• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Saudi World Golf Tour 2022/2023 Thread

cville deac said:
It has an old timey aura that I kinda like. Way better than the new Minnesota course they added. Also not a fan of the Deere and the Memphis courses we're getting soon.
Click to expand...

I'm not a huge fan at just how wide open most of the holes seem to be - not a whole lot of areas where trouble can lurk. Case in point is Bryson not finding the fairway today in his first three holes yet coming out with three birdies.
 
There's basically no trouble anywhere on this course that is overly punitive. Guys can just stand out there and bomb away without worrying about much. There are like two or three total shots (all in the final few holes) that you even have to worry about unless you're 50 yards off line.
 
Oh well, DeShamblow backed it up this week good on him. Hopefully the Workday broadcast won’t be 4 days of talking about him, especially since he’s not playing.
 
Had Bryson and Hatton in a fantasy league this week which should help the numbers there. We debated Hovland v. Reed for the third spot and settled on Reed who MC but all in all a solid week on that front.
 
It will be interesting to see if anyone else on tour attempts the single plain swing. Probably not unless DeChambeau goes on an extended streak of high finishes. Golfers are always looking for "the secret", so we may see others attempt it. Moe Norman gets his day in the sun?

I am fairly confident that no one will take up Mathew Wolff's swing, especially his trigger move.

(I think that should be "plane" not "plain" but not sure)
 
Last edited:
liveanddiedeac said:
DeShamblow backed it up this week good on him. Hopefully the Workday broadcast won’t be 4 days of talking about him, especially since he’s not playing.
Click to expand...

I could handle a few more minutes of Jim Nantz baiting Faldo & Immelman to make fun of graphite shafts in wedges and the shafts being too long. Was kind of hoping they'd bring up the cameraman incident too but that would be a little too obvious.

But, the news was pointing out that golf needs a good heel. I guess I agree since I watched the last hour yesterday hoping he'd find a way to choke.
 
We already had Reed and Poulter. When the Mexico City tourney came down to Reed and DeChambeau, I found myself rooting for Reed.

What was the cameraman incident?
 
Given that DeChambeau is stat geeking that the longer the drive the better the chance to get a birdie, I'm wondering if course management will start putting more traps, ponds and deeper first cuts starting at a certain distance off the tee to make this strategy tougher.
 
Dechambeau is a little country club cry baby. Totally out of line to confront a camera man for doing his job. Whines after almost every shot on the course too. Couldn't stand those kids in junior golf
 
When DeChambeau joined the tour a little more than two years ago, he weighed 195; Bryson is now 240 (maybe more) and that includes 20 pounds added during the 3 month pandemic shutdown. In other sports, there would be louder whispers that some of the weight/muscle gain was science-aided. To his credit, in his short time on the tour, he has never stopped at looking for ways to improve his game. Not a fan, but give him credit for pushing limits and thinking outside the box.
 
Where are you guys at on the governing bodies dialing back the equipment for the pros? Personally I don't like that. Part of what it cool about golf is you can go out and play with the same stuff the pros play with if you want to, although often ill-fitting for the handicap golfer. If they were made to use balls that were 75 percent limited flight or drivers that were limited to 300cc's it would just water it down to me. I want to see what these guys can do with the latest and greatest equipment that falls under the USGA and R&A rules for everybody. Now, I do want to see these guys challenged at times. It's ok to have tournaments where they're destroying par, but it's also good to see them challenged to shoot under par for 4 days. I don't think it's feasible to start building or lengthening courses to 8000+ yards, so I'd like to see them significantly toughen select courses. Narrow the fairways and lengthen the rough to challenge these guys to really think about the strategy of hitting it as far as possible because you'd rather have a wedge from the rough, than a 7 iron from the fairway. If you lengthen the rough enough, a 100 yard sand wedge from the rough is harder than a 7 iron from the fairway. I think right now there isn't a big distinction between risk and reward off the tee in most cases. If DeShamblow is having to decide whether to hit driver 360 yards with a good chance of having a sand wedge out of 6 inch rough, as opposed to hitting a long iron and having an 8 iron from the fairway, I think it would be a much harder decision.
 
Something needs to change. BD was destroying par 4s, often having only chip for his 2nd or a green side bunker shot. Hitting a short iron for his 2nd on par 5s...that is not how the game was designed to be played. Accuracy off the tee must become a greater factor, IMO. The long hitters now just hit it as far as they can with little concern about hitting out the rough for their 2nd. More water may be part of the answer along with tighter fairways and deeper thicker rough.
 
Jack Nicklaus has long advocated for a limited flight ball for the PGA tour. One of the problems is that the companies that make the balls and clubs are also among the largest sponsors of the tour. Bridgestone loves that DeChambeau was bombing 350 yard drives with their ball. Weekend hackers may not be as eager to pay $40+ for a dozen high-end golf balls if the pros are hitting their drives 250 with limited flight versions of their balls.

These companies have resisted attempts to limit the equipment on the tour, and they have pull because they help pay of the bills.

