The greatest development in Golf technology

I was watching the Masters the other night and whilst Adam Scott was putting, it got me thinking about how golfers have changed their equipment over the years.

But what do you think has been the major technological improvement to the game over the last 50 years?

I have put a few suggestions below for you to discuss and I would like to also hear what you think has been bad for the sport.

Long Putters (which I really dont like - they just don't look like they should be allowed)
Ball technology
Club Head technology
Shaft technology
Putter head technology

Feel free to throw in others that I might have obviously missed.

None of the above.

The fitting technology and analysis.

LondonJonnyO wrote:None of the above.

The fitting technology and analysis.

Is this customising clubs and watching slo mo replays?

I like the screw-on umbrella holder

It's got to be the ball surely. I'm not sure that all the clubhead development and shaft-fitting in the world would be worth much if everyone was still playing with balata balls.
But of course this isn't to say that the developments are all positive. Hasn't Jack Nicklaus gone on record in the past saying that rather than lengthening and tightening the classic courses we should just reverse ball technology?

Hobo wrote:

LondonJonnyO wrote:None of the above.

The fitting technology and analysis.

Is this customising clubs and watching slo mo replays?

No. I mean the technology which monitors the strike and swing with various clubs. It gives you the impact position of the clubface, the azimuth through the impact area, region of the face you are striking, launch angle, initial spin rate, side spin applied, swing speed, shaft load and release pattern and on the more advanced machines the ball flight down range.

It means that you can find the perfect match to your current swing profile.


--------------------------------------

Additional: This is also used to marry the perfect ball to your swing profile thus maximising yardage and accuracy.

You could have all the club and ball tech you like. If it's wrong for you then it won't work. The fitting tech has advanced way beyond an impact position from a strike mat and face tape + swing speed to something that takes everything you mention and puts it all together. Without it I think that a lot of the club/ball tech is kind of worthless to most players.

Most dramatic technological change for me was the Titanium Driver. It was such a dramatic transformation from wood/steel headed clubs and has not been replaced as a material since.

Most other innovations have come more gradually like the golf ball has gradually got better over the years but it was not as if a manufacturer released a ball that suddenly got everyone playing differently. The introduction of Titanium into drivers made a huge difference to accuracy and distance to an immediate effect and the original Titanium Drivers would probably perform only slightly worse than current drivers.

As for fitting, this has always been about but it is only recently that it has become more common due to the fact that golf clubs don't really change year on year so manufacturers need to offer more than just a repainted model. Again, it has made an improvement but nothing dramatic...

Harrison. Whilst fitting has been around for ages how long have fitting specialists been using 3D imaging using Doppler Radar to perform the process?

It's grown massively in terms of the technology it uses.

I like the hats you can get with the magnet on the peak so you can throw your ball marker on it

LJ

Are you saying ANGC would have to be 7600 yards if all the players used 1960's dunlops and persimmon clubs but used the latest fitting technology?

I dont think so.

Actually the first great ball revolution and probably bigger than the introduction of the ProV1 was the move from the featherie to gutta percha.

I agree that is great but it is again a gradual process. Club manufacturers have been offering custom fitting for decades and most good golfers don't really need all of the computers to know what equipment they should be using. The specifics that this type of technology offers like spin rates etc are interesting to some but have very little interest to many and realistically would probably not make a huge difference to the average golfer. If a player cannot swing the club properly and hit the middle then the equipment that they use is irrelevant but Titanium in drivers made it more possible for every golfer to play better.

I'm personally not really too interested in this type of technology because I'm a bit more of a natural player that likes to feel my shots so believe that I will know which equipment to go for because it will play the way that I want and not necessarily the way that I should play.

Soft spikes were also a really great innovation. Cant' remember the last time that my ball hit a spike mark and went off line...

Mac. Obviously not. But with the growth of such a wide variety of different club and ball profiles there has been a corresponding growth of club players using the wrong equipment. Look around your club on a sunday at the number of people using a proV1. How many of them are actually capable of getting anything out of the ball? Then look in their bag at the shafts and clubheads they are using. There are loads of players out there who have a driver which is a bog standard 9 degrees or so but is the latest greatest bit of kit on the PR peoples campaign literature.

