12 clubs?

13
4

Comments

  • jslane57jslane57  3929Members Posts: 3,929
    Joined:  #62



    Lately trouble is in play with every stroke I take with anything over a 7 iron LOL. But, I might as well stay aggressive since it's only recreational golf.



    What does the book say about putting? Once I blast a putt past the hole and three putt, or if I miss a 3 to 4 footer I find myself lagging and coming up short the rest of the day. Probably need to stay aggresive to take advantage of birdie opportunities.




    That it doesn't matter. Well, not that it doesn't matter, but that it takes so much time to get better at it to have it show up in your score (Because of the huge equalizing factor of the two putt) that its stupid to practice putting. If we both putt from 10 feet and you hit it to 2 inches and I hit it to two feet, you have made about a 30% better stroke than me. With the driver, that is MASSIVE. With the putter, its irrelevant (Because we both tap it in). A 90 shooter who has a PGA putt for him will save about two strokes per round. Its not that putting doesn't matter, its that it takes so long to improve its pointless. Further, most people trick themselves into thinking they are much worse at putting than they actually are because they only remember the misses - its how our memories work. A miss from two feet gets seared into our brains as awful, but a make from two feet doesn't. 98% of golfers one putt 97.6% of the time within 3.5 feet and two putt 97% of the time between 8-35/40 feet. Between 3.5 and 8 and over 40 is where "good putters" can seperate themselves, but the strokes you gain arn't even close to worth the practice time.



    You can never practice putting enough to make up for just hitting it closer. Its silly. By getting better at ballstriking you automatically become a better putter much faster (because you are hitting it close to the hole), so until your ballstriking is very close to elite, there's no point to putting practice.
    I like these putting stats. Ball striking can trump for sure. I'd also add that the putting stats mean a ton for chipping/pitching. As in, if you can't chip it within like 5 feet, you may as well not get it within 30 feet (so don't plunk that pitch into the bunker). And conversely, if you can chip it withing like 5 feet, then you're seriously saving strokes. The nice thing is that practicing your lag putting and practicing chipping is nearly the same skill as it is all about feel and knowing how the ball reacts on the greens.



    What are the stats for GURs? My guess is that if you're a 15 or a 10 hcp your not hitting significantly different number of greens, but your chipping/pitching and course management is the difference. Short game is still very important, just not 10 foot putts, which is exactly what you see folks playing with on the putting greens...
    Posted:
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • animalgolfsanimalgolfs FL & OK  2036Members Posts: 2,036
    Joined:  #63
    Played with 11 in the past.....it's not all that hard once you integrate hybrids instead of irons.
    Posted:
    G400-Max 9*
    G400 SFT 16*
    G Crossover 21*
    G700 6i
    i500 8i PW
    Glide 2.0 Stealth 54*
    iwi Craz-e 
  • pinestreetgolfpinestreetgolf  3492Members Posts: 3,492
    Joined:  edited Mar 29, 2017 #64
    jslane57 wrote:



    Lately trouble is in play with every stroke I take with anything over a 7 iron LOL. But, I might as well stay aggressive since it's only recreational golf.



    What does the book say about putting? Once I blast a putt past the hole and three putt, or if I miss a 3 to 4 footer I find myself lagging and coming up short the rest of the day. Probably need to stay aggresive to take advantage of birdie opportunities.




    That it doesn't matter. Well, not that it doesn't matter, but that it takes so much time to get better at it to have it show up in your score (Because of the huge equalizing factor of the two putt) that its stupid to practice putting. If we both putt from 10 feet and you hit it to 2 inches and I hit it to two feet, you have made about a 30% better stroke than me. With the driver, that is MASSIVE. With the putter, its irrelevant (Because we both tap it in). A 90 shooter who has a PGA putt for him will save about two strokes per round. Its not that putting doesn't matter, its that it takes so long to improve its pointless. Further, most people trick themselves into thinking they are much worse at putting than they actually are because they only remember the misses - its how our memories work. A miss from two feet gets seared into our brains as awful, but a make from two feet doesn't. 98% of golfers one putt 97.6% of the time within 3.5 feet and two putt 97% of the time between 8-35/40 feet. Between 3.5 and 8 and over 40 is where "good putters" can seperate themselves, but the strokes you gain arn't even close to worth the practice time.



