Don't Miss

Growing Up Golf Part 8: Deliberate Practice

Jeff Singer

Jeff Singer was born and still resides in Montreal, Canada. Though it is a passion for him today, he wasn't a golfer until fairly recently in life. In his younger years Jeff played collegiate basketball and football and grew up hoping to play the latter professionally. Upon joining the workforce, Jeff picked up golf and currently plays at a private course in the Montreal area while working in marketing. He has been a member of GolfWRX since 2008

28 Comments

Paul

Feb 18, 2013 at 12:44 pm

With so many options out there, it takes way more testing to find equipment that works with one’s own swing dynamics. One thing that is certain, is that for those who ignore the short game (Wedges & Putter)… And ignore the fact that this is where realistic gains can be made in keeping the total score down to as low as possible… Those same individuals will also ignore how important properly spaced wedge lofts are – in contributing to keeping the score down. 150 yards and in, is where the game is won and lost.

Reply Report comment
Eric

Feb 4, 2013 at 4:17 pm

I enjoyed reading the article and wish that the general public would understand the same things about club manufacturers and how they market.

However, I would interested to know whether equipment today helps a player who has lower swing speeds distance. Clubs with more advanced technology and better materials that allow for low centers of gravity, high MOI, etc, are really beneficial to bad players. Like you said there are not really statistics for the average amateur or bad players, but I wonder what effect, if any, these newer clubs have for these players.

Along the same lines, don’t you think today’s iron technology allows the clubs to have lower lofts and go farther? A 7 iron today can have 3 degrees less loft than a 7 irons from 10 years, but still have the same ball flight characteristics (height, spin, etc.) and also go farther. Though I agree that it is misleading when a company says that their 7 iron will go farther than yours, when their 7 iron is more like your 6, as long it has the ball flight that you want out of a 7 iron, I am fine with that.

Reply Report comment
lbj273

Feb 2, 2013 at 3:44 am

the average distances is just that, an average. it fails to take into account anytime something less than a driver is hit off the tee, which skews the distance averages

Reply Report comment
- Jeff Singer
  
  Feb 3, 2013 at 9:05 pm
  
  yes, but that was also the case in 2004, which is the earliest averages that are referenced in the article.
  
  Reply Report comment
  - Charlie
    
    Feb 6, 2013 at 4:58 pm
    
    Could you not argue that, because of advances in overall distance since 2004, players are able to hit driver less often but still hit it as far?
    
    Reply Report comment
trapp120

Feb 1, 2013 at 8:39 pm

I really liked the article. I do have one problem with it…no mention of shafts! A lot of progress has been made in this area and we all know the right shaft can transform even the crappiest iron or driver head into the right tool for you, so this should really be addressed when blasting all of the marketing.

I agree that it’s gone a little overboard, but these companies have to sell every year to meet rev goals. There’s no way they can do that by saying “The New TMAG R1…just as good as last year!”.

Instead of ripping the marketing distance claims, maybe you should rail against the practice of “perceived obscurity” that they’re all very guilty of pushing in hopes of creating a product lifecycle closer to 12 months instead of 3+ years.

Reply Report comment
GMatt

Feb 1, 2013 at 12:11 pm

It’s a case of the sheep being led to the slaughter or in buzz word terms “marketing”
The majority of folks on here may not believe in the hype but I’d bet you a $100 bill, they’ve inquired about it at their local golf shop. and the gentlman who stated most golfers would improve from lessons, you make absolutely too much sense to be on this forum

Reply Report comment
moses

Feb 1, 2013 at 12:45 am

I still havn’t found a modern driver that was as long as my old 300cc Titleist 983E. Look at the driving distance averages on PGATOUR.COM. Average distances of the purest ball strikers on earth really hasn’t changed in the last 7-8 years. Everything is maxed out. Want more distance? Go get properly fit for launch angle and spin rates.

Reply Report comment
- S
  
  Feb 2, 2013 at 12:30 pm
  
  None of what you said means anything at all to anyone.
  When you had that 983E, you were younger, probably stronger. Played more.
  Your 983E may have been an anomaly club, which could have been at, or over, the average COR of an average consumer club (that sounds like a fluke, but it happens), with a very good shaft, also at an excellent spec. Unless you had the club tested we will never know.
  Did you actually tally up your driving stats of those days with the 983E and compare it to the one you’re using now? What kind of courses did you play on, with what kind of weather conditions? How hard or soft were the courses and how much wind was there?
  You say last 7 to 8 years – do you have the data to back that up? I bet you’d be surprised.
  
