[jwplayer 5Vf9mTup-9JtFt04J]
PEBBLE BEACH, Calif. – As a rule, PGA Tour pros can’t agree on what day of the week it is. On Tuesday, they proved the point yet again when discussing the importance of distance in the game and what the USGA/R&A Distance Insights Project report means to the game’s future.
“I think it would be ignorant not to look at people that play well and say distance isn’t a big issue or a big component of all the good players’ games,” Patrick Cantlay said. “To ignore that or to say it’s not that big of a deal, I think would be a mistake because guys are hitting it farther and the golf courses are suited for that.”
Ever since Padraig Harrington turned pro in 1995, he has witnessed first-hand how the balance of golf’s blend of distance and direction, short and long game, finesse and strength has shifted to become more of a power game.
“When I started out, 280 was a big number, then 290. Today, 300 is just average, 320, you’re a big boy now,” Harrington said. “The best players were always comfortable with their driving. What you see now is a greater depth of players that are long. Davis Love stood out in his day. If he didn’t play well that week, he didn’t win and everyone assumed that you didn’t have to be long to win. Now you have 20 to 30 more Davis Loves. So, you have increased the number of long hitters who could win. Length always gave you an advantage. It’s the same advantage, if not less, because there’s more of them. It’s more of a disadvantage to be a short hitter because of the fact that the courses have to be set up to deal with the long hitters.”
As an example of how length has changed the game, Harrington noted, “You’re never hitting a 4-iron into a par 4 anymore. When I was starting out, you used to hit woods.”
Harrington supports a rollback
Harrington is an ambassador of the R&A and says he shared his views with its executive director Martin Slumbers.
“I’ve told him I 100-percent support a rollback for the golf courses. It’s purely because of the cost to the golf course – the size, the maintenance, the water, all the costs. There are great golf courses that can’t be used. Roll it back and start again,” he said. “My personal opinion is I would set new specifications and the let the manufacturers have another race to the top. If the ball was rolled back 10 percent, we’d all start again and off we’d go.
“I’m with Titleist, which I think has the best ball now, and they’re a big enough company that if they had to start from scratch, they’d be the best ball again. It would be a shock to the system, to the manufacturers, sure. There’s a risk when you have a company like Titleist that has the largest market share. They would like the status quo but I think they are in the best place to produce the next best ball under the new parameters. Let them compete again. I think Titleist would actually gain from it.”
Jack Nicklaus, who has long maintained the golf ball goes too far, took to Twitter to respond to the report.
“Now that they have clear findings obtained from century of collecting data and its impact on all levels – from golf played at highest level to recreational golf – I look forward to supporting industry’s collaborative effort to find solutions that are in best interest of game’s future,” he wrote.
But not everyone is convinced the ball goes too far.
“Hell no, distance isn’t a problem on our level,” Harold Varner III said. “It’s way firmer out here on Tour. When I go back home, I’m never hitting it over 300. Out here I am.”
Would he be in favor of playing in a tournament that had distance-control measures?
“No,” Varner said. “If you have a God-given talent and worked to be as good as you can be, and in this case, being able to hit the ball far, you should be able to use it. LeBron James is 6-9 and can run over everyone. Is he not allowed to play with them? That’s weak. If I didn’t hit it far enough, I’d get up for the challenge.”
RELATED: Five takeaways from USGA, R&A distance report
No course is too short
“Perfect example is Riv,” Varner said of Riviera Country Club, host of next week’s Genesis Invitational near Los Angeles. “It plays so much longer and it’s right around 7,000 yards. And 10 under or around that wins every year. As far as new courses, all they want to do is make them longer. They don’t want to make the greens smaller, the fairways tighter. The stuff that isn’t very exciting. So, let’s make it 8,000 yards.”
Is distance taking strategic elements out of the game because the ball goes too far?
“Depends on the course,” said Paul Casey, who emphasized he hadn’t read the report yet. “Look, the 10th at Riviera is a brilliant golf hole. Now, it’s just a brilliant golf hole with a different golf club in your hand. It’s still a great golf hole. Distance, in a way, exposes golf architecture. The great architecture is still great, the bad architecture is still bad.
“This is what always frustrates me. It’s the chicken-and-the-egg scenario. You hear the golf professionals hit the ball too far. The golf professionals are hitting it 320 yards instead of 300 yards. Why is it all about us? Obviously, there has been an increase in distance, partly because of the golf ball, partly because of the golfer, partly because we’re maximizing perfect launch conditions, other technology. That didn’t come about because the golfers decided to hit the golf ball farther, or golf manufactures decided to make the golf ball go farther. The golf courses got longer.
“There’s an argument for this. I’m not saying it’s right or wrong. But the golf courses became longer because the golf developers said if we can make the golf courses longer, we can get four more houses on that hole and two more on that hole, etc. That’s more money. And that’s when the manufactures and the players – including the amateurs – rose to the challenge. They had to start hitting the ball longer. I don’t like us players and the manufactures getting the blame. We’re not the only ones to blame.”
What about the amateurs?
Cantlay says distance isn’t a problem for the amateur player.
“I think all the equipment and all the stuff is great for the amateur golfer,” Cantlay said. “The ball can’t go too far for a 10 handicap.”
Scott Hamilton, a golf instructor for several Tour pros and elite amateur players alike, has seen his students swing with ever-increasing velocity.
“I’ve been at this for a long time and I used to get one college guy who could swing 118 mph. Now they all do. And it is the same with women. I’ve got six girls who can swing it over 100 mph. It’s not all the ball. The average chopper isn’t hitting it farther. Elite players are training better and they’re better athletes.
“Rolling the golf ball back isn’t going to help the grow game at the amateur level. I ran a golf shop for 18 years and never had one golfer ask me, ‘Give me the shortest ball you’ve got.’ ”
Stewart Cink opposes bifurcation
Cink, the 2009 British Open champ, doesn’t see the harm in amateurs hitting the ball longer, but he doesn’t support the potential of a local rule that would allow for different equipment at the elite level in competition.
“That sounds like bifurcation of the rules,” Cink said. “We (the PGA Tour) shouldn’t be in the rule-making business. I think playing by the same set of rules helps our fan base identify with us. They realize when they play the same equipment we do that golf is hard. I’m not saying nothing should be done, but I’m not sure if this reactive way of rolling things back is a real great idea.
“My caddie and I were just discussing this and what would bring it all back is a golf ball that didn’t go as straight, that curved more. Then you’re going to think twice about hitting driver. Hitting the ball straight should be a skill. You can’t deny that power is important, but that’s what makes a sport a sport. Tell me a sport where power isn’t important. Now, is it disproportionately important? That’s the question the ruling bodies have to answer.”
[opinary poll=”do-you-think-distance-is-a-problem-in-go” customer=”golfweek”]