    You can never practice putting enough to make up for just hitting it closer. Its silly. By getting better at ballstriking you automatically become a better putter much faster (because you are hitting it close to the hole), so until your ballstriking is very close to elite, there's no point to putting practice.
    I like these putting stats. Ball striking can trump for sure. I'd also add that the putting stats mean a ton for chipping/pitching. As in, if you can't chip it within like 5 feet, you may as well not get it within 30 feet (so don't plunk that pitch into the bunker). And conversely, if you can chip it withing like 5 feet, then you're seriously saving strokes. The nice thing is that practicing your lag putting and practicing chipping is nearly the same skill as it is all about feel and knowing how the ball reacts on the greens.



    What are the stats for GURs? My guess is that if you're a 15 or a 10 hcp your not hitting significantly different number of greens, but your chipping/pitching and course management is the difference. Short game is still very important, just not 10 foot putts, which is exactly what you see folks playing with on the putting greens...




    Again, though, it comes back to practice efficiency. Chipping and pitching practice is almost as inefficient as putting practice.



    Golfers A and B are 17 caps who want to get better. 17 caps hit about 4 greens a round. Golfer A plays every day for 5 years and develops a PGA level short game, getting up and down about half the time. Golfer B hits as many greens as a 2 cap, about 11. Both will "get up and down" around 6.5 times a round.



    Which takes more practice time, hitting as many greens as a 2 cap or getting a PGA tour level short game? They have about the same effect on score.



    Ballstriking improvement helps everything. Short game and putting improvement helps short game and putting. It's not that short game and putting "don't matter" it's just that because percent misses arnt rewarded as highly bc of two putts it takes way way WAY more practice time for putting and short game improvement to show up in your score.



    If you enjoy hitting chips and putting by all means have at it. But if the goal is shooting a better golf score you may as well watch TV as practice putting twice a week.



    Edit: this assumes you can make decent contact. If you are blading chips and pitches practice them that costs more than a stroke. But once you can hack it out and two putt practicing more (instead of long game) is much less efficient.
    Posted:
    Post edited by Unknown User on
    Ping g30 driver, Tight Lies 3 wood
    910H 19*, Hi-Bore Hybrid 24*
    j40 DPC 5-PW x100
    Vokey SM7 50, 55, 60
    Edel Putter
  • jslane57jslane57  3929Members Posts: 3,929
    Joined:  #65

    jslane57 wrote:



    Lately trouble is in play with every stroke I take with anything over a 7 iron LOL. But, I might as well stay aggressive since it's only recreational golf.



    What does the book say about putting? Once I blast a putt past the hole and three putt, or if I miss a 3 to 4 footer I find myself lagging and coming up short the rest of the day. Probably need to stay aggresive to take advantage of birdie opportunities.




    That it doesn't matter. Well, not that it doesn't matter, but that it takes so much time to get better at it to have it show up in your score (Because of the huge equalizing factor of the two putt) that its stupid to practice putting. If we both putt from 10 feet and you hit it to 2 inches and I hit it to two feet, you have made about a 30% better stroke than me. With the driver, that is MASSIVE. With the putter, its irrelevant (Because we both tap it in). A 90 shooter who has a PGA putt for him will save about two strokes per round. Its not that putting doesn't matter, its that it takes so long to improve its pointless. Further, most people trick themselves into thinking they are much worse at putting than they actually are because they only remember the misses - its how our memories work. A miss from two feet gets seared into our brains as awful, but a make from two feet doesn't. 98% of golfers one putt 97.6% of the time within 3.5 feet and two putt 97% of the time between 8-35/40 feet. Between 3.5 and 8 and over 40 is where "good putters" can seperate themselves, but the strokes you gain arn't even close to worth the practice time.



    You can never practice putting enough to make up for just hitting it closer. Its silly. By getting better at ballstriking you automatically become a better putter much faster (because you are hitting it close to the hole), so until your ballstriking is very close to elite, there's no point to putting practice.
    I like these putting stats. Ball striking can trump for sure. I'd also add that the putting stats mean a ton for chipping/pitching. As in, if you can't chip it within like 5 feet, you may as well not get it within 30 feet (so don't plunk that pitch into the bunker). And conversely, if you can chip it withing like 5 feet, then you're seriously saving strokes. The nice thing is that practicing your lag putting and practicing chipping is nearly the same skill as it is all about feel and knowing how the ball reacts on the greens.



    What are the stats for GURs? My guess is that if you're a 15 or a 10 hcp your not hitting significantly different number of greens, but your chipping/pitching and course management is the difference. Short game is still very important, just not 10 foot putts, which is exactly what you see folks playing with on the putting greens...




    Again, though, it comes back to practice efficiency. Chipping and pitching practice is almost as inefficient as putting practice.



