[ad_1]
Thanks, Bryson DeChambeau.
With your victory at Bay Hill, you’ve added more attention and relevance to the distance debate. While this is the one that may get some people to marvel, the conversation persists as the most provocative and important in sport.
I get the glaze. There is a lot of confusion. There is a 102-page distance report from the USGA and the R&A. There are technical discussions on both sides of the issue. There are a lot of arguments and, in my opinion, misunderstandings.
But despite all the rodents, there is a lot of meat on the bone. No problem gets to the heart of what people think is best for the game or what it should be. With DeChambeau as a timely illuminator, what follows is an attempt to clarify one side of the argument.
Like someone who accepts With the governing body of golf, that the trend of increasing distance is “leading the game in the wrong direction”, let me start by saying two things:
On the one hand, I often hear people say that regulating the distance by some sort of equipment recoil would bring the game back, stifling innovation, fun and the economic health of the golf industry. . But governing bodies have publicly stated that their intention is to advance golf, to make the game, especially recreational, more affordable, faster, more environmentally sustainable and more welcoming.
I have always focused on the top of the pyramid. For me, elite professional play in any sport – NFL, NBA, MLB, etc. – is what we watch and talk about the most, the one we compete against, the one with the most history, the one that is the most important and the most interesting. . The longer this area retains its celebration of all facets of athletic skill and challenge, the better. Perhaps it is looking back to look ahead.
Second, what may seem contradictory to many may also be true. For example: Bryson is good for the game, and more distance is not.
DeChambeau represents what energizes any sport the most: an exceptional athlete in pursuit of greatness with an obsession without compromise and without limits. It’s not just about being the best. It’s about being transformative by changing the way sport is played. The biggest examples have been Harry Vardon, Ben Hogan and Tiger Woods. DeChambeau, within a very short time, threatens to join the club.
He took on his mission with intelligence, discipline, courage and an infectious love of the game. He does the hardest thing in golf: hit tee shots as far as he can, while maintaining sufficient control. And arguably no player in history has ever, in the span of a year, worked so hard or effectively to redo their game and improve dramatically.
But if I’m so pro-Bryson, the guy that’s supposed to break golf, how can I also be pro-USGA / R&A, the protectors assigned to the game? This is because DeChambeau’s most revolutionary act was to pick fruit at hand.
Since DeChambeau’s six-stroke stunt at the US Open last September, there’s no denying that he’s much more than a one-ride pony. But his decision to prioritize speed and distance came after determining, based on stroke analysis and watching the emasculation of Bethpage Black by Brooks Koepka at the 2019 PGA Championship, that the long balloon is the most effective way to separate from the pack.
Bryson doesn’t break the game. He does. And expose it. This will valuablely inform, encourage and intensify the focus of the USGA and R&A on finding substantive solutions to the distance problem in elite play.
Bryson DeChambeau nails No.6 to Arnold Palmer
Consider the sixth of 555 yards hole at Bay Hill, which over the weekend replaced the 13th hole at Augusta as the best microcosm for the distance debate. Yes, watching DeChambeau carry 330 yards of water and come within 100 yards of the green was a great theater. Like anything done on a large scale for the first time after seeming impossible, this was a must have watch.
But let’s assume, not unreasonably, that DeChambeau won’t be the last to bite as much or more, or that he will be the first in a long series. Is there less than 100 yards left for a second shot in a par 5 what we really want the game to be? Is it good for the game? In my opinion, not more than if the majority of the NBA’s offensive possessions ended in a dunk, or if the majority of MLB’s hits were home runs, or if most of the NFL’s offensive plays saw a quarterback. -back back and throw a bomb for a touchdown.
To say that limiting the distance is to punish DeChambeau for what he has accomplished – an honestly earned advantage – is a misunderstanding. Everything he has won in sport must be exalted, never be taken away. But its real advantage is most accurately measured not in distance but in power.
This is an important distinction. I might be against greater distance in the elite men’s game, but I’m all for the power to retain its place as perhaps the most important tool for a touring player.
This is the attribute that has often marked the dominant players. It is the common thread of the historic succession of Bobby Jones, Sam Snead, Arnold Palmer and especially Jack Nicklaus. Tom Watson, Seve Ballesteros, Greg Norman would follow, then there was Tiger.
The power advantage exists and continues regardless of how far the golf ball travels. If the average drive was 250 yards, a player who averaged 275 yards would have a greater power advantage than a player averaging 310 when 300 is the average.
Reducing distance in the game does not reduce power. And some kind of backtracking wouldn’t undo all of DeChambeau’s work.
Power, in many ways, defines sport. It is the main driving force behind the Olympic motto “faster, higher, stronger”. It should never be reduced or handicapped at the highest level as is sometimes the case in horse racing, where the fastest horse is forced to carry extra weight.
But because humans evolve and improve physically and technically, athletes in all sports are continually gaining more power. And that has forced many sports to consider rule changes in the interest of making sure power doesn’t become more important than overall skill.
In football, goalposts were pushed back and later narrowed as the range of kickers increased to the point that too many games were decided by field goals. In basketball, the lane has been widened so that, with the three-second rule, the bigger men cannot camp under the basket. Baseball has been the most responsive. In an era when pitchers were deemed too dominant, field fences were out of place, the strike zone was narrowed, and the ball received more pep. Conversely, when there were too many home runs, the ball was cushioned, as will be the case for the coming season.
Likewise, in tennis, when powerful serves became too important, the ball was quietly slowed down. Boxing has evolved from bare knuckles to ever more padded gloves. KOs might not be as violent, but the power of the boxer is still the determining factor.
This hasn’t happened much in golf, and the Distance Insights Project is probably several years away from final action.
New USGA Proposals Aim to Reduce Golf Distance Problem
The distance controversy in golf is almost as old as the game itself, but it gained significant momentum in the early 2000s with a style of play dubbed Bomb and Gouge, which grew after a wave of equipment innovation that has dramatically increased the distance the pros hit the ball. Rather than prioritizing putting tee shots down the fairway, players understood that the percentages were often in their favor by driving as long as possible in order to end up with as short an approach as possible, even if it was. played in the rough.
This style worked best in regular events, where rough was less strenuous, but proved problematic in major championships with high rough. But as the distance grew, the practices grew longer and the distances left to the green became shorter, so much so that a much higher percentage of approaches are played with wedges. This changed the equation so that the bomb and gouge model is more prevalent than ever, even in the majors.
DeChambeau deployed the Bomb and Gouge 2.0 version at Winged Foot, and proved it was no fluke at Bay Hill, where all the speed training and technical work he does with a brain trust that includes Chris Como and long drive champion Kyle Berkshire have shown that he is just stretching out.
It would be misleading not to point out that DeChambeau continued to improve in all areas of the game. Several longer iron shots at Bay Hill were mind-blowing. Even though Patrick Reed has tried to convince him to shorten the shank length of his wedges, DeChambeau continues to develop more variety and touch around the green. And his putting seems more solid, especially under the pistol.
But I would say that the game he plays – and for example encouraging others to play – offers less variety than the game played by previous champions of the past 50 years, both in the number of different clubs and in the types of shots attempted. . This brings into play that awkward word – “deskilling”. Which, to me, means the biggest game isn’t as good as it used to be, even though the game’s most interesting figure has already established itself as an enhancer for the ages.
I would say that the challenge at the highest level has been somewhat compromised and the governing bodies are right to be concerned and ready to intervene. As they themselves admit, they have waited too long to do so.
But now DeChambeau has shone a brighter light than ever on the imbalance.
Once again, thank you, Bryson.
And may your mission to raise power to the top continue unabated.
[ad_2]
Source link
