Opinion & Analysis
Distance for dinner: Have OEM distance claims gone too far?
Bigger, faster, stronger….longer. That might as well be our adopted cultural motto. This doesn’t just apply to sports, mind you. People have always been very quick to pull out the measuring tape to compete with others in most ways, shapes and forms.
The measure of a person always seems to be measurable, doesn’t it? Or at the very least, more about the catchy sizzle then the substantive steak. This isn’t even a very recent phenomena. Our desire to reduce ourselves to this dates back to our origins. Not that we need to go back that far, but one certainly doesn’t need to think hard to come up with a few examples.
Baseball fans might remember Tom Glavine and Greg Maddux telling us that “chicks dig the long ball” in a famous 1990s commercial that spoofed on the popularity of the home-run-hitting Mark McGuire, as oppose to their brand of crafty pitching. How about the Cadillac CTS-V commercials in 2010 detailing the exact times its car was able to circle the famous Nurburgring circuit in Germany in order to call it the world’s fastest production sedan? To this day, I wonder how many CTS-V owners drive their car in such a manner, or if it would have mattered if their car had come up a few seconds short of a BMW M5 in the commercial. Would they still have bought it?
Want to go back further? How about the railroad and mining tycoons of the Guilded Age, trying to outdo each other by building the world’s biggest houses. Or before that, European and American naturalists and archeologists arguing over which side of the pond was more manly by comparing how big the respective fossils they found were (yes this actually happened, and actually involved Thomas Jefferson). Golfers want to hit the ball further then their friends. They just do. Original equipment manufacturers (OEM) know this, and for the past few years, they have been selling clubs to us has been like shooting fish in a barrel.
But the questions we want to ask, or should be asking ourselves is: Why do we believe we are going to hit the ball longer? And are distances really increasing to back up OEMs claims and promises?
First, why do we believe the claims? Well, we believe because we want to believe, and because what we see on TV can be a bit confusing. With a drive, the average golfer hits the ball roughly a bit longer than the length of two football fields. If we are to focus more closely on males between the ages of 18 to 49, which for many markets is the target consumer, I’m going to guess that would go up a little bit. I don’t have exact facts to back this up but I’d certainly think 220 yards is reasonable to guess.
If you were to ask the average golfer from that bracket, he would probably tell you that pros hit the ball 300 yards regularly, and based on that they’d probably think he is way behind their potential for how far they can hit. Naturally, he’d be wrong. Pros don’t hit the ball 300 yards regularly, in fact my colleague just printed that the average PGA pros carry distance carry the ball roughly 269 yards. Think about that for a second. Joe Couch-Potato hits the ball within 82 percent of the average pro. Ummm, isn’t that pretty good?
If I can humor you for a second with tales from my youth, I could tell you that I was a fairly athletic teenager. I ran track for my high school team, and was a decent junior baseball player. The fastest I ever threw a baseball when clocked was 73 mph, and the fastest I ever ran the 100-meter dash was in (if I remember correctly) 12 seconds. Neither is that terrible. I’d venture a guess that most people couldn’t top either, and both those marks are about the same percentage off the average pro as your average drive compared to a golfing pro. What would you tell your friend if he told you he was going to buy new shoes so he could get closer to the 10-second 100-meter dash? You’d probably tell him he’s crazy.
Further diluting things is total distance, which is completely irrelevant. The courses amateurs play are completely different then the ones pros play, and total distance is all but meaningless. Every 340-yard drive you see is suspect, because the fairways the pros play are similar to the greens the average golfer plays. Again, if I can tell you tales of my own exploits, my carry distance with driver is very similar to the average pro, roughly 265 yards. I can tell you that I have had days where I’ve averaged more than 300 yards off the tee when playing hard and fast courses, and days where I’ve hit balls that have stuck in the ground. Carry distance is all that matters really. Next time you play your local municipal, imagine how much further you’d hit it if the fairways were as hard as the greens. Pros can get 50-plus yards of roll, remember that.
Iron shots aren’t much more reliable, because not a tournament goes by where the casual fan will see a pro line up a shot and hear the announcer say, “Here’s Kuchar, hitting 7-iron from 195,” and naturally the thought process is that pros absolutely murder their irons. This again is a bit of a misnomer, as all announcers really have to go by is the word of the players caddy, or an educated guess. And it’s not like caddies are always going to tell the truth; why not make his pro seem superhuman?