    Golfers A and B are 17 caps who want to get better. 17 caps hit about 4 greens a round. Golfer A plays every day for 5 years and develops a PGA level short game, getting up and down about half the time. Golfer B hits as many greens as a 2 cap, about 11. Both will "get up and down" around 6.5 times a round.



    Which takes more practice time, hitting as many greens as a 2 cap or getting a PGA tour level short game? They have about the same effect on score.



    Ballstriking improvement helps everything. Short game and putting improvement helps short game and putting. It's not that short game and putting "don't matter" it's just that because percent misses arnt rewarded as highly bc of two putts it takes way way WAY more practice time for putting and short game improvement to show up in your score.



    If you enjoy hitting chips and putting by all means have at it. But if the goal is shooting a better golf score you may as well watch TV as practice putting twice a week.



    Edit: this assumes you can make decent contact. If you are blading chips and pitches practice them that costs more than a stroke. But once you can hack it out and two putt practicing more (instead of long game) is much less efficient.
    I think it is safe to say that 17 caps are not making decent contact around the greens. Even if they think they are, they're probably not. Heck, they don't make decent contact with many of their putts! While your data is not untrue, it is freakanomocs in nature. Still half of your shots or more are from 50 yards and in. I like overlap practice. Practice skills that help multiple parts of the game. The driver is not this skill for the 17 cap.
    Posted:
  • pinestreetgolfpinestreetgolf  3492Members Posts: 3,492
    Joined:  edited Mar 29, 2017 #66
    jslane57 wrote:


    jslane57 wrote:



    Lately trouble is in play with every stroke I take with anything over a 7 iron LOL. But, I might as well stay aggressive since it's only recreational golf.



    What does the book say about putting? Once I blast a putt past the hole and three putt, or if I miss a 3 to 4 footer I find myself lagging and coming up short the rest of the day. Probably need to stay aggresive to take advantage of birdie opportunities.




    That it doesn't matter. Well, not that it doesn't matter, but that it takes so much time to get better at it to have it show up in your score (Because of the huge equalizing factor of the two putt) that its stupid to practice putting. If we both putt from 10 feet and you hit it to 2 inches and I hit it to two feet, you have made about a 30% better stroke than me. With the driver, that is MASSIVE. With the putter, its irrelevant (Because we both tap it in). A 90 shooter who has a PGA putt for him will save about two strokes per round. Its not that putting doesn't matter, its that it takes so long to improve its pointless. Further, most people trick themselves into thinking they are much worse at putting than they actually are because they only remember the misses - its how our memories work. A miss from two feet gets seared into our brains as awful, but a make from two feet doesn't. 98% of golfers one putt 97.6% of the time within 3.5 feet and two putt 97% of the time between 8-35/40 feet. Between 3.5 and 8 and over 40 is where "good putters" can seperate themselves, but the strokes you gain arn't even close to worth the practice time.



    You can never practice putting enough to make up for just hitting it closer. Its silly. By getting better at ballstriking you automatically become a better putter much faster (because you are hitting it close to the hole), so until your ballstriking is very close to elite, there's no point to putting practice.
    I like these putting stats. Ball striking can trump for sure. I'd also add that the putting stats mean a ton for chipping/pitching. As in, if you can't chip it within like 5 feet, you may as well not get it within 30 feet (so don't plunk that pitch into the bunker). And conversely, if you can chip it withing like 5 feet, then you're seriously saving strokes. The nice thing is that practicing your lag putting and practicing chipping is nearly the same skill as it is all about feel and knowing how the ball reacts on the greens.



    What are the stats for GURs? My guess is that if you're a 15 or a 10 hcp your not hitting significantly different number of greens, but your chipping/pitching and course management is the difference. Short game is still very important, just not 10 foot putts, which is exactly what you see folks playing with on the putting greens...




    Again, though, it comes back to practice efficiency. Chipping and pitching practice is almost as inefficient as putting practice.



    Golfers A and B are 17 caps who want to get better. 17 caps hit about 4 greens a round. Golfer A plays every day for 5 years and develops a PGA level short game, getting up and down about half the time. Golfer B hits as many greens as a 2 cap, about 11. Both will "get up and down" around 6.5 times a round.



    Which takes more practice time, hitting as many greens as a 2 cap or getting a PGA tour level short game? They have about the same effect on score.



    Ballstriking improvement helps everything. Short game and putting improvement helps short game and putting. It's not that short game and putting "don't matter" it's just that because percent misses arnt rewarded as highly bc of two putts it takes way way WAY more practice time for putting and short game improvement to show up in your score.