Technology advances in the equipment is all well and good. But by getting more and more advanced in terms of the fitting technology that guys are using they are more likely to have the correct bit of new technology on the end of their grips.

None of the above.

The biggest influence on the game has been greenkeeping technology!

Courses now are presented in much better condition than they were in the past. Irons for the greens to get them fast and true, top dressing spinners, triple cut mowers etc etc. Be honest, when is the last time that you played a decent course in summer that didn't have good greens?

Woburn. Their greens seem to be hit and miss a lot of the time. I have no idea why however.

Realistically though, most of those sunday golfers using a ProV1 would play no better with any other ball because the average golfer just does not strike the ball well. A few yards different in spin will not affect a poorly hit ball. I agree at the better end that it can make a difference but even then the technology is not essential - I can generally tell if a ball is right for me or not within a few shots and would even lean towards choosing a ball that I prefer chipping and putting with which is not quantifiable on a computer.

LJ

Say you are a 5 handicapper and you take a standard set of Irons and driver of the shelf at random on American golf, you then play a round.

The next day you totally custom fit a set of clubs to your swing, then go play a round with them.

Can you really claim, assuming you swing as well both days, that there would be a noticeable difference in your score? Probably not.

Mac. I would say there would be a difference yes.

drive4show wrote:None of the above.

The biggest influence on the game has been greenkeeping technology!

Courses now are presented in much better condition than they were in the past. Irons for the greens to get them fast and true, top dressing spinners, triple cut mowers etc etc. Be honest, when is the last time that you played a decent course in summer that didn't have good greens?

I think that age of courses has had just as much effect. Older golf courses have generally always been in great condition because they have matured enough to be great. Golf greens generally will take at least 20 years to get good and the vast increase in golf courses built 20-30 years ago when the game became more popular and accessible means that there are a lot more courses with better greens now.

LondonJonnyO wrote:Mac. I would say there would be a difference yes.

Yes but the point of this article is to discuss the greatest development in golf technology. So yes, in that experiment over 1000 rounds the fitted clubs might have 0.5 a round better score. But do you not think that steel and graphite shafts for example have had a great effect on the game?

LondonJonnyO wrote:Mac. I would say there would be a difference yes.

A 5 handicapper would probably not just go for an off the rack set or if they did then they would probably be good enough to pick one that is similar to the results on a computer just by being a good golfer. Thus there would not be a huge difference.

As long as a player is using roughly the correct equipment then going into the specifics might be interesting but not essential. To pick roughly the correct equipment then they will have to either be a good enough golfer to know what they want or see a good enough and honest pro that will find it for them.

Not quite the point I'm making.

What I'm saying is that all this incredible club technology is one thing. But by picking up say an R11 (and then spray painting it a sensible colour) and taking the stock shaft off the rack what are you really getting?

The fitting technology has advanced to such a degree that you can see exactly what gives you the best possible chance. So you are using the technology effectively.

LondonJonnyO wrote:Mac. Obviously not. But with the growth of such a wide variety of different club and ball profiles there has been a corresponding growth of club players using the wrong equipment. Look around your club on a sunday at the number of people using a proV1. How many of them are actually capable of getting anything out of the ball? Then look in their bag at the shafts and clubheads they are using. There are loads of players out there who have a driver which is a bog standard 9 degrees or so but is the latest greatest bit of kit on the PR peoples campaign literature.

Technology advances in the equipment is all well and good. But by getting more and more advanced in terms of the fitting technology that guys are using they are more likely to have the correct bit of new technology on the end of their grips.

How much of this "incorrect usage" is down to people not taking advice from their Pro or poor Pro's who just want the sales of their expensive stock. A number of Pro's that belong to the same purchasing group conducted a Poll recently and 52% of respondents had not been fitted for their clubs,I dislike some of these polls as they don't tell what %age of their customers actually responded so the %age of people being fitted could be less, I would like to have seen one run for balls as well. I like the use of video by my local pro as I am one of those "hackers" who likes to see what I am doing wrong as I seem unable to do what I am told without seeing why I need to correct something.

