2016-17 PGA Tour Distance Average Up 2.5 Yards To 292.5

One key crime of the wraparound: not getting to disgest, analyze and celebrate the many fun stats produced by the players and documented by the ShotLink system.

Thanks to the crack crew at ShotLink I just started looking over the 2016-17 stats as we roll into week two of 2017-18. Naturally, I went to the distance numbers first and the overall average spiked from last year's 290.0 number.

I'm fairly certain the 292.5 yard average for 2016-17 makes it a record year, proving yet again that core work and heavy use of foam rollers can pay dividends.

All drives in '16-17 averaged 285.1, but the records do not go back as far to put that number into perspective.

(Just a reminder here that the USGA and R&A Joint Statement of Principles was issued in 2002 suggesting  significant increases would set off alarm bells. The PGA Tour Driving Distance average in 2002 was 279.5 yards, meaning a 13-yard increase since then.)

As for 2016-17...check out the interval chart:

Note that 43 players averaged over 300 yards, compared to 27 in 2015-16. That's also a new high mark for 300+ average. Just one player (John Daly) averaged over 300 yards in 2002 when the Statement of Principles was issued.

Do I need to keep going?

Comments

[JS]

Guys - please name one block of people that “win” by a roll back, and provide support.

I’m not opposed, just realistic.

[munihack]

@JS
The biggest winners are future golfers. For they will get to play the game with the goal of mastering all the skills that once were required to play at a high level, not just bomb and gouge their way around a course. Why do you think the Open Championship has had such a skewed list of older winners in the last decade? It is because they still know how to play golf when the wind and weather demand imagination and strategy to score. And they know how to hit shots. The under 30 crowd grew up with trampoline drivers and spinny pinnacles as their default tools. They never had to develop nuance in their games. If they did it was by accident.

[Tom Morris]

@JS

There you go again talking about win - so far the lack of taking control has resulted in the mess we find ourselves in - for once stop thinking about self think about the quality of the game and more so the quality of our golf courses - those things that are now starting to close at an ever increasing rate.

Ball roll back is about the golf course not about individual prick size - its about being affordable , its about the challenges, its about sporting courses with serious hazards while allowing the learners to still play .

Distance in golf is pointless, what does it prove, but getting around a course with real hazards that makes you think defines the game, but we have travelled some distance away from the game of golf where people think its great to hit a ball a long way, to do long puts on snooker finished fairways and greens - that all crap because in golf you have to think and walk - you play it by using your eyes legs and the feel you get once on the course. Distance is a sign of a weak player, no matter how far he hits the ball - but worst still some designers think its great and also think island green are too, trouble being they have missed the whole point about the game of golf

Well you did ask! Enjoy or if you can go play a few rounds with Hickory clubs.

[Johnnnycz]

JS: Greenkeepers, Course Owners, Golfers who don't have all day to play 18, Beginners, Older Mobile restricted golfers, to name a few.

[digsouth]

As a former manufacturers rep for some of the top, premier companies in the performance car industry, it was common for the ''next'' xxx to be waiting in the wings for the next year: waiting, that is, fir the existing inventory to be sold. And the ''next'' ''next'', and the one after that were often ready as well.

I would think that TM, Callaway and Titleist all have similar closets full of even longer, more forgiving sticks for years to come- and sell- then sell- then sell, then se....!

If you put out''the best'', then you have screwed the pooch- marketing dictates engineering in golf equipment. among everything else.

Something to consider, as we ''ask'' them to shelve their goodies, and build inferior good stuff, so to speak.

there's yer lawsuit.
dig

[Easingwold]

Digs, I understand that. But how can they sue a sport that makes it's own rules ? When they reduced tennis balls because regular aces ruined the game, the manufacturers went with it. Why ? Because they knew rallies were more exciting and the game was better for it. Now I realise distance is the main selling point with golf equipment, but that's no good if there are less people playing golf. I believe golf would be more exciting if shotmaking returned to the game, ie rollback 10%, more spin, and shorter courses. And ultimately more people playing golf when a great shoemaker something like Seve comes along. And suddenly golf is buzzing again.

[digsouth]

EW- I'm with you on this. I said that recovery shots are the most exciting part of golf right now. PM's hook from the deep rough to a few feet from the pin was called the shot of the day, maybe the event, I'm not sure about that.

The problem is perception- everybody likes the long ball.