    If you enjoy hitting chips and putting by all means have at it. But if the goal is shooting a better golf score you may as well watch TV as practice putting twice a week.



    Edit: this assumes you can make decent contact. If you are blading chips and pitches practice them that costs more than a stroke. But once you can hack it out and two putt practicing more (instead of long game) is much less efficient.
    I think it is safe to say that 17 caps are not making decent contact around the greens. Even if they think they are, they're probably not. Heck, they don't make decent contact with many of their putts! While your data is not untrue, it is freakanomocs in nature. Still half of your shots or more are from 50 yards and in. I like overlap practice. Practice skills that help multiple parts of the game. The driver is not this skill for the 17 cap.






    The problem with your "half of your shots are from 50 and in" statistic is that it is true but not accurate. Yes, half the shots are from 50 and in but about 65% of those have a pre-determined outcome (putts inside 3 feet are made 97% of the time, putts between 8 and 40 feet are two putted 97% of the time by golfers of all skill levels). *Once you remove* those shots, the most common shot is the tee shot (you hit one every hole), followed by the approach shot (same). Once you remove the shots from 50 and in that are just automatic (putts inside 3, two putts inside 40) they are ranked third behind driver and approach. And it is a distant third.



    The best way for anyone to improve is to improve their approach shots into the green from their typical approach shot distance. The second best way is to improve off the tee. Because once you factor out easy one-putts and easy two-putts, you hit those shots most often. The "half inside 50" stat is silly because it includes shots that have pre-determined outcomes (tap in putts, two putts from 12 feet, etc...).



    I would argue their contact would improve significantly if they would stop trying to hit every short game shot close and just chop it out and two putt. The average tour player is 2.4 strokes from off the green, 2.7 in the bunker. So a 17 cap who can hack it out and 2 putt loses .6 from off the green and .3 from the sand. Assume 5 greens, 4 bunkers, 9 missed greens for our 17 cap and he'd shoot 6.6 strokes better (roughly) with a PGA Tour player's short game. He'd shoot about 15.72 strokes better with a PGA tour player's long game. The biggest difference between the 17 and the tour pro is the 5 greens versus 12.7 greens. The "get up and down from a garbage can" stuff is absolute nonsense*. Driver and approach shots is how good golfers are created.



    EDIT: That should say "Anyone except elite ballstrikers" - there is a crossover point, but it is probably around a +1.



    *There are exceptions to every single rule. Bob Estes has been on tour a long time hitting 260 yard drives and getting up and down 6 times a round. It is absolutely possible to get good at golf via the short game and putting. Its just hideously inefficient. Its like taking a rickshaw to work instead of a car. It gets you there, but its a whole lot slower and requires a whole lot more effort.
    Posted:
    Ping g30 driver, Tight Lies 3 wood
    910H 19*, Hi-Bore Hybrid 24*
    j40 DPC 5-PW x100
    Vokey SM7 50, 55, 60
    Edel Putter
  • jslane57jslane57  3929Members Posts: 3,929
    Joined:  edited Mar 29, 2017 #67


    The problem with your "half of your shots are from 50 and in" statistic is that it is true but not accurate. Yes, half the shots are from 50 and in but about 65% of those have a pre-determined outcome (putts inside 3 feet are made 97% of the time, putts between 8 and 40 feet are two putted 97% of the time by golfers of all skill levels). *Once you remove* those shots, the most common shot is the tee shot (you hit one every hole), followed by the approach shot (same). Once you remove the shots from 50 and in that are just automatic (putts inside 3, two putts inside 40) they are ranked third behind driver and approach. And it is a distant third.



    The best way for anyone to improve is to improve their approach shots into the green from their typical approach shot distance. The second best way is to improve off the tee. Because once you factor out easy one-putts and easy two-putts, you hit those shots most often. The "half inside 50" stat is silly because it includes shots that have pre-determined outcomes (tap in putts, two putts from 12 feet, etc...).



    I would argue their contact would improve significantly if they would stop trying to hit every short game shot close and just chop it out and two putt. The average tour player is 2.4 strokes from off the green, 2.7 in the bunker. So a 17 cap who can hack it out and 2 putt loses .6 from off the green and .3 from the sand. Assume 5 greens, 4 bunkers, 9 missed greens for our 17 cap and he'd shoot 6.6 strokes better (roughly) with a PGA Tour player's short game. He'd shoot about 15.72 strokes better with a PGA tour player's long game. The biggest difference between the 17 and the tour pro is the 5 greens versus 12.7 greens. The "get up and down from a garbage can" stuff is absolute nonsense*. Driver and approach shots is how good golfers are created.



