I love Hogan's swing and his post-impact alignments.
However, I also love Tiger Woods' swing and I have seen many photos of him looking equally as good post-impact. Here is one.
Jeff.
Tiger is not there yet...although his iron swing with his irons is much closer than some of the swipes he makes with his driver...although he drove well in the closing few holes I saw on Monday.
I think that to keep the right wrist bent this far past impact suggests some rignt triceps...my biomechanics knowledge (pretty limited )but that is the way I see it...
The sand, I suspect, is helping to exaggerate the appearance on this pic...but even then I do not think that many modern players would look like this even out of sand.
Short sand shots often some throwaway (very well timed) is used...this is what Mark Roe has been teaching Lee Westwood if I understood a recent article... and fairway bunker shots...Well, Rocco - for all his great play, did not look like this on the play-off hole.
Well, Rocco - for all his great play, did not look like this on the play-off hole.
Rocco had a sidehill lie with the ball sitting down in the bunker. He hit down on it but got over the top and pulled it left. Certainly a bad shot since he had plenty of green to work with if he had kept it right of the green.
You guys have to remember that Ben Hogan's average driving distance was taken at 253 yards. With the technology these days 300+ yards are far more routine. It even means I could hit 3 wood past one of the greats . It doesn't take a mathematician to work out that the accuracy required for the increase on drive length is far far higher. Woods would hit the fairway alot more if he was only hitting 250 yards too.
You guys have to remember that Ben Hogan's average driving distance was taken at 253 yards. With the technology these days 300+ yards are far more routine. It even means I could hit 3 wood past one of the greats . It doesn't take a mathematician to work out that the accuracy required for the increase on drive length is far far higher. Woods would hit the fairway alot more if he was only hitting 250 yards too.
I agree (and I am no Leibnitz!) BUT...if Hogan had the same technology he would be considerably longer and I dare say still quite accurate. I have watched Tiger on the range as well as on the course. On the range he is a freaking machine, his rhythm (TGM definition of course) is mesmerizing. He overaccelarates on the course especially with the driver...what a great pair of hands he has! I think this knee injury may convince him to keep his rpm a little more constant. When Tiger is in the fairway who can beat him? Range Tiger makes the best move I have ever seen (although I once watched Tom Purtzer hit is like a minor deity for two hours!) Course Tiger is less mechanic and more intuitive genius! I honestly believe that as Tiger "matures" his game will acquire more precision. He already has it mechanically, but he cannot resist slashing one out there 340!
You guys have to remember that Ben Hogan's average driving distance was taken at 253 yards. With the technology these days 300+ yards are far more routine. It even means I could hit 3 wood past one of the greats . It doesn't take a mathematician to work out that the accuracy required for the increase on drive length is far far higher. Woods would hit the fairway alot more if he was only hitting 250 yards too.
Unfortunately, you are wrong, Matthew. Math is necessary to verify your statement as follows:
- let's assume that an average fairway is 30 yard wide;
- let's assume that post-accident Hogan's FIR was 80% on the average and his average drive was 253 yard long;
- let's assume that Woods's FIR is 50% on the average and his average drive is 305 yard long;
- in order to be on the average fairway after the driver tee shot:
a. Hogan's misses should not exceed 15 yards left or right that makes nearly 6% of allowed deviation margin (15:253=0.059);
b. Woods's misses should also not exceed 15 yards left or right that makes nearly 5% of allowed deviation margin (15:305=0.049);
c. the difference is only 1% that is much much too small a value to justify Tiger's inferior ball striking quality comparing to Hogan's.
- if Woods is the same quality of ballstriker as Hogan was, his average FIR should oscillate between 70 and 75% which is an unreachable goal for him until now;
- Hogan was reported to start almost all par 4's and 5's with his woodenheaded driver, while Woods is often using his #3 wood or a long iron that surely "unfairly" improves his FIR statistics in this context;
- in defense of Woods, we may conclude that today's quasi-roughs on PGA Tour (except US Opens, of course) encourages PGA players to concentrate more on driving distance than driving accuracy. Having said that, IMHO, this fact would not bring Woods much closer to Hogan anyhow.
Please correct me if I am wrong in some of the above points and calculations.
Unfortunately, you are wrong, Matthew. Math is necessary to verify your statement as follows:
- let's assume that an average fairway is 30 yard wide;
- let's assume that post-accident Hogan's FIR was 80% on the average and his average drive was 253 yard long;
- let's assume that Woods's FIR is 50% on the average and his average drive is 305 yard long;
Unfortunately Darruis, YOU ARE WRONG.
Ok lets just go along with these assumptions just for now even though they are heavily weighted towards your arguement.
Quote:
- in order to be on the average fairway after the driver tee shot:
a. Hogan's misses should not exceed 15 yards left or right that makes nearly 6% of allowed deviation margin (15:253=0.059);
b. Woods's misses should also not exceed 15 yards left or right that makes nearly 5% of allowed deviation margin (15:305=0.049);
c. the difference is only 1% that is much much too small a value to justify Tiger's inferior ball striking quality comparing to Hogan's.