Another important data point is the release the pros get on greens, so be sure to pay attention to where the ball lands. It’s not uncommon for a pro to hit 5-iron to a 225 yard par 3. Notice that a lot of times, the ball lands on the front of the green rolls to the back. The pro might be carrying it 200 yards as oppose to 225. Still long, but not ridiculous. Chances are that you hit the ball further comparatively then you believe you do, and new clubs might not really change that.
The second question is: Are people really hitting it longer then they did? OEMs definitely want you to think so. It would be easy to pick on TaylorMade or Callaway, who seem to be at the forefront of the cold war of distance, and I will try to minimize the finger pointing. But both are engaged in campaigns of convincing players there are several yards to be found. TaylorMade in 2012 had its much publicized (and successful) “17” campaign, based on the premise that players would gain 17 yards by switching to its Rocketballz 3-wood. TaylorMade even had its players wear soccer-style jerseys on the course during last year’s WGC event at Doral promoting this, truly a first in golf marketing (note: the campaign was nixed mid round by the PGA Tour).
Callaway has responded by signing every big hitter this side of Art Sellinger to its staff, and airing ads where Alvaro Quiros smacks balls over the Bellagio fountains in Las Vegas. I can only imagine what they have in store for uber-driver Jamie Sadlowski! But the question really is, despite the theatrics, are players really hitting it further?
Distance numbers for amateurs are tough to come by. But not so much on the PGA Tour, where one would think technology would be just as beneficial. In 2012, Bubba Watson led the Tour in driving distance at 315 yards, Charlie Beljan was second at 311. In 2010, Robert Garrigus led the tour at 315 yards, and Watson was second at 309. In. 2008 Watson led the tour at 315 yards. Garrigus was second at 311. What about 2006? The one and only Watson led at 319 yards and J.B. Holmes was second at 318. Wait? Were people longer in 2006? Or what about in 2004, when Hank Kuehne set the still standing record of 321 yards and John Daly was second at 314 yards, a number that would have still ranked second in 2012?
This is before adjustable-lofted drivers, full acceptance of 460cc heads, speed slots and most other features you see listed as performance attributes of 2013 drivers. With all the supposed advancements, why aren’t we seeing evidence on the tour? Sure, more people are hitting it further these days and averaging 300 yards, but you could just as easily argue that is a case of simple Darwinism than equipment, as a result of the “Tiger Proofing” of courses (think about it, if all food in the world was on 10-foot shelves, chances are humans would have a higher vertical leap 100 years from now right?). But the longest guys don’t seem to be driving it further. To take it even a step further, in Jack Nicklaus’ “Golf my Way,” he says his driving distance was “250 and up.” This was with a sub-43-inch steel-shafted driver, wound balls and wooden heads.
How far would Nicklaus carry the ball with a 45-inch graphite-shaft, a modern titanium driver head and a Pro V1X? Probably Watson long, and these are all advancements that are a decade old right now. Fact is, Nicklaus could’ve probably changed nothing other than his golf ball and he would’ve carried as far as the average pro does today, or at least very close. So how far have we really come?
Irons are another fun discussion. I recently bought a set of refurbished Ping Eye2 irons and plan on using them in the 2013 season. The pitching wedge is 50.5 degrees. Read that again! My new pitching wedge is almost two-degrees weaker than my Mizuno JPX-800 gap wedge! When I started playing golf roughly eight years ago, most pitching wedges were around 46 to 47 degrees, and now in 2013, it is common for them to be 44 to 45 degrees. The loft of my first ever 7-iron (a Tommy Armour 845 Silver Scot) was 36 degrees, as compared to my last 7-iron, a Mizuno JPX-800 which was 32 degrees. That’s over a 10 percent difference in lofts! Taking that a step further: I could hit my last 7-iron 165 yards and my original 7-iron 150 yards with the exact same swing!