Also, courses can be manipulated to make it tougher to score and that is done for the US Open (and for certain other events), but on a week to week basis, the conventional wisdom is that the golf viewing public likes seeing guys crush the ball 350+ yards and rack up birdies, as opposed to watching a slog where par is a good score. As an example, would there any golf talk this week if the course was set up so that Troy Merritt won in Michigan with a -6 final score and no notable bomb drives?
 
mebanedeac said:
Something needs to change. BD was destroying par 4s, often having only chip for his 2nd or a green side bunker shot. Hitting a short iron for his 2nd on par 5s...that is not how the game was designed to be played. Accuracy off the tee must become a greater factor, IMO. The long hitters now just hit it as far as they can with little concern about hitting out the rough for their 2nd. More water may be part of the answer along with tighter fairways and deeper thicker rough.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think the penalty for missing a fairway, not matter how far you hit it must become much more severe. Unfortunately, that is really going to penalize a guy like a Ryan Armour who is driving it 50 yards short of the big hitters. A missed fairway for him becomes a much longer club out of much longer rough, but with the way the game is trending I think that's becoming a necessity. I guess they could do graduated rough, where not only does it get longer the wider you miss the fairway, but it gets longer in the 325+ range off the tee, but that wouldn't go over I don't think.
 
Pilchard said:
Jack Nicklaus has long advocated for a limited flight ball for the PGA tour. One of the problems is that the companies that make the balls and clubs are also among the largest sponsors of the tour. Bridgestone loves that DeChambeau was bombing 350 yard drives with their ball. Weekend hackers may not be as eager to pay $40+ for a dozen high-end golf balls if the pros are hitting their drives 250 with limited flight versions of their balls.

These companies have resisted attempts to limit the equipment on the tour, and they have pull because they help pay of the bills.

Also, courses can be manipulated to make it tougher to score and that is done for the US Open (and for certain other events), but on a week to week basis, the conventional wisdom is that the golf viewing public likes seeing guys crush the ball 350+ yards and rack up birdies, as opposed to watching a slog where par is a good score. As an example, would there any golf talk this week if the course was set up so that Troy Merritt won in Michigan with a -6 final score and no notable bomb drives?
Click to expand...

I agree, watching week after week where even par to 5 under wins, would get old, but I think they could reach for a point where 10 to 15 under is a winning score a lot of weeks. It would be cool to see conditions where a guy like DeChambeau had to have a really accurate driving week to shoot 23 under par, instead of him being able to miss several fairways like yesterday and still shoot 65.
 
Last edited:
Pilchard said:
When DeChambeau joined the tour a little more than two years ago, he weighed 195; Bryson is now 240 (maybe more) and that includes 20 pounds added during the 3 month pandemic shutdown. In other sports, there would be louder whispers that some of the weight/muscle gain was science-aided. To his credit, in his short time on the tour, he has never stopped at looking for ways to improve his game. Not a fan, but give him credit for pushing limits and thinking outside the box.
Click to expand...

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/bryson-dechambeau-huge-why-isnt-160854401.html
 
Pilchard said:
Jack Nicklaus has long advocated for a limited flight ball for the PGA tour. One of the problems is that the companies that make the balls and clubs are also among the largest sponsors of the tour. Bridgestone loves that DeChambeau was bombing 350 yard drives with their ball. Weekend hackers may not be as eager to pay $40+ for a dozen high-end golf balls if the pros are hitting their drives 250 with limited flight versions of their balls.

These companies have resisted attempts to limit the equipment on the tour, and they have pull because they help pay of the bills.

Also, courses can be manipulated to make it tougher to score and that is done for the US Open (and for certain other events), but on a week to week basis, the conventional wisdom is that the golf viewing public likes seeing guys crush the ball 350+ yards and rack up birdies, as opposed to watching a slog where par is a good score. As an example, would there any golf talk this week if the course was set up so that Troy Merritt won in Michigan with a -6 final score and no notable bomb drives?
Click to expand...

Really good points. The average fan may just want to see the spectacular drives. Personally, I like it better when par is a good score and birdie is exceptional and eagles are rare. When par is essentially a failure and bogie is horrid, it is not as entertaining. Hitting a pitching wedge to within 8' is not as good as hitting a 4 iron within 8'. Perhaps only those who play the game realize that though.

Nonetheless, unless some adjustments are made many old courses will soon become glorified par 3 courses for bombers like BD and Roy and DJ and Koepka
 
liveanddiedeac said:
Where are you guys at on the governing bodies dialing back the equipment for the pros? Personally I don't like that. Part of what it cool about golf is you can go out and play with the same stuff the pros play with if you want to, although often ill-fitting for the handicap golfer. If they were made to use balls that were 75 percent limited flight or drivers that were limited to 300cc's it would just water it down to me. I want to see what these guys can do with the latest and greatest equipment that falls under the USGA and R&A rules for everybody. Now, I do want to see these guys challenged at times. It's ok to have tournaments where they're destroying par, but it's also good to see them challenged to shoot under par for 4 days. I don't think it's feasible to start building or lengthening courses to 8000+ yards, so I'd like to see them significantly toughen select courses. Narrow the fairways and lengthen the rough to challenge these guys to really think about the strategy of hitting it as far as possible because you'd rather have a wedge from the rough, than a 7 iron from the fairway. If you lengthen the rough enough, a 100 yard sand wedge from the rough is harder than a 7 iron from the fairway. I think right now there isn't a big distinction between risk and reward off the tee in most cases. If DeShamblow is having to decide whether to hit driver 360 yards with a good chance of having a sand wedge out of 6 inch rough, as opposed to hitting a long iron and having an 8 iron from the fairway, I think it would be a much harder decision.
Click to expand...

I basically agree with this. Never heard the whole "dial back the equipment" explained to me in a way that I think makes any sense. Distance should be an advantage, so narrow fairways & thicker rough is about all you can do.
 
Does the tour test for HGH? My shaky recollection is that if they're only pee testing, that's not going to pick up HGH. I think you have to have blood testing to pick up HGH. I mean, I admit I'm biased against the guy, but my 1st thought on seeing him when the tour started back up was HGH.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top