Video: Rory's Duck Hook
Who says you can't hit a duck hook with modern equipment?
The good news? No one was there to see Rory McIllroy show off his new equipment en route to an opening 75 in the HSBC at Abu Dhabi.
The bad news? Television was there.
Who would have guessed it's January?
Geoff
**Bob Harig addresses Rory's club change and short transition period in light of the opening round.
Although indications are that McIlroy knew he'd be making the switch as far back as September, the transition period has not been that long.
It is hard to imagine McIlroy working with the new clubs much when he still had tournaments to play and was contractually obligated to use the old ones. He visited Nike's testing center in Forth Worth, Texas, and got hooked up with all manner of apparatus to lock in launch angles and swing speeds and all the other technical stuff professional golfers endure to try and get their equipment just right.
Reader Comments (38)
I have all the shots.
Unfortunately I cannot control when they come out.
The equipment change is a failure.
; )
It happens.
These guys are showing spider webs and nerves.
Notice TW wearing a swoosh on his cap, and not the usual ugly ''TW'' logo.
Nike (Cindy Davis?) picks out his clothes months before.
In case you missed it, Nick: Thorbjorn Olesen switched to the same manufacturer Rory did. And he is tied for third...
David Duval
Anthony Kim
Michelle Wie
Rory McIlroy
and many others I can't even think of....
Imagine how many majors Tiger Woods would have won if not playing Nike? ??? He would have eclipsed Jack for sure.
How many great careers is Nike going to ruin?
Ya what would Sir Nicholas Alexander Faldo MBE winner of 6 majors and 40 professional wins know??? I mean he only spent 98 weeks as #1 golfer in the whole world, what a douche indeed. If his opinion was worth anything at all he'd be watching the golf channel and posting on the internet.
That's an interesting point. I wonder if anyone can do a statistical analysis of players after they switched to Nike.
Have any players improved statistically after the change?
I not sure I am ready to blame Nike for ruining careers as the players choose the equipment but if their are firm stats to back it up, then it's a valid point. Coincidence does not equal causation.
Nate Silver....get to work!
Zing!
@DTF: If G-Mac really struggled (It probably was regression to the mean) it started in the middle of his stint with Srixon. I think he started his first season with the new clubs with three top 10s.
There is no statistical basis for club changes being bad. For every Corey Pavin there's an Ernie Els. And many examples for not working out are from a different era. There are many players who suddenly have worse season despite changing anything. Blaming the material is just a lazy explanation
Are you including her Women's Publinx win?
Try and keep the Woods/Wie/Nike spin rate down.
1. Ha! That was funny. Sadly, as one who plays, watches and loves both sports, I could presently ask the same about golf.
2. Hockey players are a much like what understand golfers were like before my time (pre-'70's): intensely brand loyal and loathe to change equipment. My point was simply that, even allowing for the normal range of quality and character of gear in any sport, Nike's hockey stuff was spectacularly atrocious and the embodiment of hubris. It arrogantly tried to dictate features, style and function despite clearly lacking the expertise and heritage that would give it credibility. So far, this seems a lot like their golf venture.
3. The list of ill-fated equipment changes in golf is long and notorious, just like Slider's you-know. How long would Rory have to slump before Nike starts to get some heat? Could be interesting to watch.
Than ks- honestly, I must only see him on the ''TW'' cap days.
Today he switched back to his Scotty putter and was as bad on the greens as yesterday. He hit two more fairways, but from wathcing it his driving was more erratic than yesterday. But if you had seen the swings he took you wouldn't blame this on the clubs. He was just plain bad. The commentators mentioned he didn't hit many balls the last few weeks and instead hung out with Ms. Wozniacki. He might have been a bit lazy during the off-season.
Putting is feel and look.
While I have no doubt the engineers at Nike are good, and no doubt that Nike wasnts to put a quality club in their marquee players' hands- I have nver hit a nike club that felt even close to good, relative to my Mizunos, and honestly all the way back to some Wilson Staffs that I just cannot let go of
I jusr do not have any faith in that company- I cnnot escape thoughts of overpaid athletes, and underpaid workers, products that have more money spent on advertising than on manufactuing costs. .
As for Nike and hockey, interesting situation. Nike isn't the first big company to buy, and then screw up, a small company. Having said that, I'm surprised Nike got involved in the first place given the overall size of the market and the inherent growth characteristics (or lack thereof). As of 2010 (2 years after the Nike sale) Bauer was a tiny company with less than $300 million in total sales, that's rounding error material for Nike.
Bauer will clearly be better on their own. Have you seen an improvement in their skates since Nike sold them in 2008? I see they bought the Maverick lacrosse company, now there's a growth sport!
I just now checked in with this thread again--- my recollection is that Nike jumped into hockey at a time (one of several) when many thought (wrongly) the sport was poised to transcend its niche status and bloom in full as a legitimate national presence befitting its "big four" status. Gretzky had come to LA, The "Clerks" guys were lending street cred and ESPN was pushing it hard on TV.
What Nike bought was a shell or conglomerate or whatever called Canstar, which had wisely retained the individual brand names, trade dress, styling etc of many long time equipment makers in order to capitalize on the insanely rigid nature of players when it comes to their gear. NIke then phased out many if not most of those legacy brands and consolidated everything under the Bauer name, which pissed off and alienated a good chunk of their market, however small. The Nike stuff generally ran parallel to the Bauer line, sort of like Pontiac and Chevrolet at GM. Quality remained mostly consistent with the Bauer line and without any particular knowledge of the corporate inner workings, it was apparent to me that Nike mostly left Bauer alone to do their thing throughout this period. The Nike line however, was like Dr. Jekyll's laboratory and was clearly managed, led by and staffed with people for whom hockey was a foreign subject.
Since Nike bailed out, I haven't noticed any difference with Bauer but as I said before, there really wasn't any while they were intertwined either. Of course, at my age and rate of deterioration, I am already wearing the last pair of skates I'll ever purchase! Frankly, I was stunned to see the sales figures for Nike golf mentioned above. I don't have my name on my bag but I get it around okay and at the risk of sounding like Pauline Kael, I don't know anyone with any Nike sticks in the bag. Shows what I know.
Whoops! The sales figures I mentioned were from your post in the newer thread about Rory's putter.