Hope all is well, shoulder holding up?

dig

[Tom Morris]

A while ago I read a letter published in The Times (nearly a 100 years ago) in response to an article by J H Taylor titled “The New Golf” published on the 3rd September 1921. It was to start with in the response to the floating ball debate that was going on at the time, however the letter also had some real question as to what was happening to the game. I feel I must post some of his comments for your information:-
“Modern Golf has become an orgy of long driving. To meet the increased flight of the modern ball golf courses have been lengthened again and again until a round is a weariness to the flesh, and still they are not long enough to compel the best players to use their brassies. Nor is the end in sight, for the ingenuity of the ball makers is not yet exhausted. Skill has been discounted further by the large expanse of the present day greens and by the modern tendency to bank up the back of the greens so that a too powerful shot, instead of meeting its fate in the terrors of the back of beyond, may simply run up the bank and then trickle back on the green. Thus, a player who has hit a properly controlled shot may be no better off than the smiter whose ball in justice ought to have been over the green.
Golf is tending to become the game of a robot, not of an artist. Every year has made reform more difficult. Is it too much to hope that our golf legislators will take their courage in their hands and call a halt to the prostitution of the Royal & Ancient game by boldly restoring the floating ball? All who have the interests of the game at heart would approve such action, which would once more ensure that skill and artistry would meet with their due reward. I am, Sir, & c., Herbert J. Paterson London W1.”

Now that is a letter and what’s more it’s just short of a 100 years old – one of the issues I raised a few years ago with Tom Doak and the guys at Golf Club Atlas was that very point of not protecting the rear of the Green. Clearly, Mr Patterson, too was ignored but, I hope it conveys just how good the game of golf was in those far off times and why I seek to encourage others to join in and enjoy the real game of golf – it just requires a little commitment.

[Easingwold]

@digs- it's doing well thanks. Now and then I might get a sharp pain, if I'm laying on it for instance. But 80% movement and enjoying my modest game. 60th on the horizon, working to lower my handicap a few shots.
Hope your issues are getting better. And as for the spelling police, what you say is far more important. Enjoy your posts, cheers.

[JS]

“JS: Greenkeepers, Course Owners, Golfers who don't have all day to play 18, Beginners, Older Mobile restricted golfers, to name a few.”

Greenskeepers want to have less responsibility?

Course owners have every opportunity to offer the product they think is best. Value wins!

Golfers on a time crunch are not impacted either way...this is a made up reason for people not playing.

Beginners? Yes, they would probably rather play with the rakes and shovels of old...

Mobility challenged golfers? What?

Melvyn wants to go back to 1900. Do Chico, Easingwold, Digs and the rest want to do that?


Sorry guys, not trying to be obtuse but...this is on each and every course and player to deliver and get what they want out of the game.

I’ll repeat, a roll back would be perfectly fine with me...but it won’t make the game better (or worse...).

[Matt A]

@MC - Why would longer courses become obsolete? they would just move the tee's up and save money on not using and maintaining all the extra turf.

[Matt A]

@ JS - ML is 33 and his driving distance is 298.6, When Azinger was 33 his distance was 273.3 but did not play on tour past 2010.

Let's take Freddy since he still plays. When he was 33 his distance was considered long as he was 5th on tour for driving distance with a driving average of 274.8. But Marc at 298.6 is only 50th in driving there are 49 other players out there this year that hit farther than 298.6.

Now take Freddy on the Champions tour this year - his average is 293.7 and is 58 years old. I'm sure he's not as fit as Marc now but he's still only 5 yards shorter than Marc. The most well known player tied for 49th in driving distance in 1992 was Brandle Chamblee with 265.5 33.1 yards behind the current 50th Marc Leishman.

Pretty sure that's equipment.

[JS]

Matt - have I ever said equipment wasn’t a main contributor to increased distance?

What I’ve said is that major change for such an infinitesimal group is not warranted.

Also, the Leishman question was based on #50 in driving in 2002 versus 2017. In addition to ball, clubs, fitness and optimization and maintenance practices; a major contributor to yardage increases are the guys hitting the ball. Take out the shorter, control focused players and replace them with bigger guys that play a more power game and the numbers go up as well.

[Tom Morris]

@JS

It’s not that I want to go back to the 1900's - it’s because back then the courses were in tune with the ball/equipment/design. Today the ball travels far too far, reducing great designs to the point of wondering what was so great about them - Its destroying the game of golf yet so many just want to see long driver show just how ignorant they are about the game of golf and the idea on playing such a game.

The trend today is to uneducated the player/golfers, to the point that they lose sight of the game, believing it’s all about low score and being an Alpha Male or Female. The thought of thinking the game through - even to the Hole, appears to be beyond some.

I seek, no hope that players will become golfers and enjoy the richness of the game that was taught to me way back in my days at St Andrews, when golf was really played, went score was hardly ever mentioned and Matchplay was the game. Golf was way, way better than we have today, so were the courses because they reflected the game, when they tested the golfer. To present a player with an easy course and equipment that will humble it even further is cruel, it’s not golf and it’s not playing the game - however it seems the R&A and USGA have not quite understood the idea behind The Royal & Ancient Game of Golf, when they do we might see some change - but don't hold your breath, its take over 100 years and we still have not resolved the ball to the satisfaction of the game.

[hornblower]

Restrict the number of clubs in the bag for some tournaments. Six clubs and a putter would be a good start. Players will show up if there is money at stake. Weekend players can carry as many as they wish.