View Poll Results: Should golf have a one driver rule?
- Voters
- 42. You may not vote on this poll
-
Yes
6 14.29% -
No
36 85.71%
+ Reply to Thread
Results 61 to 90 of 90
Thread: Two Drivers One Too Many?
-
04-03-2006 07:14 PM #61
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Posts
- 4,163
Originally Posted by LobWedge
If a club conforms to the rules, then let the golfer use 14 of them. How much influence do the adjustably weighted clubs really have on the flight of the ball, anyway? Mouse farts? So who cares? A slicer will still slice with a draw biased club.
My view is biased(pun intended) as I have played two drivers, one to hit low shots(6*) and one to hit higher shots (8)
-
04-03-2006 07:25 PM #62
8°'s for higher shots! That's priceless! A 6° driver would def be good for lower shots, if I ever want to take out some ground hogs I know who to borrow the the driver from!
-
04-03-2006 08:13 PM #63
ARRRRRRRAH, give me 14 clubs and I'll show you wonders the likes you never seen, ARRRRRRRRAH, I don't know what I'm doing, ARRRRRRAH.
-
04-03-2006 08:30 PM #64
Does it really matter that much its just his own decision on playing it
-
04-03-2006 09:34 PM #65
- Join Date
- Mar 2005
- Location
- XXXXXXXXXXXX
- Posts
- 4,215
Phil now has 954,000 reasons for bagging two drivers
If technology is making the game sooooooooooooooooooo simple, no skill required then why is it that the average North American male handicap index hovers around 19?
I mean come on folks, the game is easy with that new fade bias driver, or that draw bias driver, or those honking cavity back irons with sweet spots the size of a loonie. How about that two ball putter? I mean you just line that sucker up behind the ball and every putt you hit is going dead centre. How easy is that?
I say we toss away those NXT Tours and PRO V's. You should not be able to spin the ball that much. OR carry it that far in the air. They make the game much too easy. Those 460CC drivers with the nano tech shafts? BAN THEM NOW, before we all become so good at the game of golf that there will be 20,000,000 PGA Tour Card Holders lining up for every tournament held in North America
I don't know about you guys, but driving a 325 yard Par 4 and making eagle from 3'7" still seems like there was some skill involved. Or sticking iron shots from 185 yards, again that requires skill. Or making a 25 foot birdie putt with a 4 foot left hand break, again SKILL REQUIRED.
The game might seem easy when you watch those guys on TV. Afterall those PGA Tour ads do say "THESE GUYS ARE GOOD"
Get over it boys, the rules say you can carry 14 clubs. That is exactly what Phil did. Now if Tiger, or Ernie, or anyone else who happens to be your favourite tour player did the same thing and creamed the field, would you be HACKED? Somehow I doubt it.
As far as Callaway getting lots of free advertising this past weekend, good for them. I looked at new drivers today and did not even pick up a Callaway. So that free advertising from the announcers did not influence me at all.My opinions are my own, I do not follow others.
-
04-03-2006 10:30 PM #66Originally Posted by BC MIST
Once again (for the millionth time), I have no issue with the legality of the clubs as they are built. They obviously conformed to the rules in that respect or he wouldn't have used them. If you say that adjustably weighted clubs don't have that much effect on the flight of the ball, then again I ask, why did Mickelson feel the need to use two drivers? His season accuracy average was 57% heading in to the Bell South. His accuracy for the week of the tournament was 71%. This is a professional golfer who hits hundreds, if not thousands of balls on the range every week, yet he still only hits the fairway less than 6 out of 10 times. Suddenly he decides to put two drivers in the bag, and his percentage jumps by 14 points! That sounds like equipment compensating for a flawed swing to me. I would think that as a proponent of the "single plane" swing that you would be all over this like flies on you know what.When applying the Rules, you follow them line by line. You don't read between them.
-
04-03-2006 11:05 PM #67Originally Posted by LobWedge
-
04-04-2006 01:35 AM #68Originally Posted by LobWedge
The guy was totally ON his game. Whatever equipment Mickelson had in his bag last week was TOTALLY MEANINGLESS to the final result - nobody was going to beat him. He could have had Callaway's original S2H2 driver from 10 years ago and his fairway % would have skyrocketed!
You have taken one innocuous little fact - that Phil happened to have two drivers in his bag last week - in order to "prove" your pre-conceived notion that technology is making tournament winners out of unskilled hacks with "flawed" swings.