    EDIT: That should say "Anyone except elite ballstrikers" - there is a crossover point, but it is probably around a +1.



    *There are exceptions to every single rule. Bob Estes has been on tour a long time hitting 260 yard drives and getting up and down 6 times a round. It is absolutely possible to get good at golf via the short game and putting. Its just hideously inefficient. Its like taking a rickshaw to work instead of a car. It gets you there, but its a whole lot slower and requires a whole lot more effort.
    I realize we're starting to beat a dead horse now. A tour player playing on the courses the normal 17 hcp is playing would have up and down stats far better than the up and down stats that they have. So this comparison is simply not valid. Of course, they'd be on every green and be shooting in the low 60's regularly as well. I believe the crossover point is around scratch as you say, but I also think there is a crossover point around 17 hcp as well in which knowing how to manage the short game really adds up. I simply can't tell you how many times I've been in a club match with a mid hcp golfer, we both end up on the skirts of the green, and we walk away with a halve even though I was giving the player a stroke on the hole...
    Posted:
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • pinestreetgolfpinestreetgolf  3492Members Posts: 3,492
    Joined:  #68
    jslane57 wrote:


    The problem with your "half of your shots are from 50 and in" statistic is that it is true but not accurate. Yes, half the shots are from 50 and in but about 65% of those have a pre-determined outcome (putts inside 3 feet are made 97% of the time, putts between 8 and 40 feet are two putted 97% of the time by golfers of all skill levels). *Once you remove* those shots, the most common shot is the tee shot (you hit one every hole), followed by the approach shot (same). Once you remove the shots from 50 and in that are just automatic (putts inside 3, two putts inside 40) they are ranked third behind driver and approach. And it is a distant third.



    The best way for anyone to improve is to improve their approach shots into the green from their typical approach shot distance. The second best way is to improve off the tee. Because once you factor out easy one-putts and easy two-putts, you hit those shots most often. The "half inside 50" stat is silly because it includes shots that have pre-determined outcomes (tap in putts, two putts from 12 feet, etc...).



    I would argue their contact would improve significantly if they would stop trying to hit every short game shot close and just chop it out and two putt. The average tour player is 2.4 strokes from off the green, 2.7 in the bunker. So a 17 cap who can hack it out and 2 putt loses .6 from off the green and .3 from the sand. Assume 5 greens, 4 bunkers, 9 missed greens for our 17 cap and he'd shoot 6.6 strokes better (roughly) with a PGA Tour player's short game. He'd shoot about 15.72 strokes better with a PGA tour player's long game. The biggest difference between the 17 and the tour pro is the 5 greens versus 12.7 greens. The "get up and down from a garbage can" stuff is absolute nonsense*. Driver and approach shots is how good golfers are created.



    EDIT: That should say "Anyone except elite ballstrikers" - there is a crossover point, but it is probably around a +1.



    *There are exceptions to every single rule. Bob Estes has been on tour a long time hitting 260 yard drives and getting up and down 6 times a round. It is absolutely possible to get good at golf via the short game and putting. Its just hideously inefficient. Its like taking a rickshaw to work instead of a car. It gets you there, but its a whole lot slower and requires a whole lot more effort.
    I realize we're starting to beat a dead horse now. A tour player playing on the courses the normal 17 hcp is playing would have up and down stats far better than the up and down stats that they have. So this comparison is simply not valid. Of course, they'd be on every green and be shooting in the low 60's regularly as well. I believe the crossover point is around scratch as you say, but I also think there is a crossover point around 17 hcp as well in which knowing how to manage the short game really adds up. I simply can't tell you how many times I've been in a club match with a mid hcp golfer, we both end up on the skirts of the green, and we walk away with a halve even though I was giving the player a stroke on the hole...




    It doesn't matter what course their on. It's relative. They are both trying to improve relative to 72 strokes so it's the same. It's expressed as a percent not an absolute number. My post should be read as "to be as good on their course as a tour player is on a tour course".



    I'm simply suggesting that it would be easier (in terms of practice time) to beat that guy at your club by not hitting in the same spot with the full swing, as opposed to being better at the chip/putt. It takes much more practice to shave strokes the closer you get to the hole, but it counts the same.
    Posted:
    Ping g30 driver, Tight Lies 3 wood
    910H 19*, Hi-Bore Hybrid 24*
    j40 DPC 5-PW x100
    Vokey SM7 50, 55, 60
    Edel Putter
  • GladanGladan  69Members Posts: 69
    Joined:  #69

    C-rad wrote:

    mlp021 wrote:
    what will i learn by reading this?
    That drive for show, putt for dough is backwards...