  Reply Report comment
Golflaw

Jan 31, 2013 at 10:10 pm

As someone who has had to defend companies in court against false advertising claims, I find it strange that these arge, publicly traded golf equipment companies would knowingly be making claims without verifiable claims support.

Reply Report comment
- S
  
  Feb 2, 2013 at 12:25 pm
  
  They only need ONE player to get that result ONE TIME from a test hit on a machine.
  
  Reply Report comment
mark

Jan 31, 2013 at 6:36 pm

From 35 years of experience my best scores all come when 1 club works better than usual. My trusty 17 year old Anser Scotsdale. The worst modern trend is 46 and longer driver shafts. The Pro’s dont use them so why should we? I recall a quote from Davis Love where he said he knew in 3 swings whether or not a club would work for him….

Reply Report comment
Roger

Jan 31, 2013 at 1:06 pm

My goal has been to land in regulation on the 7th at my course and par it, the number 1 stroke hole…did it yesterday from 185m
with a 16.5 Tee i love….
Just upgraded to newer 588 wedges,love them…
Next step is a Driver that helps me hit 12 fairways per round…..250 yards total distance, in the fairway will make me happy. Set realistic expectations of your bag, stay fit and flexible, and practice putts,chipnruns and pitch shots a lot more!!! Great article !

Reply Report comment
Bill Gabbert

Jan 31, 2013 at 12:45 pm

I used to be the same way, beleiving all the stuff manufactures were putting on TV. Then one day I took my bag full of TM products to the course along with a bag of clubs I played 2 years ago. Played 2 rounds, one with each set, and I actually played better with my old set. Bottom line is if you have something that works and your happy with it, leave it alone. Like someone said early here take some lessons, and make some training aids like Michael breed does on the Golf Fix and practice, you will be amazed. Good article Jeff. love this site.

Reply Report comment
S

Jan 31, 2013 at 2:25 am

Blah blah blah blah blah…… that’s what all that is, above!

You know what?

Bigger, faster, stronger….longer. = AMERICA.

It’s our culture. PERIOD. Nuff said.

Reply Report comment
- Jeff Singer
  
  Jan 31, 2013 at 6:45 pm
  
  my original article was just “bigger, faster, stronger…longer. Nuff said”. But my editor rejected it and asked for like 1800 more words
  
  Reply Report comment
  - S
    
    Feb 2, 2013 at 12:22 pm
    
    Hahahahaha! That’s awesome.
    
    The other part of what I was going to say, was:
    
    AMERICA = we’re gullible and love our commercials telling us beautiful lies. We love it.
    
    Reply Report comment
ABgolfer2

Jan 31, 2013 at 12:37 am

269 +50=319

Sounds like 300+ on tour IS a regular thing.

Reply Report comment
Jesse

Jan 30, 2013 at 9:45 pm

“First, why do we believe the claims? Well, we believe because we want to believe, and because what we see on TV can be a bit confusing.” – Distance for dinner: Have OEM distance claims gone too far? by Jeff Singer

Secondly – Many people are stupid enough to believe it!

Reply Report comment
Troy Vayanos

Jan 30, 2013 at 2:30 pm

It makes you wonder what the golf club manufacturers are selling us?

Are they really telling us the truth about distances and so forth?

I think a lot of time it is up to the individual to test new clubs out for themselves and get a better understanding of their own distances and ball flights.

Better to do this than listen to a slick salesman telling you that a new driver is going to instantly get you another 20 yards off the tee.

Cheers

Reply Report comment
CPP

Jan 30, 2013 at 11:41 am

cool story bro. 🙂

Reply Report comment
John

Jan 30, 2013 at 10:38 am

Jeff, another great article. Exposing marketing truths is always a risky proposition, and most amateurs don’t want to hear it. It’s a lot more fun to buy new clubs than to take a few lessons. My personal favourite is the strengthening of lofts, and lengthening of shafts. Today’s 4 iron is NOT a 4 iron.

Reply Report comment
Tim

Jan 30, 2013 at 7:55 am

great article exposing fallacy of distance gains, especially pointing out the course set up for Most PGA tour events, I am reminded of the pictures of the 2006 open at Hoylake where the fairways were almost burnt, and tiger was hitting his 2 iron over 260 off the tee. Move to Hawaii this year into the wind Dustin Johnson was barely hitting driver 200 yards.