These are important things to remember when considering an iron purchase. Next time you hit clubs in the store further than your original set, make sure to check the specs. To come back to Jack Nicklaus’ yardages, in “Golf my Way,” he claimed he hit his 7-iron 140 to 155 yards, which doesn’t sound like a lot. But remember his 7-iron was really a modern 8-iron at least, and at worst relatively close to a 9-iron! Suddenly his yardages with a wound ball don’t seem so bad! So again, how far have we come with technology? Or really, is it more a clever way of selling?
Another random thing I remember from my youth was a Fox Network special where a masked magician revealed many of magic’s secrets. At the relatively anticlimactic end, he said that he did it not to shame anyone, or make himself famous. He did it to push other magicians to come up with new material, to force them to come up with new tricks. I wish we as consumers would force that upon golf manufacturers. I wish all golf publications and reviewers would mention things like loft and shaft length in their reviews, but many do not currently do that.
Golfers everywhere have spent $799 for new irons under pretenses they might not understand, and ended up with a 4-GW set that performs the exact same as their previous 3-PW set. It’s time we stopped whipping out the measuring stick and forced golf manufacturers to come up with something that really benefits us. This will not happen until golfers out there truly understand what is being sold to them and how flawed their basis of comparison is. Until then, OEMs will continue to feed us distance promises that don’t quite jive. I hope, in my most ambitious sense of optimism, that this can start us along that path.
As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!
Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.
Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.
One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?
Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.
Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.
Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”
For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…
Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.
Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…
That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.
Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.
@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic
Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!
Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.
View this post on Instagram
“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”
Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.
That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.
As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.
I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.
One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.
The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.
If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.
Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.
As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.
It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.
David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.
In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:
“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”
Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”
Eventually, though, something shifts.
We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.
Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.
Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.
Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.
So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.
I see someone evolving.
He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.
It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.
‘Why would anybody want to change that swing?’ – Brandel Chamblee says PGA Tour star was wrong to change his swing
‘The stupidest freaking thing I’ve ever heard’ – Billy Horschel slams Open idea suggested by Padraig Harrington
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Golfer proudly posts photo of ball mark on iron, receives immediate roasting
WITB Time Machine: Matthew Wolff’s winning WITB, 2019 3M Open
Oakmont Country Club bans Wyndham Clark over locker incident; Reveals specific conditions to earn reinstatement
Adam Scott puts Callaway blades in the bag at Wyndham Championship
Report: LIV star fires caddie and coach in shock shake up
Rickie Fowler makes equipment change to ‘something that’s a little easier on the body’
The championship formula: How 3 key stats separate winners from the field
Peter Malnati WITB 2025 (August)
Peter Malnati what’s in the bag accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. More photos from the event here. Driver: Titleist...
Cameron Young’s winning WITB: 2025 Wyndham Championship
Driver: Titleist GT2 (9 degrees, A1 SureFit setting) Buy here. Shaft: Mitsubishi Tensei 1K Pro Orange 70 TX 3-wood: Titleist...
Camilo Villegas WITB 2025 (July)
Camilo Villegas WITB accurate as of the Wyndham Championship. Villegas was undecided on a 3-wood when we shot his bag. ...
WITB Time Machine: Brandt Snedeker’s winning WITB, 2018 Wyndham Championship
Brandt Snedeker fired a final-round 65 at the 2018 Wyndham Championship to outlast Webb Simpson and C.T. Pan. His 5-under...
Paul
Feb 18, 2013 at 12:44 pm
With so many options out there, it takes way more testing to find equipment that works with one’s own swing dynamics. One thing that is certain, is that for those who ignore the short game (Wedges & Putter)… And ignore the fact that this is where realistic gains can be made in keeping the total score down to as low as possible… Those same individuals will also ignore how important properly spaced wedge lofts are – in contributing to keeping the score down. 150 yards and in, is where the game is won and lost.
Eric
Feb 4, 2013 at 4:17 pm
I enjoyed reading the article and wish that the general public would understand the same things about club manufacturers and how they market.
However, I would interested to know whether equipment today helps a player who has lower swing speeds distance. Clubs with more advanced technology and better materials that allow for low centers of gravity, high MOI, etc, are really beneficial to bad players. Like you said there are not really statistics for the average amateur or bad players, but I wonder what effect, if any, these newer clubs have for these players.
