Golf is a game that originated in the middle ages and is
still enjoyed by many today. This past weekend, I was shopping with my brother
for new golf clubs and the salesman was ranting about all of the differences
between them. Some make the ball go farther, some improve accuracy. Thinking
about this, I did some research and found some very interesting concepts for
engineering a golf club.
One
of the first revolutions to the golf club was the use of steel, making a
player?s shot go farther. Graphite was then tested, which further improved the
distance, but compromised the accuracy. The Nano Science and Technology
Institute has more recently invented a new type of golf club shaft that
involves using nanomaterials. These nanomaterials combine the benefits of both
graphite and steel and are also being implemented to golf balls. This is an
extremely brief summary of this technology, more information can be found in
this video:
The
game of golf is based on distance and accuracy. It is not based on athleticism
or on intelligence. So, my question is, if golf clubs and golf balls continued
to be reengineered, what will be left of the golf game. Furthermore, these more
advanced clubs are more expensive than the regular ones. Does this give more of
an advantage to a golfer like Tiger Woods as opposed to a golfer who is just
starting his or her career? I know that there are plenty of people who love
golf and would proudly defend the game. I am not a golfer myself and don?t
necessarily know that side of the story, so I would love to hear from those of
you who do!"
I am not a golfer either but I found this post very interesting. I think now a days many people are thinking the same thing for all sports not just golf. I think in order to make all sports fair for each golfer, equipment, playing fields, uniforms, should all be equal, made with the same material, just aesthetically different. There always will be a part of the game that will purely depend on the player, style, form, execution, however as technology made so that materials alter to help make the game more efficient, the game is definitely changed and less pressure is on the player. However, if everyone has the same things, then the same amount of advantage is given to each other canceling it out.
ReplyDeleteAll sports were created on the basis of fun. They teach you at a young age about sportsmanship and winning honestly and being happy no matter the outcome. I think material to enhance games is unnecessary. Michael Phelps awhile ago had a swimsuit that was made out of material that made it easier to swim through water and was taken away shortly after. Materials can always be created to help, but I strongly feel that we should leave all these enhancements out and let the games be purely dependent on the teams.
I agree with your concern in fairness. I will say that in the more serious competition, such as the Olympics, they regulate the athlete's equipment a lot more to create a level playing field among the competition. However in events such as the Master's, everyone has different equipment all the way down to the length of their putter (some have chest putters while some have the original) I don't disagree in companies revolutionizing their materials, but i believe it should be more towards cost and comfort than towards performance.
ReplyDelete