Beman: "The advances in technology have greatly reduced the advantage of the physically superior."

Good to see Deane Beman continuing to shine a light on the technology debate as he battles with Golf World's E. Michael Johnson in this week's issue.

Responding to a question about the growing divide between amateur and pro game and why everyday courses should not be impacted:

Beman: You would think that, but fact is people who are on club golf committees see these longer courses. For the most part, they're better players and they become infatuated with all of it and push for a new tee box here or another 30 yards there. It's not good for the game. It's not a good use of land. It's not a good use of resources, and it does little but make the game too hard and too slow.

GW: Which is why some have called for more equipment rollbacks. But why should manufacturers have to adjust because people can't keep their egos in check?

Beman: Because when you have 523-yard par 4s it's really not golf.

GW: But golf is a sport where physical superiority should count for something.

Beman: That's my point. The advances in technology have greatly reduced the advantage of the physically superior. And those with more talent too. Everyone hits it long enough now. Working the ball is a lost art.

Jack [Nicklaus] hit it farther than just about everyone. That was an advantage for him. Now the longest of hitters don't get that big a benefit. Three hundred yards when everyone else is at 260 is useful. Hitting it 320 when the rest are at 290 is not nearly as much so because both players are still hitting a short iron in.

Comments

[Jay Townsend]

Someone please send this to the USGA and R & A

[eric_b]

So Beman's argument is that 40 yards is an advantage and 30 yards isn't? Really? My golfing buddy consistently outdrives me by about 30 yards....and let me tell you: it's a freaking advantage. Also, anyone who outdrives someone by about 30 yards usually has a one club advantage as well (i.e. the shorter guy may have a 6 iron as their 150 yard club whereas the longer guy uses a 7 or maybe even an 8). So that part of the argument is stupid....but moving on.

While I agree that the ego thing is a problem for the courses we mortals play (6000-6200 yards from the tips is MORE than enough for the average course), I don't see the problem with the pros playing a 523 yard par 4....I don't watch golf on TV to watch them struggle, I can watch myself for that.

Basically, we would be putting regulation on equipment because of a bunch of weekend warriors that are too stupid to realize that they shouldn't be playing from the tips. Sorry....that's stupid.

[Ky Laffoon's Ghost]

"Basically, we would be putting regulation on equipment because of a bunch of weekend warriors that are too stupid to realize that they shouldn't be playing from the tips. Sorry....that's stupid."

Not hardly, as they say around these parts. As Beman said, a 523-yard par-4 is not golf. The reason for rolling back the ball and placing limits on the driver are many, but the ego of the odd weekend warrior is not one of them. Rather: safety, speed of play, land use, maintenance expense, conservation of championship courses that were relevant for 80 years from the 1920s forward...

[Brad Ford]

Deane Beman is my hero. I continue to believe that the longer hitting ball/clubs have contributed to a decline in the skill of competitive golfers.

More importantly, I think the solution is very easy and relatively inexpensive:

1. Make clubheads larger than a late persimmon-era driver illegal (BTW - that would result in the reduction in the size of many modern 3 woods). A smaller sweet spot would prevent all but the most skilled drivers of the ball from bombing it out there 350 yards.

2. Mandate that the thickness of the face of a hollow club be contant (except for grooves). This would prevent the trampoline effect and much of the gear effect;

3. Make it possible to generate sidespin again off the tee. Mandate that any "legal" ball manufactured after the date of the new rules must generate at least XXX rpms of sidespin when hit with a regulation driver at 110rpm with the face open/closed at impact by Y degrees.

[A3golfer]

When I played Bethpage black on almost a weekly basis, a few holes played for me like 530 yard par 4's. And to say this was not golf is ridiculous. It was golf and it was hard and challenging and made me focus on putting and 75 yard wedge shots. I became a better golfer because of it.

Design better short holes, instead of extending mediocre golf courses for the few. And the idea of the physically superior golfer not having an advantage is a joke, has he been asleep during the Tiger era or what? What let's bring back fat beer drinking tour pros and the persimmon woods so that some private golf course that is revered by elites can still be relevant to the 1% of golfers who hit it 320 yd. Ummmmm......no.

[Steve]

Beman: Because when you have 523-yard par 4s it's really not golf.

Would he have said the same thing 60+ years ago when 470 yard holes were par 4's but played similar to 530 yard holes today with modern equipment?

Funny how a 500+ yard par 4 gets people riled up, yet 450-460 yard par 4's back when tee shots were only 220 or 230 were fine.

[calvin coolidge]

"Now the longest of hitters don't get that big a benefit. Three hundred yards when everyone else is at 260 is useful. Hitting it 320 when the rest are at 290 is not nearly as much so because both players are still hitting a short iron in."

Being two clubs longer is not an advantage? Huh?

Maybe it's that the fields today are much, much deeper and they weed out most of the shorter hitters so everyone appears long.

P.S. A 523 yards par four is golf if you hit it 320. Who the hell wants to see pros hit it the distance I hit it?

[Hawkeye]

OK, so a 6-iron versus a 3-iron is a huge advantage,but a gap wedge versus an 8-iron isn't? Please tell me what I don't get about this.

[James]

The argument that technology brings everybody closer together distance wise doesn't make any sense; in fact, I believe it does the opposite. If player A swings 10% faster than player B he's going to hit it 10% further regardless of what clubs their hitting - persimmon, titanium, heck, a tennis racket for that matter. Now suppose player A could only hit a persimmon wood 200 yards and player B only 180. All things being equal, if player A could could hit a titanium driver 300 yards then player B should only be able to hit it 270. 30 yard difference compared to 20. What helps player B helps player A as well. The end result is further separation than before.