[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,
Given what you say here (which I find to be true for myself as well), do you agree that there is a possibility that the Tour guys are doing what we are, and accuracy is their goal, with distance as a side benefit, albeit a highly desirable one?

My initial take is that it's the opposite.
Distance is the goal with accuracy the side benefit.[/color]

Would you then rather see the USGA change the ball or the driver as a remedy to too much distance?  

I've always been an advocate of changing both.

The size of a driver head allows you to swing as hard as you want with little fear of off line or short distance hits.

A while back I suggested letting the best players in the world swing away at a 43 inch, shallow faced, Power Bilt driver.

Today, mis-hits go almost as far as pure hits.
Swinging hard and mis-hitting the shallow faced Power Bilt driver would result in the ball being out of bounds, popped up, topped, hooked or sliced.

So, my druther is, a five or ten year, gradual reduction in the size of the club head along with a gradual reduction in the distance the ball goes, together with higher spin rates.

I'd prefer not to see mis-hits go as straight and nearly as far as was intended with a good drive.[/color]

Could there be an answer in finding a way to make the driver less accurate instead of the ball shorter?

Yes, limit shaft lengths to 43.5 to 44 inches, reduce the size of the clubface and increase spin rates on the ball.[/color]

I'm not trying to hook you into another ball/distance discussion here, I promise!  All of this has just occurred to me, and I am very, very curious about this avenue of approaching distance.

Spin rates are a critical factor in ball performance.
ClubHead size and shaft length are also factors.
Perhaps another factor is weight, clubhead and overall.

I think you have to examine the components, Implements & The Ball.

I seem to remember that the USGA proposed a limit on clubhead size, only to increase it prior to final guidelines.
I'd like to see clubhead sizes reduced over a 5-10 year period.[/color]

[Rick Shefchik]

Rich mentioned hitting his driver off the deck as a partial replacement for his 3-wood, but I've had a different experience.

I agree with A.G. and others that I hit my latest driver straighter than I do my 3-wood (even though I don't want to believe it -- it violates my sense of cosmic order.) But the trade-off is that I can't hit it off the deck worth a damn anymore. That used to be a go-to shot of mine, even when I was playing with a 7-degree Biggest Big Bertha. There's something about the way the face of my current Great Big Bertha is constructed that now prevents me from executing an acceptable fairway driver.

Anybody else notice this? Could the same face angle that makes my driver more accurate off the tee make it less effective off the grass?

[A.G._Crockett]

Rick,
It isn't the face angle, it's the depth.  The sweetspot is so much higher than on the original Big Berthas that the ball just doesn't get airborne enough to hit it either far or reliably straight.  Nobody used the extra long tees, even with the Great Big and Biggest; now they are almost a must to tee the ball high enough to take advantage of the actual sweetspot.  If I could hit my driver off the deck the way I could with the Big Berthas, I wouldn't bother with a 3-wood at all.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Rick & AG,

Big Bertha's, Great Big Bertha's and the Greatest Big Bertha were terrific for hitting it off the deck.

They felt like extra long irons, it was almost like having an additional club in your bag.

I do miss them from time to time, especially when I need to hit a low, long shot off the fairway to a long par 4 or par 5.

[Dan Kelly]

Big Bertha's, Great Big Bertha's and the Greatest Big Bertha were terrific for hitting it off the deck.

They felt like extra long irons, it was almost like having an additional club in your bag.

I do miss them from time to time, especially when I need to hit a low, long shot off the fairway to a long par 4 or par 5.

Are they still out in the garage somewhere, or down in the basement?

Why not put one back in your bag?

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dan Kelly,

Like my old woodies, they're all still in the garage.
Occassionally, I'll take them out for a round.

My problem wasn't trying to find a driver I liked, it was trying to find a 3-wood I really liked.

I could make my old Toney Penna 3-wood perform at will, I've yet to find a metal 3-wood that combines distance with movement.