Reply Report comment
Chris

Jan 30, 2013 at 3:47 am

Great article. Here in the UK I just read that Mr King CEO of Taylormade wants to chuck away all the USGA/R&A equipment rules to make the game more enjoyable ( Comments apparently originating at the 2013 show) He wantsthe manufacturers to call time on the USGA.

This of course has absolutley nothing to do with all the Marketing
B******t his company puts out about equipment performance gains that frankly never materialise unless of course you count hitting a 7 iron
further than your 6 iron ( Of course we are talking about the number on the club here not the actual loft or length of the club). Further a test in the UK showed that apart from cosmetics the Rocketbladze irons were no better than the Rocket balls irons To sum up this type of marketing you could miss out the rocket.

Once some one is customfitted ( the best equipment for their current swing and club head speed) the only wayI’ve seen to gain distance is by improving club path ball stricking and clubhead speed.

Reply Report comment
Jeff

Jan 29, 2013 at 11:31 pm

Great article, I don’t plan on upgrading my clubs until they either fail or the grooves wear out. Most golfers would improve more with lessons over new equipment.

Reply Report comment
- mark
  
  Jan 31, 2013 at 6:31 pm
  
  Damn you’ve let the secret out. Bad swing with good clubs equals bad shot!!
  
  Reply Report comment
Adrian Apodaca

Jan 29, 2013 at 8:51 pm

Jesus Christ! Mark McGwire and The Gilded Age.

Reply Report comment
- Jeff Singer
  
  Jan 29, 2013 at 9:38 pm
  
  I’ve been really trying to work the gilded age into my artices. Finally an opportunity presented itself…LOL
  
  Reply Report comment

Cancel reply

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

19th Hole

Vincenzi’s 2024 Zurich Classic of New Orleans betting preview

Published

2 days ago

Apr 22, 2024

Matt Vincenzi

The PGA TOUR heads to New Orleans to play the 2023 Zurich Classic of New Orleans. In a welcome change from the usual stroke play, the Zurich Classic is a team event. On Thursday and Saturday, the teams play best ball, and on Friday and Sunday the teams play alternate shot.

TPC Louisiana is a par 72 that measures 7,425 yards. The course features some short par 4s and plenty of water and bunkers, which makes for a lot of exciting risk/reward scenarios for competitors. Pete Dye designed the course in 2004 specifically for the Zurich Classic, although the event didn’t make its debut until 2007 because of Hurricane Katrina.

Coming off of the Masters and a signature event in consecutive weeks, the field this week is a step down, and understandably so. Many of the world’s top players will be using this time to rest after a busy stretch.

However, there are some interesting teams this season with some stars making surprise appearances in the team event. Some notable teams include Patrick Cantlay and Xander Schauffele, Rory McIlroy and Shane Lowry, Collin Morikawa and Kurt Kitayama, Will Zalatoris and Sahith Theegala as well as a few Canadian teams, Nick Taylor and Adam Hadwin and Taylor Pendrith and Corey Conners.

Past Winners at TPC Louisiana

2023: Riley/Hardy (-30)
2022: Cantlay/Schauffele (-29)
2021: Leishman/Smith (-20)
2019: Palmer/Rahm (-26)
2018: Horschel/Piercy (-22)
2017: Blixt/Smith (-27)

2024 Zurich Classic of New Orleans Picks

Tom Hoge/Maverick McNealy +2500 (DraftKings)

Tom Hoge is coming off of a solid T18 finish at the RBC Heritage and finished T13 at last year’s Zurich Classic alongside Harris English.

This season, Hoge is having one of his best years on Tour in terms of Strokes Gained: Approach. In his last 24 rounds, the only player to top him on the category is Scottie Scheffler. Hoge has been solid on Pete Dye designs, ranking 28th in the field over his past 36 rounds.

McNealy is also having a solid season. He’s finished T6 at the Waste Management Phoenix Open and T9 at the PLAYERS Championship. He recently started working with world renowned swing coach, Butch Harmon, and its seemingly paid dividends in 2024.

