Here’s another article about modern players and old equipment…Not just Snedeker had a problem
I’ve read that article already. This is pretty weak, lads. If you’re trying to make a case against the modern game, giving a guy a new club and a few swings just isn’t good enough to act as proof. Snead hooked the crap out of it with his same swing and ‘old gear’ until he got a driver with very little loft and a super extra stiff shaft. So to say that either of the examples presented are definitive is watery to say the least.
I’m not trying to prove anyone wrong here, this is all discussion for me. Truth is my only interest, I don’t have a side other than that. If we could get beyond the religion we could actually have some real debate and understanding…
I agree with this. Give a current top 10 pro say a month with flat heavy vintage gear and tell them that their next pay check and indeed their livelihood depends on them breaking par with this equipment and I’m sure you will find that they will be able to get a reasonable enough handle on the gear.
Let me make it clear that I’m not saying here that they will be able to strike a persimmon or 1 iron as skilfully as Mr Hogan or other Masters from the past but then again there are not many people past or present who could. I’m simply suggesting that a pro golfer or indeed any kind of golfer would need some time to get used to any type of substantial equipment change.
I also completely agree with this, I couldn’t have put it better myself Bom.
I don’t mind being somewhat of a shout it from the rooftops for this stuff …I honestly believe my game deteriorated as the techno clubs kept forging ahead and were supposedly getting better.
I always pretty much played persimmon…I even found an article the other day talking about me using a Wood Bros in the 96 British Open…so I may have even outlasted davis Love etc as far as using a wooden driver
I could routinely hit the persimmon 300 yards with a soft squishy ball
Then as clubs got longer, lighter, bigger I totally lost my feel for swinging the driver because I had no clue where the head was…I had to tone down my swing…My body stopped… I became a steerer and I lost my swing dynamics and I actually started to lose distance from the tee by using these masterpieces of modern technology…a la 'Frying Pans"
I think there is some weak discussion going on from people that never used the old gear…or were never any good using the old gear…or haven’t worked these modules into their swing to even understand what a dynamic powerful controlled swing actually feels like
Golf is meant to be a precision game…when you can just take a big slap at a ball with an oversized beast and it goes 300 yards even if you swing like shit flying up a toilet wall what does that show you or prove?
The longer you can slap it …the shorter the club to the green. The shorter the club to the green the less rough or trees come into play because you can gouge it out and whack it over tress with lofted clubs. Doesn’t mean you are a good golfer. Because the next guy will come along and outslap you and outputt you and you’ll be wondering what to do next.
I played the tours for 20 years and competed in all these events we all see. I DON’T EVEN watch golf on TV anymore. It bores me. I hate to watch it. It is NOT golf. It is a long drive affair with a putting contest tacked onto the end of it.
Sure I would love to be out there again making millions but quite frankly it isn’t a game of skill anymore. It actually became a bore to play also. It’s all about distance/strength and a putting touch that can fill a thimble
I would bet any guy on tour who started golf in the past 15 years would take close to 12-15 rounds or quite possibly many more than that to shoot par with persimmon woods and older blade irons. Like Snedeker. He never used them. Didn’t have a clue how to swing them. He is obviously steep with his irons into the ball because he chunked the old blades all day long.
The slightly older guys who did at one time use the old gear would maybe solve the puzzle a little quicker, but not much quicker, as the modern technology has killed their swings to the point they would be hard pressed to produce anywhere near close to the results they used to get with that older equipment.
bad driver swing because of long light clubs. Bad iron swing because of excessive bounce on the clubs and carrying the crap driver swing over to the iron swing and many more reasons would hold them back.
That’s why I practice with persimmons and use old VIP blades from the 1970’s, Wilson wedges from the 70’s too… However it has taken me a good 6 months of training and retooling to get to the point where I can play golf with trust in my ability again…because I know the drill again from solid module work and using hard to hit clubs that provide me feedback on each and every shot.
Footnote: Round today at my club…13 of 14 fairways. 16 of 18 greens 6 under 66 with a 3 putt-- ALL because my swing is getting better by moduling and playing with the old gear and working the modules to train my body to do what it used to know how to do on it’s own…I honestly don’t even practice anymore…It’s modules and a few persimmon hits on the range to get some feedback on how I am doing and that’s it
our course is 7000 yards and tighter than 40 out of 44 courses you’ll see on TV this year so it’s not a picnic. I used metal rounds to play but have become straighter and longer with my driver again since working modules and persimmons into my practice or casual games.
For those that think this is all BS that has been spoken I am testament that can beg to differ with you. If you have no before or after to compare to then there is no real argument.