You don't just divide the driving distance (yards) by the fairway with the half of the fairways width(yards) and expect to find anything useful. All you have found is the difference between a fifteenth of their driving distance - you could of just subtracted their driving distances together and divided by 15 and you would of come up with the same answer....an answer which isn't much use for anyone. It doesn't say much about your maths skills or those of GPStyles who seems to think your akin to Albert Einstein.
The correct differences are these.... I've omitted the sums because you won't understand them anyhow...
Woods hitting 300 yards onto a 30 yard fairway has 5.73197 degrees margin for error.
Hogan hitting 250 yards onto a 30 yard fairway has 6.87963 degrees margin for error.
So hogan at 80% FIR having to be 83.4% less accurate than Woods would only hit the fairway 66% of the time at 300 yards.
Quote:
- if Woods is the same quality of ballstriker as Hogan was, his average FIR should oscillate between 70 and 75% which is an unreachable goal for him until now;
So where you plucked this number from I do not know - perhaps you clicked your heels together three times.
The pure maths is pointless to the debate and anyhow the maths becomes more in Tigers favour when you increase the fairway from the super tight hypothetical width you set. I could think of plenty of arguements that when added up make the maths arguement sound silly. It would be like a game of Jenga but its your arguement falling after each one of these blocks (variables you have not accounted for) and you couldn't even set the game properly up to begin with because you suck at Maths.
My feeling is that Wood's golf stroke is better than Hogans... You just wanted to try and own me - You tried and you failed... Try harder next time.
I don't know . . . . I think we are severly discounting the amount the old ball spins in this analysis.
AND . . . I think Eldrick was AWESOME this week no question . . . gutz galore . . . But Hogan won his major's on two busted wheels. Tiger's pops said he was more mentally tough than any player period. I'd put Hogan up against him in a minute. Saw his pops kill himself, war, shoulda died in a wreck, and won majors when he couldn't hardly walk. Hard Case From Texas.
Tiger Woods without any doubt the best player to ever lace 'em up. And he's gotta be the best putter period. Think about the the puts he's made just this year. Obviously this week was incredible. But don't forget what he did to JB Holmes and Badds at the match play. Then we swished that eagle putt to win in Doooby or whatever that place is. He's made more feet worth of putts than it takes for Mike O to drive and find sheep he hasn't dated in California.
Ok lets just go along with these assumptions just for now even though they are heavily weighted towards your arguement.
You don't just divide the driving distance (yards) by the fairway with the half of the fairways width(yards) and expect to find anything useful. All you have found is the difference between a fifteenth of their driving distance - you could of just subtracted their driving distances together and divided by 15 and you would of come up with the same answer....an answer which isn't much use for anyone. It doesn't say much about your maths skills or those of GPStyles who seems to think your akin to Albert Einstein.
The correct differences are these.... I've omitted the sums because you won't understand them anyhow...
Woods hitting 300 yards onto a 30 yard fairway has 5.73197 degrees margin for error.
Hogan hitting 250 yards onto a 30 yard fairway has 6.87963 degrees margin for error.
So hogan at 80% FIR having to be 83.4% less accurate than Woods would only hit the fairway 66% of the time at 300 yards.
So where you plucked this number from I do not know - perhaps you clicked your heels together three times.
The pure maths is pointless to the debate and anyhow the maths becomes more in Tigers favour when you increase the fairway from the super tight hypothetical width you set. I could think of plenty of arguements that when added up make the maths arguement sound silly. It would be like a game of Jenga but its your arguement falling after each one of these blocks (variables you have not accounted for) and you couldn't even set the game properly up to begin with because you suck at Maths.
My feeling is that Wood's golf stroke is better than Hogans... You just wanted to try and own me - You tried and you failed... Try harder next time.
Should I wait for you to edit your post two or three times more or can I comment it now ?
Listen, mate - I just done a very simple math to show you that the 50 yds distance that differs Hogan from Woods cannot in any case justify the difference in hitting fairways ability between the two. It was done "on the knee" without trying to going deeper because I did not want to jack the thread more. If you regard my math as useless and my math ability as pathetic - I am fine with it and I can even gladly agree with it since I am not a mathematician and, if you noticed, was kindly asking for a correction from your part in case I was wrong.
But, when somebody as yourself write a sentence like this: I've omitted the sums because you won't understand them anyhow... or you couldn't even set the game properly up to begin with because you suck at Maths it shows only what small caliber and arrogant person you are. Keep your math for yourself then, I am not interested to see it any more (and I honestly was interested until now, since I always like to learn). Save it as well as your pathetic ad hominemremarks to your friends, if you have any.
)but that is the way I see it...
. It doesn't take a mathematician to work out that the accuracy required for the increase on drive length is far far higher. Woods would hit the fairway alot more if he was only hitting 250 yards too.
Hybrid Mode