    Correct, that is a conclusion, although the one I was driving at is that laying up to a specific yardage almost certainly makes your scores worse (and a whole bunch of other golf myths dispelled).




    I didn't use the 52° wedge last 3 rounds. Could use a 4 wood to replace the 3 and 5 wood. Will always bag 14 in the cart because I can.



    Drive for show putt for dough is correct. Putting is the money part of the game. Now hitting in the woods all day and missing every green is no fun. You need some decent ballstriking to make putting worthwhile, but outdriving your playing partners by a few yards every hole does not mean you will out score them.




    If you actually believe that (and you arn't just trolling me), you should read the book. High caps and PGA pros are almost identical at putting when you adjust for the distance the balls starts from the hole. Pros make more putts because they hit the ball closer. A high cap and a pro have virtually identical putting statistics inside four feet (97.4%) and between 8 and 50 (two putt 96% of the time). Pros are better between 4-8 and outside 50, but not by much. A 15 cap who had a PGA pro hit all of his putts would save about 2.7 strokes a round. It doesn't matter. There is no amount of putting skill that makes up for hitting the ball a yard or two closer to the pin on average. Obviously "being in the woods all day" is bad (who would advocate that?).



    This isn't the part of the book I wanted the OP to read. Laying up to specific distances isn't smart golf. Its the exact opposite of smart golf. The biggest factor in how close to the hole you hit the ball is how close to the hole the ball started before you swung. Everyone is better from 50 than 100. Everyone.



    That said, this is an argument as old as time. Read the book, he argues it much more eloquently than I do.




    Ordered the book. Looking forward to reading it.
    Posted:
  • tap in birdietap in birdie  531Members Posts: 531
    Joined:  edited Mar 30, 2017 #70
    596 wrote:



    I'll have to check out the book. Still thinking about that second shot on a par 5 when you are too far to reach...do you lay up to 100 (or 90, or 80) with an iron or blast a wood to 50 or so yards. 50 yards is an akward yardage to control distance and spin for most weekend golfers who don't practice 1/2 and 3/4 type swings. If I have a club that goes 100 or 90 or 80 with a repeatable swing I might be better off. Plus by hitting a longer club on my second shot there is a greater chance of error. Especially with water or OB left and trees right.




    You feel more uncomfortable, but you still hit the ball closer on average. Those arn't the same thing. You should hit it as far as is safely possible (i.e. that doesn't bring a stroke-costing hazard into play water or OB). The basic point of the book (and it is fantastic) is that your brain doesn't deal in strokes, it deals in comfort. You'll score better from 50 over time by a huge margin, but until you actually do it a lot it will feel worse.



    He proves pretty conclusively that misses are calculated in percent (Because they are degrees offlline in a golf swing). If you miss by 10% 100 yards out its much worse than missing 10% 50 yards out (Twice as worse, in fact). Your brain doesn't think in terms of percent misses. It fools you because it wants to be where it is comfortable, not where you will hit it the closest over time.




    I asked our Pro a few weeks ago what distance he lays up to for his wedge approaches and his response was "as close to the hole as I can get". He never lays up to a specific yardage. He always hits the ball as close to the green as he can get. I do the same thing. I will hit the ball closer to the hole the closer to the hole I start at, it's actually common sense.




    No disrespect to you or your pro but I think that's a terrible strategy. Half the point of laying up is to avoid hitting the most penal clubs in your bag. With a 3 wood or 4 iron you risk tugging or blocking your ball OB. Even if well executed, you can leave yourself in a precarious situation, like a 30 yd short sided flop over a bunker. It would make more sense, to me, to hit it to a solid number where I'm not in between clubs forcing myself to try a trick shot/feel shot and going out of my comfort zone. The other half of the point of laying up is comfort. If you roll it up to a weird spot you now have extra pressure to hit it tight to have a chance at bird. I'd rather hit 8 iron to a flat spot in the fairway with an angle and leave myself a full SW in. Then if I need to flight it up or down, stop it or release it, I have the room necessary to bring more options into play. The only time I think it's worth walloping it far is if you're a high capper who just needs to keep progressing the ball forward. Or someone who just loves to pound their woods and thinks there's a chance you can roll it on. I favor going for it over laying up but not if I have 0% of reaching or it's a heavily guarded green.