Along the same lines, don’t you think today’s iron technology allows the clubs to have lower lofts and go farther? A 7 iron today can have 3 degrees less loft than a 7 irons from 10 years, but still have the same ball flight characteristics (height, spin, etc.) and also go farther. Though I agree that it is misleading when a company says that their 7 iron will go farther than yours, when their 7 iron is more like your 6, as long it has the ball flight that you want out of a 7 iron, I am fine with that.
lbj273
Feb 2, 2013 at 3:44 am
the average distances is just that, an average. it fails to take into account anytime something less than a driver is hit off the tee, which skews the distance averages
Jeff Singer
Feb 3, 2013 at 9:05 pm
yes, but that was also the case in 2004, which is the earliest averages that are referenced in the article.
Charlie
Feb 6, 2013 at 4:58 pm
Could you not argue that, because of advances in overall distance since 2004, players are able to hit driver less often but still hit it as far?
trapp120
Feb 1, 2013 at 8:39 pm
I really liked the article. I do have one problem with it…no mention of shafts! A lot of progress has been made in this area and we all know the right shaft can transform even the crappiest iron or driver head into the right tool for you, so this should really be addressed when blasting all of the marketing.
I agree that it’s gone a little overboard, but these companies have to sell every year to meet rev goals. There’s no way they can do that by saying “The New TMAG R1…just as good as last year!”.
Instead of ripping the marketing distance claims, maybe you should rail against the practice of “perceived obscurity” that they’re all very guilty of pushing in hopes of creating a product lifecycle closer to 12 months instead of 3+ years.
GMatt
Feb 1, 2013 at 12:11 pm
It’s a case of the sheep being led to the slaughter or in buzz word terms “marketing”
The majority of folks on here may not believe in the hype but I’d bet you a $100 bill, they’ve inquired about it at their local golf shop. and the gentlman who stated most golfers would improve from lessons, you make absolutely too much sense to be on this forum
moses
Feb 1, 2013 at 12:45 am
I still havn’t found a modern driver that was as long as my old 300cc Titleist 983E. Look at the driving distance averages on PGATOUR.COM. Average distances of the purest ball strikers on earth really hasn’t changed in the last 7-8 years. Everything is maxed out. Want more distance? Go get properly fit for launch angle and spin rates.
S
Feb 2, 2013 at 12:30 pm
None of what you said means anything at all to anyone.
When you had that 983E, you were younger, probably stronger. Played more.
Your 983E may have been an anomaly club, which could have been at, or over, the average COR of an average consumer club (that sounds like a fluke, but it happens), with a very good shaft, also at an excellent spec. Unless you had the club tested we will never know.
Did you actually tally up your driving stats of those days with the 983E and compare it to the one you’re using now? What kind of courses did you play on, with what kind of weather conditions? How hard or soft were the courses and how much wind was there?
You say last 7 to 8 years – do you have the data to back that up? I bet you’d be surprised.
Golflaw
Jan 31, 2013 at 10:10 pm
As someone who has had to defend companies in court against false advertising claims, I find it strange that these arge, publicly traded golf equipment companies would knowingly be making claims without verifiable claims support.
S
Feb 2, 2013 at 12:25 pm
They only need ONE player to get that result ONE TIME from a test hit on a machine.
mark
Jan 31, 2013 at 6:36 pm
From 35 years of experience my best scores all come when 1 club works better than usual. My trusty 17 year old Anser Scotsdale. The worst modern trend is 46 and longer driver shafts. The Pro’s dont use them so why should we? I recall a quote from Davis Love where he said he knew in 3 swings whether or not a club would work for him….
Roger
Jan 31, 2013 at 1:06 pm
My goal has been to land in regulation on the 7th at my course and par it, the number 1 stroke hole…did it yesterday from 185m
with a 16.5 Tee i love….
Just upgraded to newer 588 wedges,love them…
Next step is a Driver that helps me hit 12 fairways per round…..250 yards total distance, in the fairway will make me happy. Set realistic expectations of your bag, stay fit and flexible, and practice putts,chipnruns and pitch shots a lot more!!! Great article !
