Lag,
Where Is Annika in this conversation? Did Annika’s stats impress you with modern gear? In 2004 she was 3rd in distance @ 268, 1st in greens @ 79% and 78% in fairways…Maybe she had better stats in other years but to me they are right up there with Calvin…
Those are solid stats… and Peete was the straightest in the modern era and had great success. Peete worked the shaft properly through impact, as level as most anyone and it showed in his stats. Annika turned very level through the ball also.
Again, taking specific rounds and defining careers and generations by them, is short sighted at best. I don’t think that was a good ball striking round, but he’s had many great ball striking rounds, and he’ll have many more- though I’m sure if he hit 14 fairways and 18 greens, there’d be a reason why it was unimpressive- it’s a pointless discussion, and too often simplistic. Shooting 65 on a bad day is pretty decent. Having the courage to do that defines champions. But only in 1968, apparently.
I get the swing differences, that’s not under discussion. What is is whether or not there’s a lack of talent among the modern top players compared to previous generations- you think so, I don’t. This is why I’m involved in this discussion, not because I think the modern version of the swing is better- how can that not be apparent by now?! Leave the goal posts where they are, it makes for clearer debate.
Im not sure anyone is arguing players from the past were more talented, just that they had better technique and hit the ball more consistent day in and day out.
Fair post, but I think you’ve missed the point I was making. It’s a hypothetical ‘if’ whether or not they’d be as good with the old gear. I’m not suggesting they’d be forced to use it during the current game, I’m saying that IF we wanted to find out, then they’d need a year or so to come out with a clear version of their games using the old gear.
In relation to being demanding, that’s nothing new by any stretch. Jack would need 50+ drivers made in order to find one he liked- and they were a fair bit more time consuming to make. And that doesn’t even touch on how demanding Hogan was with his equipment.
I disagree. Constantly saying that the current players can’t handle the old gear and talking down their achievements etc. etc.- and there’s been many more direct statements saying as such. They’d need time with the old gear to find that answer, not a one round Golf Magazine circus show by two or three players, that gets used to define whole generations.
I do not believe you are a troll, Styles. Stubborn, troll-like, not a troll. You aren’t nearly that disruptive.
Again…I don’t believe anyone here is taking anything out on the players. In fact, Lag has posited that the equipment (primarily), infatuation with the long drives and course design has changed the swing/style of golf. Saying that most of the players are not as good at ball striking as those in the past is not saying they are crap. The equation has changed for success on the tours.
I grow weary of attempting to point out what has been pointed out in countless attempts. And I do not think you are a bad person either…just as I said above - stubborn. That’s okay, except when it conflicts with my views or if it’s a lady that would like an expensive dinner before…well…you know. Employing that tactic always make me feel used. 
Captain Chaos
Lag has said as much Bom. The wheat would be separated from the chaff.
I believe he even stated that some of the best players would be better and the best ever might not even make it through Q-school; never to be recognized because of the current skill set required to be successful on tour.
Anyway, I’m done arguing about this as it feels like we’re beating a dead horse…and that’s too demented even for me!
Captain Chaos
The old saying… necessity is the mother of invention.
I just don’t see the necessity for modern tour players to really strive for top level ball striking.
While that may be a bit difficult to define… I don’t think a player walking off with a check for a million dollars on Sunday who just hit less than 50% of the fairways for the week, and averaged 12 greens a round or less is qualifying for such a distinction.
Players will miss some fairways and greens no matter who they are or what technique they are using. But a player who really has expert control over the golf ball is not miss hitting many shots. I might miss a couple greens a round while still hitting quality shots. A ball bounces hard on a green, or some wind comes up… or I just didn’t feel the yardage based upon a variety of conditions. It’s golf. Fairways can be missed by running through a dogleg, or just playing to the safer side of a fairway in the attempt to open up a shot into the green.
But there is a difference between slightly missing a fairway or green and hitting a drive 40 yards right or left, or missing a green with a short iron long and left over a green or 40 yards left of the pin etc.
In the past, you would see a lot of players hitting irons off tees on tight holes. They would do this because the penalty for missing the fairway was very significant. It would take birdie out of the equation. Often taking par out of the equation. So the farther down the fairway you attempted to drive the ball, the greater the risk.
I just don’t see this kind of risk reward situation. Not even in the US Open. Rory was making birdies from the rough in the US Open. Not because he had super power golf abilities, but simply because the rough was not very penalizing. If I remember, 30 plus players shot under par in the US Open? Everyone was doing that.
So what is clearly happening, is that the modern players really don’t have to develop the kind of golf swing that is going to give them the skills to strike the ball with great precision. It is simply not required on tour… so not only do they not figure it out… they don’t need to figure it out. What they do need to figure out is how to hit it very far… and how to hit good short irons… and how to chip and putt great. That is the game today. It shows in the ball striking if you watch it. It shows in their statistics, it shows in their golf swings.
