Golf and the Great Equipment Debate
Created | Updated Dec 14, 2005
Golf is a great and frustrating game that was - we accept - invested by the Scotts many centuries ago. Whilst I have heard it postulated that the very earliest vestiges of the game we know to be as golf originated in France and perhaps China, you probably wouldn't want to say this within earshot of a Scotsman lest you be hung up by the niblicks and experience 10 strokes of the mashie.
The game has come a long way from the days of the niblicks and mashies as well as the featheries and gutties and hopefully even the plus fours. Golf has definitely not been immune to the effects of technology in sport, and it could be argued strenously that technology has benefitted the enjoyment of the sport and maybe even benefitted the sport itself.
Cavity Back irons, oversize woods, distance balls, 3 piece tees and all have made the game more accessible for weekend hackers as well as adding healthy sums to the coffers of Callaway, Acushnet, Adidas, Mizuno and Nike but to name a few.
The development of this technology however has brought us to a point where many pundits are questioning the benefits. Ever since Tiger Woods dominated the Masters in 1997 there has been almost a paranoia that the modern breed of players and equipment are bringing the great old courses to their knees.
The committe at Augusta National have been altering Augusta each year sincee 1997 in order to 'Tiger Proof' the course. In the old days of playing golf in the the 'Colonies' this meant putting up a fence and giving guns to the ground staff. Now however this means moving back the tee boxes, narrowing fairways, planting trees and adding fairway bunkers between 300 and 350 yards from the tee.
While this has been working to a certain extent is has primarily penalised the shorter, straighter hitters who have relied on their shotmaking abilities for their success. Whether it works for the long hitters though is questionable, as we saw Tiger reach the green in 2 shots at Doral this year on a 650 yard par five - the Blue Monster. This weekend just gone in the 87th US PGA Chanpionships, Davis Love III drove the ball 355 yards into the wind.
This issues is being takes seriously such that the ruling bodies of the sport have regulated the spring characters of drivers. This is rated as a measurement of 'COR' or Co-efficient of Restitution. This relates to the amount of time the driver face can stay on the ball, as the longer it stayes on the ball the more energy is transferred. Similar to a trampoline surface; if the surface of a trampoline stayed in contact with your feet for only a tenth of the time that it normally did, you wouldn't go as high.
This COR Measurement has been limited and so some drivers that have been on the market are now illegal for competition use. From time to time professional players may now report another player of there is any suspicion that their driver may exceed COR limits.
With the advent of long flying balls such as the Titleist Pro V1 and Pro V1x, a new argument has arisen - "Should there be a standard ball specification?"
Obviously with the amount of money that is being poured into endorsements, advertising, development and everything else it would be hard to see someone like Titelist saying something like 'well we've spend a lot of money developing the greates golf ball technology of all time and we'll happily throw it all away and go with someone else's specs for a one design ball. Simply not going to happen, and you could argue - why should it.
It is very exiting as a spectator to watch Erinie Els, Tiger Woods, Phil Mickelsen, Vijay Singh et al bombing 330 yard plus drives and stopping their approaches dead on the greens. Would I find it exiting if I was a pure hitting tour veteran who hits the ball dead straight but only 250 yards off the tee and simply could not compete? Maybe not.
No matter what the outcome, it's going to be a quite a spitited debate.
Whatever would Old Tom think.
The game has come a long way from the days of the niblicks and mashies as well as the featheries and gutties and hopefully even the plus fours. Golf has definitely not been immune to the effects of technology in sport, and it could be argued strenously that technology has benefitted the enjoyment of the sport and maybe even benefitted the sport itself.
Cavity Back irons, oversize woods, distance balls, 3 piece tees and all have made the game more accessible for weekend hackers as well as adding healthy sums to the coffers of Callaway, Acushnet, Adidas, Mizuno and Nike but to name a few.
The development of this technology however has brought us to a point where many pundits are questioning the benefits. Ever since Tiger Woods dominated the Masters in 1997 there has been almost a paranoia that the modern breed of players and equipment are bringing the great old courses to their knees.
The committe at Augusta National have been altering Augusta each year sincee 1997 in order to 'Tiger Proof' the course. In the old days of playing golf in the the 'Colonies' this meant putting up a fence and giving guns to the ground staff. Now however this means moving back the tee boxes, narrowing fairways, planting trees and adding fairway bunkers between 300 and 350 yards from the tee.
While this has been working to a certain extent is has primarily penalised the shorter, straighter hitters who have relied on their shotmaking abilities for their success. Whether it works for the long hitters though is questionable, as we saw Tiger reach the green in 2 shots at Doral this year on a 650 yard par five - the Blue Monster. This weekend just gone in the 87th US PGA Chanpionships, Davis Love III drove the ball 355 yards into the wind.
This issues is being takes seriously such that the ruling bodies of the sport have regulated the spring characters of drivers. This is rated as a measurement of 'COR' or Co-efficient of Restitution. This relates to the amount of time the driver face can stay on the ball, as the longer it stayes on the ball the more energy is transferred. Similar to a trampoline surface; if the surface of a trampoline stayed in contact with your feet for only a tenth of the time that it normally did, you wouldn't go as high.
This COR Measurement has been limited and so some drivers that have been on the market are now illegal for competition use. From time to time professional players may now report another player of there is any suspicion that their driver may exceed COR limits.
With the advent of long flying balls such as the Titleist Pro V1 and Pro V1x, a new argument has arisen - "Should there be a standard ball specification?"
Obviously with the amount of money that is being poured into endorsements, advertising, development and everything else it would be hard to see someone like Titelist saying something like 'well we've spend a lot of money developing the greates golf ball technology of all time and we'll happily throw it all away and go with someone else's specs for a one design ball. Simply not going to happen, and you could argue - why should it.
It is very exiting as a spectator to watch Erinie Els, Tiger Woods, Phil Mickelsen, Vijay Singh et al bombing 330 yard plus drives and stopping their approaches dead on the greens. Would I find it exiting if I was a pure hitting tour veteran who hits the ball dead straight but only 250 yards off the tee and simply could not compete? Maybe not.
No matter what the outcome, it's going to be a quite a spitited debate.
Whatever would Old Tom think.