Bill Gabbert
Jan 31, 2013 at 12:45 pm
I used to be the same way, beleiving all the stuff manufactures were putting on TV. Then one day I took my bag full of TM products to the course along with a bag of clubs I played 2 years ago. Played 2 rounds, one with each set, and I actually played better with my old set. Bottom line is if you have something that works and your happy with it, leave it alone. Like someone said early here take some lessons, and make some training aids like Michael breed does on the Golf Fix and practice, you will be amazed. Good article Jeff. love this site.
S
Jan 31, 2013 at 2:25 am
Blah blah blah blah blah…… that’s what all that is, above!
You know what?
Bigger, faster, stronger….longer. = AMERICA.
It’s our culture. PERIOD. Nuff said.
Jeff Singer
Jan 31, 2013 at 6:45 pm
my original article was just “bigger, faster, stronger…longer. Nuff said”. But my editor rejected it and asked for like 1800 more words
S
Feb 2, 2013 at 12:22 pm
Hahahahaha! That’s awesome.
The other part of what I was going to say, was:
AMERICA = we’re gullible and love our commercials telling us beautiful lies. We love it.
ABgolfer2
Jan 31, 2013 at 12:37 am
269 +50=319
Sounds like 300+ on tour IS a regular thing.
Jesse
Jan 30, 2013 at 9:45 pm
“First, why do we believe the claims? Well, we believe because we want to believe, and because what we see on TV can be a bit confusing.” – Distance for dinner: Have OEM distance claims gone too far? by Jeff Singer
Secondly – Many people are stupid enough to believe it!
Troy Vayanos
Jan 30, 2013 at 2:30 pm
It makes you wonder what the golf club manufacturers are selling us?
Are they really telling us the truth about distances and so forth?
I think a lot of time it is up to the individual to test new clubs out for themselves and get a better understanding of their own distances and ball flights.
Better to do this than listen to a slick salesman telling you that a new driver is going to instantly get you another 20 yards off the tee.
Cheers
CPP
Jan 30, 2013 at 11:41 am
cool story bro. 🙂
John
Jan 30, 2013 at 10:38 am
Jeff, another great article. Exposing marketing truths is always a risky proposition, and most amateurs don’t want to hear it. It’s a lot more fun to buy new clubs than to take a few lessons. My personal favourite is the strengthening of lofts, and lengthening of shafts. Today’s 4 iron is NOT a 4 iron.
Tim
Jan 30, 2013 at 7:55 am
great article exposing fallacy of distance gains, especially pointing out the course set up for Most PGA tour events, I am reminded of the pictures of the 2006 open at Hoylake where the fairways were almost burnt, and tiger was hitting his 2 iron over 260 off the tee. Move to Hawaii this year into the wind Dustin Johnson was barely hitting driver 200 yards.
Chris
Jan 30, 2013 at 3:47 am
Great article. Here in the UK I just read that Mr King CEO of Taylormade wants to chuck away all the USGA/R&A equipment rules to make the game more enjoyable ( Comments apparently originating at the 2013 show) He wantsthe manufacturers to call time on the USGA.
This of course has absolutley nothing to do with all the Marketing
B******t his company puts out about equipment performance gains that frankly never materialise unless of course you count hitting a 7 iron
further than your 6 iron ( Of course we are talking about the number on the club here not the actual loft or length of the club). Further a test in the UK showed that apart from cosmetics the Rocketbladze irons were no better than the Rocket balls irons To sum up this type of marketing you could miss out the rocket.
Once some one is customfitted ( the best equipment for their current swing and club head speed) the only wayI’ve seen to gain distance is by improving club path ball stricking and clubhead speed.
Jeff
Jan 29, 2013 at 11:31 pm
Great article, I don’t plan on upgrading my clubs until they either fail or the grooves wear out. Most golfers would improve more with lessons over new equipment.
mark
Jan 31, 2013 at 6:31 pm
Damn you’ve let the secret out. Bad swing with good clubs equals bad shot!!
Adrian Apodaca
Jan 29, 2013 at 8:51 pm
Jesus Christ! Mark McGwire and The Gilded Age.
Jeff Singer
Jan 29, 2013 at 9:38 pm
I’ve been really trying to work the gilded age into my artices. Finally an opportunity presented itself…LOL