But does this mean that your average golfer should not strive for something better? I think the weekend golfer actually would benefit more from advanced techniques. The tour pros play everyday, grind zillions of balls, and play on very homogenized velvety conditions. When a golf swing is based upon timing a flick of the hands through the ball, it is more difficult to time and repeat. But the tour guys have the time to work on this, while the weekend golfer doesn’t.
99% of golfers don’t play on PGA Tour set ups… velvet greens, conditioning and so on. So to look at the tour as a role model is not wise in my opinion. They get drops from mud and all kinds of situations the average golfer would not.
I am much more impressed watching a great player from the past shoot 68 on a course where they are hitting long irons or even fairway woods into par 4’s… or playing par 5’s that are often not reachable… and putting on greens that look like shag carpet… or fairways that look like poorly kept public courses. Deep penalizing rough if off the fairway and so on.
I understand that younger golfers only know the modern game played with hybrids, long putters and frying pan drivers with a ball that doesn’t spin. If that is your only reference, then that is what you are going to know.
For us 40 somethings and older like Bradley, I and others… we have a different set of standards based upon experience playing on tour, having to deal with much more difficult conditions, persimmon, balata balls etc.
But the reality is that if you can drive the ball 350 yards on tour… and chip and putt great… then you only need to learn a very rudimentary golf swing that covers only high clubhead speeds with the driver and a wedge and short iron swing that offers some competence. This is nothing or anywhere near the skill set that was required in the past to navigate through golf courses that were set up much more difficult than today.
youtube.com/watch?v=JWpfoMS6 … ata_player
You may not rate him John but we sing songs about him.
CC is right this goes in circles, you do not like the modern game or players. Stats are twisted to suit purposes and generalizations are made.
If you ever get the chance to see Rory play close up take it because only then will you appreciate his talent.
Love the reference to weekend golfer. The single most important reason why I joined ABS, the guarantee that I won’t have to practice 1/10th as hard as a tour pro to hit a reasonable amount of greens each week.
Maybe it’s just bad timing on my part, but the times I have watched the so called new wonder boy of golf was The Masters when he just played horrid. The event where he played much better than the field winning the Congressional Classic. And some pretty mediocre ball striking this last weekend on Sunday. I don’t feel like I am seeing anything amazing. I don’t feel like I am watching Knudson strike it… or Hogan, or Moe or even Nicklaus or Watson for that matter. I don’t see the tight cohesive connection through impact I see with the greatest strikers and the ball striking results confirm what I see.
But relative to everyone else, I can see why he is #1 in the rankings. Who is he really up against right now?
Are there a dozen Hall of Famers teeing it up every week? I don’t see it. Tiger is far from what he was at this point. Phil is playing well. But there is really not much in the way of any kind of intimidation factor. I feel like I could beat anyone on tour if you handed them persimmon and blades on a tight course with average greens and I basically don’t play golf actively anymore. I could never have imagined having such thoughts in the persimmon age thinking I could go out and beat Floyd, Crenshaw, Nicklaus, Watson, Seve, Norman etc, even if I was playing full time and living the full time golf life.
When I was on tour, there were some really fine strikers around. You knew that if they putted well, they were untouchable. If a guy didn’t hit it that good, you knew he was going to have to putt lights out to contend. I don’t think you want to have that kind of pressure on your putting week in and week out. The really good strikers could still be on the weekend leaderboard even with average putting, and when they got hot they would win or run away from the field.
I would be interested to know when the last time a PGA Tour event was won by a player averaging over 30 putts a round?
It seems every week the winner is averaging no more than 27 putts a round… often less.
Rose shot 16 under with just over 26 putts a round. For example when I won on tour I shot 17 under averaging 30.5 putts a round. That’s a 16 shot difference on the greens over 4 rounds… roughly shooting the same score. Had the greens been better, and my stroke, reads and pace been better, could I have shot 33 under for 72 holes? Maybe so. I am sure I missed three putts inside 10 feet each round.
I do think the way the guys putt today is amazing… and that leads to the good scoring of course. But I don’t get anywhere near the feeling of amazement from watching their tee to green games. It’s just not amazing to me the way the putting is.
I’m thrilled I finally figured out how to be a decent to good putter. I am a firm believer that if your technique is solid… practicing can really be kept to a minimum if at all. But this is strictly from my view… meaning I like to think I can go out on any round now and not three putt during a round, and make 3 or 4 putts outside 10 feet on a good day. But not missing a putt inside 10 feet for a week like Rory did is beyond the scope of my comprehension. If you want to learn to putt like that go see someone else. I believe strongly I have figured out why many of the great ball strikers struggled on the greens… and have a very viable solution for those so inflicted… and could teach a decent player to get down around 30 putts a round more often than not. But there is a big difference between 30 and 26. That’s 16 shots over 4 days.