What you read here in any discussion we do about this thought and idea COULD/WILL/SHOULD be the biggest lightbulb you may well ever get with regards to improving your golfing future…the difference between the endless search for WTF am I going to do next with my swing or my game…to…I will stick with this and improve over and over and over with each session/month/year
1 Like
2Ms,
As always your input is invaluable- you make a ton of sense and I agree with what you’re saying. I don’t think the issue is the one you’re taking up though. I honestly don’t think the players of today are any less capable, just that they’ve learned in a different way. Lag talks about human evolution and I agree, give good golfers anything and they’ll figure out a way to get it in the hole as quickly as possible.
Is this directed at me in some way? If it is, I’d appreciate some ownership of it. I’m not trashing the value of old gear, I’m just trying to understand. I know how good you are, and it’s a big deal to me that you share your insight here- I appreciate that a great deal. I learned the game with persimmon and experienced the move through to the new drivers and new ball at a pretty decent level, so my own judgement isn’t blind, I just want to make that clear…
I don’t doubt that you struggled with the modern gear, it’s terrible stuff, particularly for a pure striker. Just look at the video I posted about trackman on Lag’s LTLGM thread- that idiot is telling one of the all time greatest strikers to ‘hit more up on it’… Again, this isn’t about disagreeing with you guys, it’s about understanding and not just blindly saying that everything after 1998 is worthless- I just won’t buy that…
I don’t think anyone here doubts that the modules work and that playing and practicing with vintage blades and persimmons is part and parcel along with the modules of becoming a better ball striker. I certainly practice with vintage blades and persimmons only because as Lag stated earlier, I want to make sure that when I do play the modern gear that I’m not using it as a crutch.
I have set myself up with two bags, one with vintage blades and persimmons and the other with modern blades with titaniums. I play with whichever bag takes my fancy on any particular day (it usually depends on the type of course I’m playing) and I enjoy both sets equally for different reasons. I’m just a hacker stuck on module 2 so what do I know? Nothing really. All I know is that I’m enjoying my golf immensley with this type of alternating set up and I’m happy. 
Two, it’s good to see that you are feeling confident about your game again and coming out of the golfing hell you looked to be in. As a fellow Aussie and ABS’er I wish you the best of luck mate.
There’s one thing being a real hacker with his head in the ground, and there’s another thing being a ‘hacker’ with drive and insight… I’d reckon that you’re the latter… Sounds like you’re going to do fine! Keep up the good work…
My vantage point is I stopped playing the game in 1999 and didn’t come back to playing the game until 2009. In 2005 I went to watch the old AT&T tournament in Atlanta that used to be held at TPC Sugarloaf. One of the things I remarked to my buddy, a club pro visiting me, was that basically everybody looks the same out there. Everybody hits it long. Everybody has the same ball flight. Everybody has the same type of swing mechanics and everybody putts well.
Obviously, that’s a bit of an exagerration. But my memory before then, particularly of golf in the 80’s and early 90’s was there being a dynamic where long ball hitters had the advantage of length, but the disadvantage of finding the long rough and usually they weren’t very good iron players. The short players had the advantage of finding the fairways and being very ‘solid’ with their iron games. But the new game I saw up close and personal that day was basically guys bombing and gouging and the ‘little guy’ not really having an advantage when the ‘big guy’ can bomb, find the rough, and be hitting a 9-iron compared to the ‘little guy’ finding the fairway and having a 6-iron.
So I understand how today’s modern game can be boring to some.
I think there are some things that make today’s game harder. For instance, there’s a lot more water in today’s golf courses. You used to have a better chance of catching polio than finding an island green. Now almost any decent course has at least 1 island green. A lot more bunkers as well. Some courses pride themselves on how many bunkers they have. All of this has allowed for what I call ‘carry golf.’ You don’t have to be necessarily accurate, but if you can carry the trouble, you’ll be fine.
That to me is why the PGA Tour has lost that dynamic of the ‘long hitter’ vs. the ‘short hitter’ matchup. But it’s also a reason why doing well in total driving isn’t as important as ranking high in driving distance and putting. Wasn’t always that way.
3JACK
Looks like this thread has sort of morphed into the old “modern vs retro” topic and how the game has changed due to the equipment… is it better, worse, the same, etc. As it is with so many sports it’s a difficult prospect to compare eras, but it doesn’t stop us from trying. And is there ever really a “right answer”?
I’ve thought about this and I think TM raises some very good points in his post that echo my feelings, but the most siginificant I think is that those who have played the game at a high level (“good” players, competitive amateurs, professionals) with equipment from “both eras” are in a pretty good position (perhaps the only position for that matter) to provide the most credible perspective. No slam on anyone else with an opinion, but in my mind you need to have had a very good handle on this craft for a certain period of time to discern the real (and perceived) differences. This probably automatically discounts anyone who took up the game after the early 90’s or so.
I know Styles likes the “well then let’s talk about hickory shafts” argument, but I think we need someone who played hickory and steel (and gutta percha and balata) here to argue that point with any credibility. Not saying you’re wrong Styles, just that you don’t have any personal experience with the equipment from those 2 eras. At least I don’t think you do… I’ve seen the youtube vids and you look more like a 30-something than an 80-something. 