[Dan Kelly]

Patrick --

My point was:

If you could hit shots with your old driver that you can't hit with any club currently in your bag, why not retrieve that old driver and return it to your bag -- right alongside your current driver.

No rule against carrying two drivers, is there?

[ForkaB]

Patrick --

No rule against carrying two drivers, is there?

Yes there is Dan.  It's in the GCGC bylaws.

[Dan Kelly]

Patrick --

No rule against carrying two drivers, is there?

Yes there is Dan.  It's in the GCGC bylaws.

I thought you could have any combination of drivers and shirts totalling two (2) or less.

[ForkaB]

Patrick --

No rule against carrying two drivers, is there?

Yes there is Dan.  It's in the GCGC bylaws.

I thought you could have any combination of drivers and shirts totalling two (2) or less.

You are right, Dna

My bad....

[Patrick_Mucci]

Dan Kelly,

I only said that I could hit that old driver off the deck pretty well and that it was useful when trying to keep the ball low or when trying to reach a long par 4 or a par 5.

When it comes to removing a club in its place, my 3-wood offers more than the trade off I'd get, especially with the ability to get the ball up in the air, and around the greens.

However, I have seriously considered using two putters.
One for long and intermediate putts and from off the green and another for short putts.

I'm still thinking about it.

[Doug Siebert]

When I'm swinging well, my 1 iron is my go to club off the tee when I need accuracy.  When I'm not swinging well, I hit a driver because a mishit 400cc driver gets much better results than a mishit 1 iron!  I might give up 50 yards hitting the 1 iron instead of the driver when I'm hitting it well, but that gap can become nearly 100 yards on a bad mishit.  Even if the mishit stays in the fairway that's a hell of a lot of real estate to give away.  Only time that makes sense is if there is a 2 stroke penalty awaiting a wild drive.

I guess I have something in common with Tiger.  I haven't found a 3W I liked since I switched from steel to graphite in my driver in the early 90s.  The steel shafted 3W suddenly felt like it was shafted with lead in comparison with the driver, and really it was never more than 10-15 yards longer than my 1 iron anyway so when I started hitting it worse I chucked it in the closet.  I've experiemented with a few graphite shafted 3Ws over the years, never found one I liked.

[Ted Kramer]

Which leads me to three questions:

1.   Have any of you experienced the same thing, or am I the Lone Ranger on this?

2.   Would the same concept hold true on the Tour?  Would a Tour player select his/her 460 cc driver more often, regardless of GCA features, not so much to gain extra distance over the 3-wood, but because they are at least as accurate now as a 3-wood, with extra distance becoming a desirable by-product?

3.   Do we err in looking at club selection by the pros, assuming that they hit driver because they don’t care at all about accuracy, when in fact the opposite is true, and they realize better than most of us just how accurate modern drivers really are?  (Remember, we only know the % of fairways they DO hit, and NOT what the % would be if they had hit another club!)

It certainly seems you are not alone in this observation A.G., good thread.

I'll try to answer your question 2 and 3 to my best.

2) I would say no, they are not as accurate with their drivers as their three woods. My reasoning is (other than observation) that they practice with their three woods a hell of alot more than we do so they don't have the lack of comfort issue when they "should" hit it. I also say no because the chief proponent of "flogging" said ...the rough at 125 is better than the fairway at 160 every time... or some such thing. To me that makes it a maintenance issue. Let the greens get a little brown and they will change their tune.

3) I think it's that they are pretty sure they can keep their drivers between the tree lines so that they will have the opportunity to reach the green with their next and that's all they need for the reasons stated in #2.

JES II's paragraphs 2) and 3) are the best, clearest, most concise comments that I have read regarding this subject. I agree 100% that it is simply, and I do mean SIMPLY, a maintenance issue on tour.

-Ted

[JESII]

Could it also have something to do with the fact that three-woods are now about the same length (about 43") as drivers were 15 years ago?

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()