In doing so, you have totally discounted ALL the other rather-overwhelming evidence that Phil Mickelson was by far the most skilled golfer in the field last week in virtually every aspect of the game, and he deserves ALL of the credit for his performance.[COLOR=green][B]Golf is a game invented by the same people who think music comes out of bagpipes.[/B][/COLOR]
-
04-04-2006 08:30 AM #69Originally Posted by el tigre
I have discounted nothing. I have said nothing regarding his performance fairway to green, you have. This is their job. They practice all the time. Why shouldn't they be able to hit the fairway the vast majority of the time with only one driving club? He must have had either some reservations about his driver swing, or in the technology itself to have employed two drivers.
If he was playing a dog leg right, why didn't he hit the "fade driver", or vice versa? Because he was taking advantage of the ball flight afforded him by the equipment to help him execute those draw or fade shots. That is what I've been talking about.
If it makes you feel better about youself to disregard that and attack me as some kind of "Mickelson hater", which you'd see is far from the truth if you had bothered to search my older posts on him, then go nuts. I'm not going to waste my time responding to your flaming anymore.When applying the Rules, you follow them line by line. You don't read between them.
-
04-04-2006 10:34 AM #70Originally Posted by LobWedge
And once again, there is no such thing as a "driving club". You have 14 sticks and you can use any one of them as a "driving club" if you wish. It is totally YOUR choice.
You keep trying to bring the discussion back to "technology" when that is not the real issue here. The question of whether technology is making the game too easy is not what your proposal addresses. What you are really trying to do is "mandate" which clubs players are allowed to put in their bag. Sorry, but I don't think anybody else should be making those decisions for me.[COLOR=green][B]Golf is a game invented by the same people who think music comes out of bagpipes.[/B][/COLOR]
-
04-04-2006 10:43 AM #71quoth LobWedge...
How many fairways would he have hit with just one driver?
Let's say, for sake of arguement, that Phil hit each one half the time. It's probably more likely that he hit his favourite shape more often. Either way, pick one.
Say his normal shot is the draw (probably). Say he hits it half the time because half the fairways set up for a draw, and he has a driver set up for him to hit his draw the way he wants to. (He probably hit more of his favourite shot). According to his ytd and tourney stats, he hit it 14 points better at Bellsouth. So even without counting the second driver, he was better by (14 fairways * 4 rounds *.14 = 7.8) 7 fairways. How does the second driver produce that?
How do you explain that? If you figure it's purely the equipment, then his normal accuracy should determine how many fairways he hits with both drivers.
I think it's all mental. I think he has convinced himself that he has an advantage that doesn't exist. I think that as long as he believes that it's the equipment, he's taking the pressure off himself to perform, and he is able to let it come out. It's not the equipment. It's all in Phil's head. And I think that the second driver will fall out of Phil's bag as soon as his head clears.[color=blue]s[/color][color=red]p[/color][color=blue]i[/color][color=red]d[/color][color=blue]e[/color][color=red]y[/color]
[color=seagreen]"Got more dirt than ball. Here we go again."
Alan Shepard, Apollo 14 Commander, Amateur-Golfer, preparing to take another swing during his famous moon walk in 1971.
[/color]
-
04-04-2006 11:21 AM #72Originally Posted by el tigre
"I'm not attempting to discount the value of Phil Mickelson's performance this week. He's had one of the finest performances that I have ever seen. My question is, with the amount of coaching and training resources available, and with the technology and laser precise equipment fitting available to tour players today, does playing with two drivers that produce two very distinct ball flights create an unfair advantage?
With nano technology shafts, maximum CT/MOI heads, and softer, lower spin balls, should the PGA Tour, or even the global ruling bodies, institute a one driver rule for competition?
I'm on the fence with this one, mainly because I still believe in the "archer" not the "arrow" scenario. But year after year the "arrow" gains ground."When applying the Rules, you follow them line by line. You don't read between them.
-
04-04-2006 11:30 AM #73
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Posts
- 4,163
Originally Posted by LobWedge
One of the most significant parameters in club making is SET MAKEUP. The golfer simply decides what 14 clubs will be advantageous for his particular game. Phil chose 2 drivers, I play 2 "A" wedges, you may choose a long putter for short putts and a short putter for long putts. Based on your driver principle, would you ban the use of 2 putters as well, because it might help the golfer? If a golfer slices the ball he may chose to play offset clubs or a whippier shaft or a more closed face on 1 or more clubs to help compensate for the slice. Lightweight graphite shafts have helped to increase distance and control. Do we go back to 140 g steel shafts?