So… I tend to defer to Lag and Two on this topic. I’m in that age range that’s played a lot with gear from both eras as well, but not at the level of these two. If I were bold enough to consider myself a “good player”, then my input would be in line with theirs. I suppose some/many of today’s players would figure it out, but just as many would be exposed if they had to use persimmon and balata. How many of those that get exposed would have the ability to adapt at some point? I have no clue, but my guess is some would and some wouldn’t.
Which is more interesting to watch? To me it’s the old stuff for many of the same reasons mentioned. When you’ve hit a soft ball with a persimmon driver and have a good feel for how “bad” it can get, it’s fun to watch the great players from back in the day control their ball like they did. Maybe it’s because it really was a game that you felt you had a chance to play as well as skilled players if you were precise enough. Today’s high-level game seems so predicated on having a clubhead speed of 110+ mph.
robbo
I don’t know about that but thanks anyway. 
I wasn’t directing anything at anyone in particular…just using an example because I really don’t know how any of you guys play
The main point I was getting at is
Players that never ever grew up with or used persimmon or vintage style blades and who have been taught from a computer screen just about all seem to have much more of a vertical shoulder position at impact which brings on the arm slap, body stalling, hand flip release … the vertical shoulder position at impact they all want to teach these days automatically gets the club steep and stalls the pivot…so once the pivot stops the hands flip or roll the club over and mistimed and errant shots want to happen more and more often.
The newer equipment makes allowances for this type of swing…however these guys have to practice and practice and practice to keep some groove to their swing otherwise they are all over the map. Yes they can save themselves with a hot putter and yes they could fluke a few good weeks here and there and make a million dollars and we all think they are awesome- but they aren’t reaching their full potential because the equipment they grew up with and the ‘modern idea’ swing they have been shown don’t allow much for consistency. That’s why they are banging balls all day long because if they don’t they can’t play at all.
I could name a bunch of guys who fell back several notches once this equipment came about as it altered their swing dynamics- Sandy Lyle and Woosie being real good cases for that argument
I would say Norman also. I played with the old and the middle and the new Norman and the young persimmon Shark was absolutely all over the technology Shark as a player. His short game got better later on but as a striker there was nothing compared to his early days.
I think I have mentioned this before… In 1998 I was in the top 3 of total driving on PGA. A real good stat to have…distance combined with accuracy. It used to mean something with the rough and courses playing longer as we were going into holes with 5 irons and not 9 irons. The next year 1999 when the techno stuff exploded in a big way I stayed the same in accuracy (approx 15th-20th) but I dropped 90 places in driving distance from 22nd or so to 110th!!! and actually gained a yard in distance according to the stats.
That’s about when the game started to get ridiculous and became a slug fest putting contest compared to a fairway green skill game. And it has become sad to watch that the ‘greatest golfers’ of today’s era aren’t really golfers in a sense. They are bombers who are awesome from 100 yards and in. And the course setup and the technology allows this to happen. Everyone says they are great golfers and would kick the crap out of the older era golfers. I would beg to differ being one that has been a part of both sides of the spectrum.
Stricker has a wedge swing for every club in his bag,
We all know Mickelson and Tiger can’t hit a fairway between them.
My entire point is if these guys somehow someway worked on better dynamics and swing ideas such as we are trying to teach here, swings that can hit ANY type of gear, then these guys would be all the better for it. Can you imagine if Tiger could hit fairway after fairway with the wedge game/chipping and putting game he has- he would be unbeatable. Like he pretty much was in 2000 when he had a steel shafted 975 driver that he could unleash without any hesitation as to where it was going to go
There are pros and cons to everything- however if we practice something that in hindsight is difficult (persimmons and blades) then when we get to the main event using frying pans and such we will be all the better for it. Someone soon will work this out and take the golfing world by storm and all the little sheep will go bbaaaaa bbaaaaah and follow along on the magical mystery tour has really just been there under their noses all along
Two: Quit knocking “frying pans” as they are the only means to really “cook”. Knock them one more time and I will personally come out of retirement, play a L-handed frying pan upside down and make you eat those 7000 yards…but I’ll have to gorge on some Ensure to beef up a bit first. 
Regarding persimmons/crowbars: Kinda like Vince Lombardi’s theory…make practice so hard that the game will be easy and a welcome relief. RR
1 Like
I had an easy paper route Robbo - I’m actually 120 
I use the ‘hickory argument’ because its valid. Lag talks about persimmon being the golden age because that is what he used when he was at the height of his playing powers. I feel it is conceited to talk to anyone under the age of 25 about the game of golf being bastardised because of the advant of technology. The same argument could be made about matched sets, steel shafts, rubber grips, surlyn and balata balls. In other words, why should one era be judged as being the best?