It depends how you view this question. I saw it as what has made the most dramatic difference to the game of golf on a technological point of view. Fitting is an improvement in the game but has not made a dramatic effect.

Cavity back's in irons, Titanium in woods, grooves in clubs etc etc have all made more of a difference to the general golfing public and have thus had a bigger impact. Club fitting can, on case by case basis, cause an improvement but not everyone finds it useful.

Dunno about grooves.. I would think a fair number of players wear out the hosel long before the grooves are done with.

sharrison01 wrote:It depends how you view this question. I saw it as what has made the most dramatic difference to the game of golf on a technological point of view. Fitting is an improvement in the game but has not made a dramatic effect.

Cavity back's in irons, Titanium in woods, grooves in clubs etc etc have all made more of a difference to the general golfing public and have thus had a bigger impact. Club fitting can, on case by case basis, cause an improvement but not everyone finds it useful.

I agree that is how I read the original posters question. Think of it in terms of f1 and the introduction of rear and then front wings to f1 cars. These were new concepts that are forever being optimised but without them there is nothing to optimise. Like wise the introduction of steel shafts, graphite shafts, cavity backs, titanium and ball technology are all fundamental changes in the technology people have at hand. The optimisation of this is not the real breakthrough.

People optimise the use of E=MC[2] everyday, but it is Einstein who has the nobel prize.

Shafts, and I say this from recent experience and it also adds a bit to LJs fitting technology. I was fitted for my clubs 3-years ago and the improvements in my game have been awesome. So I don't accept that anything off the shelf will get similar results.

A few eeks ago I noticed that I was not getting the same results with my driver, so went back to my fitter and was told that I had lost 5mph off my clubhead speed. This now meant that the original shaft he fitted would not work as designed. We tried a few different shafts and found one that works for me, got back 4 of the 5mph lost and also increased yardage. He also told me that club technology had almost peaked and shafts were the engine and R&D money was being pumped into it in a big way.

By the way a few years ago I purchased a couple of rescues from AA and after getting them home discovered i couldn't hit them. Those along with my clubs were put on a machine by my (Soon to be) fitter and we discovered that I had a different lofts on my irons, no 2 shafts performed as advertised, my new rescues had stiff shafts even though they were supposed to be regular (No wonder I couldn't hit them) My 10 degree driver was 14. So buying off the shelf is not for everyone.

Shafts for me. Lightweight graphite that doesn't deform is a massive step forward. Longer, lightweight (< half that of a typical TT DG) shafts w/ the weight concentrated at the end. Boom.

sharrison01 wrote:...but it was not as if a manufacturer released a ball that suddenly got everyone playing differently...

The original Spalding Tour Edition. Norman used it in his pomp and although I'm not sure it had the same urethane cover as the current balls, it was the first to really ally balata-like spin with a cover you couldn't put a 'smiler' in combined with great distance.

Not sure I'd rate it alongside shaft development but you did ask .

For tour pros, the greatest development is the ball.

For the non pro, it is golf clubs with forgiveness.

Custom fitting for the non pro will only help if it is properly done by a true expert. I was fitted by a person who worked in a Tour van for many years and fitted many Tour players. He tested my clubs and found that the shaft flexes and lofts were not necessarily the same as the manufacturer claimed. Incidentally, there are 16 flexes for graphite shafts. If your fitter does not have a software program to match them with swing speed, etc. don't get your hopes up about having a proper fit.

I'm surprised that Simba hasn't piped up (to spell incorrectly) that the loathsome Tiger Woods isn't the greatest technological advance as he seems to think the the sun shines out of his bum.

What about head covers in the form of small cuddly animals?

it's clearly the ball picker-upper. we forget how much effort it used to be, all that bending over on the putting green...

no one has mentioned the golf umbrella or recovery wood

Or the hipflask!

douboug wrote:For tour pros, the greatest development is the ball.