These technological innovations have have helped, IMO, a lot less than people think. Again, more mouse farts. If you want to find out how much, just gearing back the golf ball to an initial velocity of 220 ft/sec, will put things in perspective, or changing the rules on dimple design. The ball is what has made the game a lot easier for some and that is where change may be needed, not the equipment. The other huge factor in improved PGA Tour scoring is the 12 on the stimp, pimple free greens on which they putt. Heck, after playing poa annua greens for 40 years, even I became a better putter when I moved to a bent grass course, with faster smoother greens.
It's the damn ball. Leave club selection alone.
-
04-04-2006 12:34 PM #74Originally Posted by LobWedge
Why should the USGA decide what combination of legal clubs go into my golf bag? Why should they mandate that long irons are better than fairway woods (or vice versa) or that 3 wedges are better than 4? Who gets to decide that there is more skill involved in hitting an iron vs a fairway wood vs a driver? Some people can hit amazing shots with a driver but can't hit a long iron to save their life - others rarely pull a driver out of their bag but can throw darts with a 3-iron. Why should the rules dictate that one player should be favoured over the other?
The "technology" question should be confined to what constitutes a legal golf club. How you use them, and which ones you choose to employ, should be totally at the discretion of the player.
One of the great things about this game is the creativity that the players can bring to it. It doesn't matter which clubs you use to get the ball into the hole - as long as you do so in the least amount of strokes. If you start mandating the makeup of the golf bag, you stifle some of that creativity.[COLOR=green][B]Golf is a game invented by the same people who think music comes out of bagpipes.[/B][/COLOR]
-
04-04-2006 12:42 PM #75Originally Posted by BC MIST
My main concern with driving clubs to begin with is that thet are designed for a single purpose and should be treated differently, as putters are. The golfer already has the advantage of starting from the tee with the ball off the ground. That should be the only advantage. They should not be given the additional advantage of being able to choose which one gives you a fade or draw ballflight during the same round. Again, IMO, it's just a way to get around rule 4-2a. If you sole a driver behind a ball that is on the ground, the CG of the club will be above the equator of the ball. By virtue of their low CGs and lofts, even though they can be hit from a tee, all the other clubs in the bag are designed to hit the ball from ground based lies.When applying the Rules, you follow them line by line. You don't read between them.
-
04-04-2006 12:53 PM #76Originally Posted by LobWedge
Again, 4-2a deals with changing the characteristics of a club during a round. Not pulling out a completely different club to accomplish what you want.It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others.
Colby
-
04-04-2006 04:42 PM #77
-
04-04-2006 04:52 PM #78Lob sez....
AAAAARRRRRRGGGGH! This is what I've been talking about! "By replacing his sand wedge with a 2nd FT3 driver, Phil could shape his shots more easily."
...then later they can tell you you need that sand wedge back, so you should replace the second driver with their new sand wedge....[color=blue]s[/color][color=red]p[/color][color=blue]i[/color][color=red]d[/color][color=blue]e[/color][color=red]y[/color]
[color=seagreen]"Got more dirt than ball. Here we go again."
Alan Shepard, Apollo 14 Commander, Amateur-Golfer, preparing to take another swing during his famous moon walk in 1971.
[/color]
-
04-04-2006 05:34 PM #79
Lobwedge,
There's nothing wrong with doing this as it is allowed within the rules! It's not like Tiger getting the gallery to move a huge rock! He's using 14 legal clubs. Just because one shapes a shot left to right rather than having a steeper ball flight, like a more lofted wedge to get a higher flop shot with the same swing.
It's allowed! Can we move on? (this is post #79 and the last one I am writing on the subject, which may make some people happy...)It could be that the purpose of your life is only to serve as a warning to others.
Colby
-
04-04-2006 06:17 PM #80
Don't you think they had the exact same story the first time someone won using a two piece ball vs a wound, or a metal wood, or a graphite shafted club, etc. Equipment has always been a factor in golf, and I am still flabergasted...yes, flabergasted....by your insistance that this particular use of technology - and only this use of technology - is the bane of golf.
-
04-04-2006 10:04 PM #81Originally Posted by ColbyWhen applying the Rules, you follow them line by line. You don't read between them.
-
04-04-2006 10:08 PM #82Originally Posted by jonf
It's interesting that you mentioned the ball though. You should read Frank Hannigan's column at golfobserver.com on the subject. The USGA is planning a 25% rollback on ball distance within the next couple of years.When applying the Rules, you follow them line by line. You don't read between them.
-
04-05-2006 07:43 AM #83
side note:
In that picture, Phil is holding the UGLIEST trophy I have ever seen.[SIZE=1]NCGT Ryder Cup Team [COLOR=black]Green [/COLOR](06,07,08)[/SIZE]
[SIZE=1]OG / TGN Ryder Cup Team [COLOR=black]Ottawa [/COLOR](07) [/SIZE]
-
04-05-2006 09:43 PM #84bbadGuest
Okay...I have one stupid thing to add to this.