Keith Mitchell/Joel Dahmen +4000 (DraftKings)

Keith Mitchell is having a fantastic season, finishing in the top-20 of five of his past seven starts on Tour. Most recently, Mitchell finished T14 at the Valero Texas Open and gained a whopping 6.0 strokes off the tee. He finished 6th at last year’s Zurich Classic.

Joel Dahmen is having a resurgent year and has been dialed in with his irons. He also has a T11 finish at the PLAYERS Championship at TPC Sawgrass which is another Pete Dye track. With Mitchell’s length and Dahmen’s ability to put it close with his short irons, the Mitchell/Dahmen combination will be dangerous this week.

Taylor Moore/Matt NeSmith +6500 (DraftKings)

Taylor Moore has quickly developed into one of the more consistent players on Tour. He’s finished in the top-20 in three of his past four starts, including a very impressive showing at The Masters, finishing T20. He’s also finished T4 at this event in consecutive seasons alongside Matt NeSmith.

NeSmith isn’t having a great 2024, but has seemed to elevate his game in this format. He finished T26 at Pete Dye’s TPC Sawgrass, which gives the 30-year-old something to build off of. NeSmith is also a great putter on Bermudagrass, which could help elevate Moore’s ball striking prowess.

Your Reaction?

LIKE7
LEGIT3
WOW1
LOL1
IDHT0
FLOP3
OB1
SHANK1

19th Hole

Vincenzi’s 2024 LIV Adelaide betting preview: Cam Smith ready for big week down under

Published

2 days ago

Apr 22, 2024

Matt Vincenzi

After having four of the top twelve players on the leaderboard at The Masters, LIV Golf is set for their fifth event of the season: LIV Adelaide.

For both LIV fans and golf fans in Australia, LIV Adelaide is one of the most anticipated events of the year. With 35,000 people expected to attend each day of the tournament, the Grange Golf Club will be crawling with fans who are passionate about the sport of golf. The 12th hole, better known as “the watering hole”, is sure to have the rowdiest of the fans cheering after a long day of drinking some Leishman Lager.

The Grange Golf Club is a par-72 that measures 6,946 yards. The course features minimal resistance, as golfers went extremely low last season. In 2023, Talor Gooch shot consecutive rounds of 62 on Thursday and Friday, giving himself a gigantic cushion heading into championship Sunday. Things got tight for a while, but in the end, the Oklahoma State product was able to hold off The Crushers’ Anirban Lahiri for a three-shot victory.

The Four Aces won the team competition with the Range Goats finishing second.

*All Images Courtesy of LIV Golf*

Past Winners at LIV Adelaide

2023: Talor Gooch (-19)

Stat Leaders Through LIV Miami

Green in Regulation

Richard Bland
Jon Rahm
Paul Casey

Fairways Hit

Abraham Ancer
Graeme McDowell
Henrik Stenson

Driving Distance

Bryson DeChambeau
Joaquin Niemann
Dean Burmester

Putting

Cameron Smith
Louis Oosthuizen
Matt Jones

2024 LIV Adelaide Picks

Cameron Smith +1400 (DraftKings)

When I pulled up the odds for LIV Adelaide, I was more than a little surprised to see multiple golfers listed ahead of Cameron Smith on the betting board. A few starts ago, Cam finished runner-up at LIV Hong Kong, which is a golf course that absolutely suits his eye. Augusta National in another course that Smith could roll out of bed and finish in the top-ten at, and he did so two weeks ago at The Masters, finishing T6.

At Augusta, he gained strokes on the field on approach, off the tee (slightly), and of course, around the green and putting. Smith able to get in the mix at a major championship despite coming into the week feeling under the weather tells me that his game is once again rounding into form.

The Grange Golf Club is another course that undoubtedly suits the Australian. Smith is obviously incredibly comfortable playing in front of the Aussie faithful and has won three Australian PGA Championship’s. The course is very short and will allow Smith to play conservative off the tee, mitigating his most glaring weakness. With birdies available all over the golf course, there’s a chance the event turns into a putting contest, and there’s no one on the planet I’d rather have in one of those than Cam Smith.

Louis Oosthuizen +2200 (DraftKings)

Louis Oosthuizen has simply been one of the best players on LIV in the 2024 seas0n. The South African has finished in the top-10 on the LIV leaderboard in three of his five starts, with his best coming in Jeddah, where he finished T2. Perhaps more impressively, Oosthuizen finished T7 at LIV Miami, which took place at Doral’s “Blue Monster”, an absolutely massive golf course. Given that Louis is on the shorter side in terms of distance off the tee, his ability to play well in Miami shows how dialed he is with the irons this season.