    As for you guys who keep quoting PGA stats .. cmon
    Posted:
    Post edited by Unknown User on
  • pinestreetgolfpinestreetgolf  3492Members Posts: 3,492
    Joined:  edited Mar 30, 2017 #71
    596 wrote:



    I'll have to check out the book. Still thinking about that second shot on a par 5 when you are too far to reach...do you lay up to 100 (or 90, or 80) with an iron or blast a wood to 50 or so yards. 50 yards is an akward yardage to control distance and spin for most weekend golfers who don't practice 1/2 and 3/4 type swings. If I have a club that goes 100 or 90 or 80 with a repeatable swing I might be better off. Plus by hitting a longer club on my second shot there is a greater chance of error. Especially with water or OB left and trees right.




    You feel more uncomfortable, but you still hit the ball closer on average. Those arn't the same thing. You should hit it as far as is safely possible (i.e. that doesn't bring a stroke-costing hazard into play water or OB). The basic point of the book (and it is fantastic) is that your brain doesn't deal in strokes, it deals in comfort. You'll score better from 50 over time by a huge margin, but until you actually do it a lot it will feel worse.



    He proves pretty conclusively that misses are calculated in percent (Because they are degrees offlline in a golf swing). If you miss by 10% 100 yards out its much worse than missing 10% 50 yards out (Twice as worse, in fact). Your brain doesn't think in terms of percent misses. It fools you because it wants to be where it is comfortable, not where you will hit it the closest over time.




    I asked our Pro a few weeks ago what distance he lays up to for his wedge approaches and his response was "as close to the hole as I can get". He never lays up to a specific yardage. He always hits the ball as close to the green as he can get. I do the same thing. I will hit the ball closer to the hole the closer to the hole I start at, it's actually common sense.




    No disrespect to you or your pro but I think that's a terrible strategy. Half the point of laying up is to avoid hitting the most penal clubs in your bag. With a 3 wood or 4 iron you risk tugging or blocking your ball OB. Even if well executed, you can leave yourself in a precarious situation, like a 30 yd short sided flop over a bunker. It would make more sense, to me, to hit it to a solid number where I'm not in between clubs forcing myself to try a trick shot/feel shot and going out of my comfort zone. The other half of the point of laying up is comfort. If you roll it up to a weird spot you now have extra pressure to hit it tight to have a chance at bird. I'd rather hit 8 iron to a flat spot in the fairway with an angle and leave myself a full SW in. Then if I need to flight it up or down, stop it or release it, I have the room necessary to bring more options into play. The only time I think it's worth walloping it far is if you're a high capper who just needs to keep progressing the ball forward. Or someone who just loves to pound their woods and thinks there's a chance you can roll it on. I favor going for it over laying up but not if I have 0% of reaching or it's a heavily guarded green.



    As for you guys who keep quoting PGA stats .. cmon




    You will hit a 30 yard shot over a bunker way closer to the hole on average than a full swing from 100 yards. Misses in golf are generated by degrees offline and/or mistakes in speed. Both of these are represented by percent. A 10% miss (whichever way) from 30 leaves you 3 yards out. A 10% miss from 100 leaves you 10.



    You will feel much more comfortable over the 100 yard shot but you will hit the 30 yard shot significantly closer on average, unless you are one of the most unique golfers in the entire world. The most important factor in how far your ball comes to rest from the hole is how close it was when you hit it. Your brain doesn't deal in strokes gained or lost, it wants to be comfortable.



    The argument you are making makes all the sense in the world. The problem is that when you put a ton of golfers on shotlink and actually study it it doesn't work. Closer is better virtually all the time, assuming "better" means "lowest score over time" and not "being comfortable and decreasing my chances of looking stupid".



    Let's say I feel like I feel more comfortable from 10 feet out putting than 3 feet (missing a 3 foot putt makes me look dumb). Should I lag to 10 feet on purpose? Of course not because your personal feelings are irrelevant. You will hit it closer from closer because misses are expressed in percent in a golf swing (whether driver or putter).



    EDIT: this completely changes IF a stroke-losing hazard (OB, water) is brought into play hitting it that far. But you should always advance it as far as is safely possible.