Question: If I hit a draw with my driver with no gloves on and a fade with gloves on, am I doing the same thing that Phil did by chosing two drivers with different weight settings?
Just a thought, though I would dare to hazzard that this is the real issue that Lob has? Can you "influence" the flight of your ball without making modifications to your swing. Clearly I am allowed to wear 5 sets of gloves (if I wanted to). The choice is mine and mine alone. If somebody else sees that it works for me, they can do it them selves and them level the playing field again, but that is THEIR choice...nobody elses.
Just my two cents
-
04-06-2006 08:32 AM #85
- Join Date
- Feb 2004
- Posts
- 4,163
Originally Posted by bbad
Was adjusting the lofts of some clubs yesterday and a thought occurred to me. I am going to put two long irons in my bag. The 3 iron I am going to bend 4* upright so with a normal swing the ball will hook, and to the 2 iron I am going to bend 4* flat so that with a normal swing the ball will fade.
Will someone suggest that the USGA/R&A ban lie adjustments, too?
It's still the damn ball!!
-
04-06-2006 09:02 AM #86"Richard"Guest
Someone mentioned tiger asking the fans to move big rock, I saw this on TV but never understood what was going on as I wasn't a golfer back then, now its kinda fuzzy. What happened and why was it such a big deal?
-
04-06-2006 09:21 AM #87Someone mentioned tiger asking the fans to move big rock, I saw this on TV but never understood what was going on as I wasn't a golfer back then, now its kinda fuzzy. What happened and why was it such a big deal?
I believe the rule has since been ammended, but I'm sure someone can confirm or deny that for us.[SIZE=1]NCGT Ryder Cup Team [COLOR=black]Green [/COLOR](06,07,08)[/SIZE]
[SIZE=1]OG / TGN Ryder Cup Team [COLOR=black]Ottawa [/COLOR](07) [/SIZE]
-
04-06-2006 09:24 AM #88
- Join Date
- Mar 2005
- Location
- XXXXXXXXXXXX
- Posts
- 4,215
Originally Posted by NWILLIAMSMy opinions are my own, I do not follow others.
-
04-06-2006 09:39 AM #89
- Join Date
- Mar 2005
- Location
- XXXXXXXXXXXX
- Posts
- 4,215
Originally Posted by BC MIST
I read, or was told that some pros bend their long irons up so they can draw the ball. Short irons are left standard so they can fade. Now of course that all depends on the lie they actually need. But the principle makes sense.My opinions are my own, I do not follow others.
-
04-06-2006 09:44 AM #90Originally Posted by NWILLIAMS
23-1/2 Large Stone Removable Only with Much Effort
Q. A player’s ball lies in the rough directly behind a loose stone the size of a watermelon. The stone can be removed only with much effort. Is it a loose impediment which may be removed?
A. Yes. Stones of any size (not solidly embedded) are loose impediments and may be removed, provided removal does not unduly delay play (Rule 6-7).
23-1/3 Assistance in Removing Large Loose Impediment
Q. May spectators, caddies, fellow-competitors, etc., assist a player in removing a large loose impediment?
A. Yes.
The question seems to revolve around whether or not the stone is "solidly embedded":
23/2 Meaning of “Solidly Embedded” in Definition of “Loose Impediments”
Q. The Definition of “Loose Impediments” states that a stone is a loose impediment if it is not “solidly embedded.” When is a stone solidly embedded?
A. If a stone is partially embedded and may be picked up with ease, it is a loose impediment. When there is doubt as to whether a stone is solidly embedded or not, it should not be removed.
[COLOR=green][B]Golf is a game invented by the same people who think music comes out of bagpipes.[/B][/COLOR]
Thread Information
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Similar Threads
-
drivers
By cleve in forum Right Hand DriversReplies: 0Last Post: 03-29-2011, 11:05 PM -
FS 3 Drivers
By MattCrabbe in forum Right Hand WoodsReplies: 0Last Post: 06-22-2009, 10:55 PM -
WTB or WTT drivers
By Powerdraw in forum Right Hand DriversReplies: 2Last Post: 04-28-2007, 08:54 AM -
drivers F/S
By lemrem in forum Right Hand DriversReplies: 2Last Post: 03-06-2007, 08:17 PM -
Drivers!
By Marcos in forum Right Hand SetsReplies: 8Last Post: 05-02-2006, 03:38 PM