PGA Tour Driving Distance Over The Decades

The PGA Tour's ShotLink folks have put together a dynamite package of year-end stats to pour over and inevitably I gravitated to the driving distance page. In it they share this statistical confirmation that core exercises really are the difference between today's Nicklaus' and Watson's and Nicklaus and Watson.

Comments

[Ky Laffoon's Ghost]

Cue Tim Finchem as Obi Wan: These are not the statistics you are looking for.

[Del the Funk]

Not sure why the number of players included varies year to year but a couple things that jump out at me are:

- the 2011 vs. 2000 comparisons are mindblowing.

- in 2000 85% hit is 280yds or shorter...in 2011 a complete reversal, 85% hit it 280yds or longer.

- in 2000 only 1% of the players hit it 290+ (2 players, Daly & Tiger, both were 10+ yds ahead of Davis)...in 2011 fully 56.5% hit it 290+ (Retief , at 107th, is the first player below 290).

[Del the Funk]

I followed Rickie Fowler for 9 holes on 2 different days at Bethpage, he was still an Am. I figured he'd do well as a pro but my only concern was that possibly lack of length would hold him back.

Well shame on me. I see he is 25th on the list in 2011 with a 299.5yd average! That really surprises me.

[Hawkeye]

Simplified, the stat between 1980 and 1990 reflects the introduction of the metal wood, 1990-2000 the introduction of the trampoline effect in drivers and 2000-2011 the Pro V1 era and 460 CC clubheads. Therefore, the one statistic I would like to see added would be 1970 to 1980. The technological advances regarding balls and drivers were pretty small during that decade, so it could serve as a sort of control group as to how big a part technology plays in relation to player strength and physical conditioning (not that any sane person has an inkling of doubt that the former is far more important, but that's where Timmy & c:o like to steer the debate). The numbers aren't available, but I suspect the difference would be pretty small, too.

[phil the author]

I understand that the equipment manufacturers now have the absolute proof that the greater distances that the golf ball is flying with every club is NOT due to improved training by the players, nor technical advances in the design of the clubs and ball, but can definitively state that it is due to global warming...

[Styles]

Hawkeye makes an interesting observation. In my opinion, players fromthe current era take fitness and conditioning seriously, look at the difference between Podge Harrington now and when he first played on tour. Contrast the fitness programme of Lee Westwood to Brian Barnes.

I think the only test that potentially could settle this is to give Westwood, Clarke and Ogilvy some persimmon bats and wound titleists and see how they compare to the long hitters of the 70s and 80s. If they are significantly longer than the players of that era then the traditionalists must concede that improved fitness and conditioning is one of the factors in increasde distance - it will not be the only factor, but it is a factor and my test could determine how much of a factor it is.

[Del the Funk]

Hawkeye, good points. I was trying to remember when we reached the 460cc threshold on the driver? When did the first one appear?

[Fan]

Great post.

So good that chart will show up in every course architect's re- design proposal and PowerPoint. You can hear the speech now - gotta redo the entire course boys just to keep up - $10 million ought to do it. Cut me a check for 2 and I'll get on it.

Call it the golf course designer stimulus program.

[Hawkeye]

@Del, I believe the rule was introduced about ten years ago, and that Taylor Made's 5 series (the first really popular 460CC driver) came out circa 2002. 2003 was the year of the biggest driving distance jump and also the year of Phil Mickelson's infamous "inferior equipment" comment.

[Chris C.]

@Styles I'd be more interested to see a side by side test of new and old technology.using a robot. That would give us measurable data showing the increased distance gains directly attributed to technology. Within the test I would also like to see the how the improved technology benefit players at different swing speeds. I've heard that new technology disproportionately benefits golfers with higher swing speeds.

Golfers who can hit the ball far and straight have always had an advantage, but the USGA and the R&A should be asking when does that advantage become unfair to the point of trivializing the game itself?

[JJ]

Another factor not discussed is that players today are trying to hit it farther. Years ago the pros referred to that as the "college swing" and with the lack of forgiveness in the equipment that was not the way to win on tour. Everyone scaled it back to get consistency. So if todays player can hit old equipment farther in a test than the old guys did on tour, it does not mean the Nicklaus or Snead could not have done as well if they chose to swing all out. Or that they could not have hit modern equipment just as far as modern players.

[johnnnycz]

"It can't be the new ball and club technologies....IT JUST CAN'T BE....I choose not to look at these inconvenient stats!"


#USGAhastheirheadinthesand

[elf]

@Del, Rickie picked up a lot of distance while he was in college

and if everyone can now hit it long enough (i.e. can reach par 5's in 2, hitting mostly short clubs into greens) it actually diminishes the advantage that longer hitters (and better ball strikers) have. One more reason the game has turned into primarily a putting contest

[Hodenfield]

As much as I'd like today's muscular pros use the old persimmons and irons, the comparison wouldn't be complete without the old squirrelly balata balls.

[LiquidKaos]

@elf -

I think I agree with you overall, but I don't believe good ball-striking necessarily translates into distance. What I mean is: you can get "just distance" from a bunch of players, but good ball-striking (into winds, shaping shots) is only from a few players.


-LK

[elf]

@LK, I agree with you, and it's also harder to shape shots etc w/longer clubs. With increased distance players aren't hitting as many long clubs another reason good ball striking is no longer as much of an advantage.