In addition to the LIV finishes, Oosthuizen won back-to-back starts on the DP World Tour in December at the Alfred Dunhill Championship and the Mauritus Open. He also finished runner-up at the end of February in the International Series Oman. The 41-year-old has been one of the most consistent performers of 2024, regardless of tour.

For the season, Louis ranks 4th on LIV in birdies made, T9 in fairways hit and first in putting. He ranks 32nd in driving distance, but that won’t be an issue at this short course. Last season, he finished T11 at the event, but was in decent position going into the final round but fell back after shooting 70 while the rest of the field went low. This season, Oosthuizen comes into the event in peak form, and the course should be a perfect fit for his smooth swing and hot putter this week.

Your Reaction?

LIKE12
LEGIT3
WOW1
LOL1
IDHT0
FLOP1
OB1
SHANK1

Opinion & Analysis

The Wedge Guy: What really makes a wedge work? Part 1

Published

6 days ago

Apr 18, 2024

Terry Koehler

Of all the clubs in our bags, wedges are almost always the simplest in construction and, therefore, the easiest to analyze what might make one work differently from another if you know what to look for.

Wedges are a lot less mysterious than drivers, of course, as the major brands are working with a lot of “pixie dust” inside these modern marvels. That’s carrying over more to irons now, with so many new models featuring internal multi-material technologies, and almost all of them having a “badge” or insert in the back to allow more complex graphics while hiding the actual distribution of mass.

But when it comes to wedges, most on the market today are still single pieces of molded steel, either cast or forged into that shape. So, if you look closely at where the mass is distributed, it’s pretty clear how that wedge is going to perform.

To start, because of their wider soles, the majority of the mass of almost any wedge is along the bottom third of the clubhead. So, the best wedge shots are always those hit between the 2nd and 5th grooves so that more mass is directly behind that impact. Elite tour professionals practice incessantly to learn to do that consistently, wearing out a spot about the size of a penny right there. If impact moves higher than that, the face is dramatically thinner, so smash factor is compromised significantly, which reduces the overall distance the ball will fly.

Every one of us, tour players included, knows that maddening shot that we feel a bit high on the face and it doesn’t go anywhere, it’s not your fault.

If your wedges show a wear pattern the size of a silver dollar, and centered above the 3rd or 4th groove, you are not getting anywhere near the same performance from shot to shot. Robot testing proves impact even two to three grooves higher in the face can cause distance loss of up to 35 to 55 feet with modern ‘tour design’ wedges.

In addition, as impact moves above the center of mass, the golf club principle of gear effect causes the ball to fly higher with less spin. Think of modern drivers for a minute. The “holy grail” of driving is high launch and low spin, and the driver engineers are pulling out all stops to get the mass as low in the clubhead as possible to optimize this combination.

Where is all the mass in your wedges? Low. So, disregarding the higher lofts, wedges “want” to launch the ball high with low spin – exactly the opposite of what good wedge play requires penetrating ball flight with high spin.

While almost all major brand wedges have begun putting a tiny bit more thickness in the top portion of the clubhead, conventional and modern ‘tour design’ wedges perform pretty much like they always have. Elite players learn to hit those crisp, spinny penetrating wedge shots by spending lots of practice time learning to consistently make contact low in the face.

So, what about grooves and face texture?

Grooves on any club can only do so much, and no one has any material advantage here. The USGA tightly defines what we manufacturers can do with grooves and face texture, and modern manufacturing techniques allow all of us to push those limits ever closer. And we all do. End of story.

Then there’s the topic of bounce and grinds, the most complex and confusing part of the wedge formula. Many top brands offer a complex array of sole configurations, all of them admittedly specialized to a particular kind of lie or turf conditions, and/or a particular divot pattern.

But if you don’t play the same turf all the time, and make the same size divot on every swing, how would you ever figure this out?

The only way is to take any wedge you are considering and play it a few rounds, hitting all the shots you face and observing the results. There’s simply no other way.

So, hopefully this will inspire a lively conversation in our comments section, and I’ll chime in to answer any questions you might have.

And next week, I’ll dive into the rest of the wedge formula. Yes, shafts, grips and specifications are essential, too.

Your Reaction?