For the non pro, it is golf clubs with forgiveness.

Custom fitting for the non pro will only help if it is properly done by a true expert. I was fitted by a person who worked in a Tour van for many years and fitted many Tour players. He tested my clubs and found that the shaft flexes and lofts were not necessarily the same as the manufacturer claimed. Incidentally, there are 16 flexes for graphite shafts. If your fitter does not have a software program to match them with swing speed, etc. don't get your hopes up about having a proper fit.

16? I don't think so and if you measure them by CPM (as a fitter typically might and which is variable) then your 'flexes' don't matter that much.


Here's one for Mac and is surely the greatest golfing advancement.....








...the Chipper.

Navy

Nothing, not even a chipper can dent my mood after watching the magestic giggs in action tonight.

I could state a case for everything from balls to shafts via the route of drivers with a 460cc head giving larger MOI etc etc.

I don't think you can single one item out as the single most technologically advanced bit of kit for example you could have the best clubhead out there but wrong shaft means you'll not be able to do anything effectively with it and Vice Versa, great shaft wrong clubhead could equally mean its wrong for you. This is why it will be personal opinion about everything and it also differs on what level you play the game at.

If you asked what has made the game easier for everyone that in my opinion would be the introduction of cavity backs and 460cc headed drivers enabling higher MOI for everyone to be able to get better more consistent strikes that blades and persimmon and even smaller headed metal woods didn't give you.

If you said what's the most significant development for the better player then it would be the ball the way it now behaves and some can ally distance and spin rates (with the exception of the Pro V in my opinion to high a spin rate).

Truth being told the greatest technological advance in the game isn't any single one of these things its actually the way that are all put together in unison to create lighter, more forgiving yet more powerful clubs for the average player to use effectively.

The biggest stand out reason why technology is rarely used effectively is many golfers inability to recognise that just because pro's use it doesn't mean they can.

Ping irons - it was the start of cavity back clubs... now the vast majority of clubs are cavity backed... very few traditional blades

It's a combination of lots of things. Material and construction of modern clubs combined with the technology in new balls have all combined to make the game easier. Hybrid clubs have replaced hard to hit 2 and 3 irons. Putters are now more like Barret Rifles than golf clubs. Driver heads are like a pit pony's heid. Five irons are like JCB shovels. These have all helped old sclaffers like me play reasonable golf as I head over the last green of life. I play sometimes with a guy who is 81. He still hits the ball as far as he did when he played off 4 as a younger man...reason? He says the ball/

I would say that the cavity back irons, was the biggest benefit for all golfers, before them you add the old blades with such a small sweet spot, that made hitting the ball consistently very difficult, then came cavity backs, and the sweet spot was the hole club face, sheer bliss

oldparwin wrote:then came cavity backs, and the sweet spot was the hole club face, sheer bliss

Really? Any chance you could point out to me where the sweetspot is on my clubs cos I'm buggered if I can find it!!

Actually I've been thinking about this and the greatest development is the low resistance tee peg. I keep hearing that those things give you a 10-15% yardage increase for pennies!

LondonJonnyO wrote:Actually I've been thinking about this and the greatest development is the low resistance tee peg. I keep hearing that those things give you a 10-15% yardage increase for pennies!

I bought a pack of these a couple of weeks ago. 200 in the pack and thought great value, I've still got 200 left and am using the same one which is getting dirty. Never had a tee for so long but I'm going to retire it and use a clean new one at the weekend As for the extra yardage not sure as I'm putting that down to the new shaft on my driver. But great tees without a doubt

Doc

Why not sell them individually on ebay if they last for ever?

drive4show wrote:Doc

Why not sell them individually on ebay if they last for ever?

I'm thinking about it, but its the post and packaging

If they last that long but get dirty it would be important to know if they are machine washable before I would purchase one.

the non friction tee! boy does it increase your yardage with the big stick!

How about the slo-mo video. To allow us all to see what we are doing right & what we are doing wrong.

Also you cannot forget the internet. What great technology...