I have actually hit a hickory shaft and in case the earlier comment of Lag’s was aimed at me, I grew up playing persimmon and played off single figures using it. I’ll repeat that I have no love for 7500 yard tracks with 50 yard fairways which I was accused of earlier - I did point that out to Lag but he has yet to pick up on it 
I completely agree with the posts that suggest putting persimmon and ‘old’ blades into the hands of todays players and within a month they’d be breaking par.
I think its laughable to suggest that ‘hackers’ can hit 300 yard drives with ‘frying pans’ - they can’t, if they could none of them would be here trying to learn to hit it better!
Hugo, I love ya man, but are you seriously suggesting that the pros of old didn’t practice? 
I know that Hogan pretty much invented the concept of grinding but it is misleading at best to suggest that any pro doesn’t practice. Monty is really the only guy I ever heard of that doesn’t grind it out at the range.
I have been shouting this from the rooftops for about the last 5 years (except the bit about sheep).
I usually mention Don Bradman (Australian Criketer for those who don’t know) in connection with this. He used to practice his batting with a stump and golf ball. Michael Jordan on his first visit to a driving range couldn’t believe how wide open it was. Golf is the only game I know of where the practice is easier than the game.
Styles,
I am talking about the tour moving into 7500 yard courses attempting to off set the advances in technology.
Does that make golf more interesting? Does it bring out the best in skill level from the tour players throughout the game?
Does making most all the courses of the past obsolete for high level competition make sense?
Does trying to retro fit an older course to new modern length make the course better or worse?
Do longer courses slow down play?
Is golf more interesting to watch in person or on TV than it was in the past?
These are the questions that are relevant.
And no, I disagree, that if you gave the typical modern tour player vintage gear they would adjust to it and play golf as good as the greats of the past
within a few months. That would not happen. Only a handful would, and it would separate out the better players quickly.
I am saying that wouldn’t it be more enjoyable to have a pure dynamic driven pivot swing that works day in and day out because of the correct physics that will allow us to hit any type of club, on any given day, given any ache or pain or mental incapacity that could affect us…then to have to grind all day long with steep shoulders and poor dynamics and somehow just hope my hands catch up and I can flick them at the right instant to get a good result
I am not saying don’t practice or that guys in the past didn’t…but these guys today practice more and more than ever and I don’t see any better ballstriking than 20-30-40 years ago… in fact it is worse with supposedly better advanced equipment and 8 irons into greens instead of 4 irons …all I see nowadays is everyone putts well and chips well and hits 11 greens and 8 fairways on perfectly manicured courses and perfect greens.
If someone could get this idea correct and consistently hit 13 of 14 fairways and 16 of 18 greens and still putt like a wizard…they would win everything. I don’t want to stand on the range on a daily basis beating away to hope my hands get the club square somehow, someway. Practice to get better forever, not just practice to be good for a day or a week
No one is saying that they would be as good as the greats of the past…well I’m not anyway…
I’m sure that most (not all) would get a handle on the old gear given time and incentive to do so, I mean if you are saying that a modern day pro can’t then what chance does a modern day hacker have of even coming close?
I just think it’s silly to write off everyone post 1995 because of a few examples.
I don’t have an agenda one way or another, I’m just a curious golf tragic who wishes he could play better than he can simply applying logic to the issue
Very interesting post, Twomasters. I don’t know if it’s something that you have a handle on, or would even want to share, but what percentage would you say your own struggles were due to bad instruction vs the new equipment? In looking at Norman during that time, he got a lot flatter and a lot deeper, and in his own words from one of your previous posts, didn’t know which bad shot was going to arrive. I know the equipment was a big deal, but he removed a significant amount of up and down lateral motion from his swing, and in doing so seemed to lose that compression strike that you guys talk about him having in the 80’s. How much do you think his problems were due to technique vs equipment? During the 90’s there was a lot Faldo/Leadbetter driven ‘rotaional’ thinking going on- dead legs and ‘distance through resistance’ crap, and with it there was a lot swiping and glancing blows at the ball. Did you get involved in any of that stuff? I know I did and suffered because of it and it had nothing to do with the clubs I was swinging. I’ve always used blades with x shafts and I’ve never been a big fan of the new drivers, so I can’t really look to equipment for my problems- the ball had more of an effect than I was realizing, I would say that. Any thoughts?
And just for understanding’s sake, I’ve won tournaments on the national amateur level and D1 college, and also as a pro with good low numbers. I’ve played Asian and Canadian Tour’s and also bits around Europe. I’ve played some golf that was good enough, but didn’t make it(I haven’t given up yet on the inside even though I don’t play anymore- call me insane). I’ve got high standards so I don’t see this as anything to brag about, I only say it for some level of understanding.
Cheers…