[A3]

Design better short holes and take driver out of hand. Stop running fairways at 12. 31 years of stats, that's a long time, what do you expect? A loss of distance?

[A3]

And the gain of distance between 1920 and 1950 is?????

[LiquidKaos]

@A3 -

What should they run FWs at? Slower or faster? I'm in the "faster" group overall (firm and fast baby), and let those monster 300+ drives (that aren't shaped just perfect) run into some rough/trouble and cause the player to think twice before just lettin' rip.

Most of these guys we're talking about are hitting 290 in the air - so I don't know if slowing down the FW speeds is going to make much of a difference.

I don't suppose many people would expect a loss of distance over 31 years - but perhaps (if the "conditioning/strength" argument was true) we should be seeing a more gradual increase across the player field instead of such rapid explosive growth?

I assume (by the tone/wording of your posts) that you are NOT in the crowd that believes that equipment (espcially drivers, balls, "launch monitor created driver-shaft-ball combo", etc.) has gotten out of hand? You're in the "who cares, this has happened for the entire existance of the game" group? I have no problem with that, lol ... but times change.

I'm unsure as to whether the entire professional golfing industry was supported/propped up by equipment manufacturers during the 1920s - 1950s, all of whom have a vested interest in creating a demand for "new" equipment. I'm unsure as to whether they had MASSIVE R+D departments with rocket design engineers getting 6 figures to design a new "hot face" driver, or new shaft/face/ball combo for "Pro Golfer X".


-LK

[Del the Funk]

A3, I can't actually answer your question with specific numbers but you might find this letter interesting. I wrote it down word for word a while back:

----------------------

June 6th, 1951

Mr. J. Wilson Jones
Garden City Golf Club
Garden City, Long Island

Thank you for your letter of May 24th. I sent the historical documents just before leaving for New York, fully intending to visit the club. But Mrs. Behr could not stand the heat. But I shall be on again.

The Travis document I bought from Gilpatrick about 1915, the then golf reporter for the New York Herald. To my knowledge it has never been published as written. I suggest that when the 50th anniversary of his winning the British Amateur Championship comes around it might be printed in a folder to commemorate his victory.

How well I remember the great course that is yours. I fear me that the modern ball has all but killed the skillful shots that were demanded when I played it with the proper ball. Indeed, true golf can no longer be played. And I can say that, statically, play is worse than the days of the Triumvirate to, Vardon, Taylor, and Braid.

I have often wondered if the giant golf club I gave the club has been preserved. It was used as the insights of the golf trade, St. Andrews, in the processions celebrating the coronations of Edward VII and George V. Maybe this fact, is unknown.

Thanking you again for your kind letter, I am

Sincerely yours,

Max H. Behr


751 Swarthmore Ave.
Pacific Palisades
California

[LiquidKaos]

@Del -

The more things change, the more they stay the same, hmm?

Awesome letter. :)


-LK

[Ky Laffoon's Ghost]

@A3: Good question. But we should view the 1920s as the same as aughts that began the 21st century. By the early 1930s steel had supplanted hickory and Bob Jones was retired. ANGC opened in 1933 at 6820 yards, give or take. It stayed that way for about 70 years, with a gradual increase of about 150 yards, but was still listed at less than 7000 yards when Tiger made his debut...the essence of strategic design in the US. Metal drivers with good graphite shafts were the equivalent of the change from hickory to steel (see Hawkeye, above), but there is no reason to think that the original Pittsburgh Persimmon and a wound ball, whatever its cover, would have caused golf to lose its way as it has. The tamed Pinnacle and the trampoline drivers made of titanium (which actually became available for such frivolous products with the end of the Cold War) were not inevitable.

For 70 years and a lot longer, really, golf was a "practice" (see Alistair MacIntyre's book After Virtue; hey, it works and the good professor had a great first name), with "standards of excellence and obedience to rules as well as the achievement of goods...(these need not be fixed, but)...to enter into a practice is to accept the authority...of the best standards..." To quote another author in this context, "when practitioners are no longer willing to be judged by the standards, a practice loses authority over itself. This may happen because the lure of external goods is greater than fidelity to a practice's internal goods, as it has been (for example) for steroid-using baseball players." With the advent of equipment that allowed average professional golfers to carry a drive 300 yards willy-nilly, it is safe to say that Golf-as-a-Practice "lost authority over itself" largely in pursuit of external goods. Pity.

[LiquidKaos]

@KYG -

You are sure you're not a Golf/English Professor, right? ;) Great post Sir - puts me to shame (not hard to do, but still - sheesh).


-LK

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Average swing speed in 1990: _____
Average swing speed in 2000: _____
Average swing speed in 2011: _____

Those numbers matter too. Any ball will go farther if you give players longer, lighter, larger drivers AND improve their fitness AND help them to optimize their launch conditions.

[Matt]

"The USGA and the R&A should be asking when does that advantage become unfair to the point of trivializing the game itself? - Chris C."

I'd say that happened around 1990

[Danny Noonan]

16 year old LPGA pro Lexi Thompson was just averaging over 290 yards driving distance in her last tournament. And she didn't miss a fairway. She is literally driving the ball further than a couple of pGA men. Something just isn't right. How in the world is she generating that kind of club head speed and keeping it in the fairway? We're talking about a 110 pound girl who couldn't bench press 90 pounds. It's time to scale back and put some regulations on this equipment. At least at the pro level.