very intersting thread. i think bom and styles have great points, i still watch plenty of golf on tv and i still get plenty of entertainment value/respect the skill
level. but also i do agree with lag that it is a entirely different game than what i play. that difference lies in the courses (among obvious skillset issues 
). the courses i and the majority of players play have challenges on them that would never surface on the tour. i always try to go watch a mini tour event when i can. they are usually played on half decent private courses that are more in line with what i play. no where near the perfect conditions they see on tour. alot more dicey situations for the golfers. i joined abs because i need to hit more greens at the courses i play, too much bad stuff happens on the bare lies that surroung my greens.
if i played all of my golf at the redstone tournament course where they play the houston open, i would have no need for abs. i would simply work out and
practice short game/putting. and i would have all the latest and greatest /lightest and mightest. 
okay, i probably still would not workout.
when i get through a few more modules putting will become a focus for me, especially if you lag has a solution for slow, bumpy, grainy greens.
i think chaos mentioned greens rolling 4-5 on the stimp and someone called bs. but i’ve seen them that slow. in houston in july or august, courses cut way less and they roll really really slow, no way more than 6 or 7. it gets too hot, the greens will die unless they water them 3 times a day. the nice courses do the required watering, but not my tracks.
every decade or so, someone tries to build a course with bentgrass greens in southeast texas, and i go play it as fast as i can because i know those greens will
be gone within 3 years. i just read about a great old track south of town that put in bentgrass recently, i 'm heading down next week because no way
they hold up through another drought this summer. the owner must have deeeeeeeppppppp pockets 
This is not a reply to anyone.
Arguments aside for a nano, it’s great Ireland has a new hero to celebrate.
Rory played himself to the top through venues and a competitive culture that he does not control.
Now he must defend his slippery place in a blinding corrosive glare.
Whatever the measuring sticks, venues, tools, and rules, here’s good will to Rory and his rivals.
Well put, as only you can do 1Tee. I second that.
Too many port-a-potties on Tour these days.
What ever happened to a short jaunt into the woods for relief
TMZ
I sometimes can’t tell if you are just being disingenuous at times or you are actually serious.
But regardless, it wouldn’t be a fair fight considering it is ALL you play anymore (a classic equipment “specialist” to sort of say) and it is miles away from what a tour pro has been using for immense amount of time. YES, classic blades that will shatter your fingers if you miss the dime-sized sweetspot and small persimmon drivers are DAMN hard to hit and play with. The greats of the past weren’t GODS. They were basically the few who out of hundreds of thousands trying that had the hand/eye and body coordination to do it routinely with what they had at the time. No different today. Basically you get used to and ingrain what you play.
Lets reverse it… If a tour pro showed up and handed you latest driver with graphite and players cavities irons (or modern MB) and immaculate fast greens do you still feel the same? Of course not, because now you would be in their comfort zone. But let Tiger, Phil, Bubba, or even someone higher ranked a year or two of ONLY playing and practicing classic equipment like you do and you don’t think they too would excel with that stuff and shooting 60’s?
To say you haven’t seen top ballstriking in a long time is something I have to side with Styles on. In my definition a top ball-striker isn’t about how many fairways one hits or how often on the green. Those can come just from someone hitting it STRAIGHT. Your Knudson video of top ballstriking and the much talked about Hogan hitting 18/18 in the shell match all I see is straightforward shots. Sure with the equipment they had at the time this is easier said than done, and seeing players today miss greens with short irons is laughable considering the pasts had to use mid irons for same distance, but where is the magic of straight?
To me, top ball striking is having complete control of the ball. Put it into an area of where one is aiming and/or Imagination to envision an shot goal and pull it off with near perfection. (Today I think it is fair to honestly just remove DRIVING from discussion because I firmly believe the tour has suffered as a WHOLE in less accuracy with the big paradigm shift to graphite shafts. Graphite shafts are basically still in infancy).
Here, have we EVER seen Hogan, Nelson, on and on (even Moe) do something like this. In front of crowds under immense pressure and millions at stake (compared to the thousands in the 50’s)? Is this not top ball striking?
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wrrwme1uKWU[/youtube]
Or could Hogan pull this off: From a fairway bunker, 213y out to a TUCKED pin over water.
Budman - I agree that having “complete control of the ball” is the mark of a great ballstriker.
To use the example of Tiger’s shot in that first youtube video, wouldn’t it be the mark of a great ballstriker to have placed his tee ball on the correct side of the fairway to not have to face that hook shot into the green in the first place?
A good analogy to me is watching a great snooker player at work. They have such fine control of the cue ball, that they have to play fewer spectacular shots because they leave themselves in perfect position for an easy pot on the next shot. They make the game look very easy to the spectator, when of course that is far from the case.
That shot by Tiger out of the bunker in Canada was pretty awesome though - probably one of the greatest I’ve ever seen.
The bunker shot in Canada was a block. He got lucky. Ive seen Tiger play, he’s good, no doubt.But that was a block .
Steve