BOMB: So the big equipment news out of the Memorial this past week was Tiger Woods’ realization that a little more loft in his driver would be a good thing. Given that his launch angle has always resided somewhere in the 9-degree area while the tour average is above 11 degrees, last week’s change to a 10-degree driver made sense. And you certainly couldn’t argue with the results.
But Woods aside, fact is the PGA Tour has seen a significant jump in average driver loft over the last seven years—about 1.5 degrees on average. Part of the reason for the increase is that lofts at the low end and on the high end have done a near complete flip-flop, witnessed by these numbers from the Memorial in 2002 and last week:
Memorial 2002
Drivers in play at 10 degrees of loft or higher: 5
Drivers in play at 8 degrees of loft or lower: 28
Memorial 2009
Drivers in play at 10 degrees of loft or higher: 28
Drivers in play at 8 degrees of loft or lower: 9
There is no single reason for the boost in driver lofts among pros. Rather, a number of equipment technologies have come together resulting in the need for additional lift. Driver technology, lower-spinning, solid-core balls and the emergence of launch monitors all have contributed.
So what can the average Joe or Jane learn from this? Plenty. In fact, driver loft for them may be more significant than for tour players. But you were way ahead on that one, weren’t you, my friend. I recall an article you did in 2003 urging players to use more loft. It’s about time folks started to listen, if not to you, then to the best player in the world.
GOUGE: Truthfully, I think both of us have been suggesting that Tiger change his thinking on the driver for years, but the fact is he could use a toilet seat on the end of a broom handle and beat us all left-handed.
I'm more intrigued by the idea of smaller club size though. Forty percent of the field at the Memorial were using drivers under 460 cc in volume. What exactly is Tiger giving up by going with a smaller head? He shouldn't be losing ballspeed, assuming he hits everything in the center of the face. It's why the driver the USGA uses on its swing robot isn't 460 cubic centimeters, either. Tiger's prototype driver is probably a little closer in size to what he used when he played miraculously flawless golf in 2000-01 when he won the Tiger Slam, only its face technology is much better engineered.
I believe there still are some valid arguments to be made that today's drivers that push size and shape limit dimensions work against the creation of clubhead speed for the fastest swingers. They may help with offcenter hit ballspeed, but I also believe that feature can be engineered into smaller heads, too. It's why big-time companies like Callaway and TaylorMade aren't all caught up in size anymore. It's why Callaway spent a lot of time and effort improving the aerodynamics of heads like the FT-iQ, and why TaylorMade isn't worried that the R9 was only 420 cc.
The question is what should average golfers do? I wouldn't recommend they switch to a smaller driver, not because I don't think it wouldn't help, but because 99 percent of the smaller drivers out there don't display the latest technology (R9 at 420 cc, would be an exception, of course). The small heads that you might find today are borderline museum pieces. Easily, there are ways to better engineer 400 cc heads today. It's just that the rush to the 460 cc limit has dictated most current driver introductions. Maybe that will change solely because the No. 1 player in the world doesn't use one anymore. Tiger does a lot of things most human golfers can't imagine, but more loft and a smaller head are things every golfer might want to try. They might help us just as much as they helped him.
Comments
Post A Comment