    SECOND EDIT: To illustrate the point, take a green that is 30 yards wide and deep. The flag is dead in the middle. A bunker is on the right and it is 10 yards from front to bank. Player A is 30 yards out on the right behind the bunker. Player B is in the middle of the fairway with a clean lie from 100 yards. It is obviously 15 yards form the pin to the bunker on the right. In order for Player A to hit his shot poorly (into the bunker) he has to be off by about 70% (he has to clear 10 yards from 30 out). Player B, from 100, can hit into that bunker by simply being 15% off (a 15% push puts him 15 yards right, into the bunker). In this scenario, Player A looks more stupid if he dumps it in the bunker (he's only 30 out, and he didn't make the "smart" play) and Player B looks less stupid (who hasn't pushed a PW 15 yards right?). However, over time, Player A (behind the bunker) will score much better on average because he has a margin for error that is massive compared to Player B 100 yards out.



    Now, could you construct a scenario involving something like the road hole where this isn't true? Of course. Golf isn't chess. But its very rare that farther out is better than closer in.
    Posted:
    Ping g30 driver, Tight Lies 3 wood
    910H 19*, Hi-Bore Hybrid 24*
    j40 DPC 5-PW x100
    Vokey SM7 50, 55, 60
    Edel Putter
  • tap in birdietap in birdie  531Members Posts: 531
    Joined:  edited Mar 30, 2017 #72
    596 wrote:



    I'll have to check out the book. Still thinking about that second shot on a par 5 when you are too far to reach...do you lay up to 100 (or 90, or 80) with an iron or blast a wood to 50 or so yards. 50 yards is an akward yardage to control distance and spin for most weekend golfers who don't practice 1/2 and 3/4 type swings. If I have a club that goes 100 or 90 or 80 with a repeatable swing I might be better off. Plus by hitting a longer club on my second shot there is a greater chance of error. Especially with water or OB left and trees right.




    You feel more uncomfortable, but you still hit the ball closer on average. Those arn't the same thing. You should hit it as far as is safely possible (i.e. that doesn't bring a stroke-costing hazard into play water or OB). The basic point of the book (and it is fantastic) is that your brain doesn't deal in strokes, it deals in comfort. You'll score better from 50 over time by a huge margin, but until you actually do it a lot it will feel worse.



    He proves pretty conclusively that misses are calculated in percent (Because they are degrees offlline in a golf swing). If you miss by 10% 100 yards out its much worse than missing 10% 50 yards out (Twice as worse, in fact). Your brain doesn't think in terms of percent misses. It fools you because it wants to be where it is comfortable, not where you will hit it the closest over time.




    I asked our Pro a few weeks ago what distance he lays up to for his wedge approaches and his response was "as close to the hole as I can get". He never lays up to a specific yardage. He always hits the ball as close to the green as he can get. I do the same thing. I will hit the ball closer to the hole the closer to the hole I start at, it's actually common sense.




    No disrespect to you or your pro but I think that's a terrible strategy. Half the point of laying up is to avoid hitting the most penal clubs in your bag. With a 3 wood or 4 iron you risk tugging or blocking your ball OB. Even if well executed, you can leave yourself in a precarious situation, like a 30 yd short sided flop over a bunker. It would make more sense, to me, to hit it to a solid number where I'm not in between clubs forcing myself to try a trick shot/feel shot and going out of my comfort zone. The other half of the point of laying up is comfort. If you roll it up to a weird spot you now have extra pressure to hit it tight to have a chance at bird. I'd rather hit 8 iron to a flat spot in the fairway with an angle and leave myself a full SW in. Then if I need to flight it up or down, stop it or release it, I have the room necessary to bring more options into play. The only time I think it's worth walloping it far is if you're a high capper who just needs to keep progressing the ball forward. Or someone who just loves to pound their woods and thinks there's a chance you can roll it on. I favor going for it over laying up but not if I have 0% of reaching or it's a heavily guarded green.



    As for you guys who keep quoting PGA stats .. cmon




    You will hit a 30 yard shot over a bunker way closer to the hole on average than a full swing from 100 yards. Misses in golf are generated by degrees offline and/or mistakes in speed. Both of these are represented by percent. A 10% miss (whichever way) from 30 leaves you 3 yards out. A 10% miss from 100 leaves you 10.



    You will feel much more comfortable over the 100 yard shot but you will hit the 30 yard shot significantly closer on average, unless you are one of the most unique golfers in the entire world. The most important factor in how far your ball comes to rest from the hole is how close it was when you hit it. Your brain doesn't deal in strokes gained or lost, it wants to be comfortable.



    The argument you are making makes all the sense in the world. The problem is that when you put a ton of golfers on shotlink and actually study it it doesn't work. Closer is better virtually all the time, assuming "better" means "lowest score over time" and not "being comfortable and decreasing my chances of looking stupid".



    Let's say I feel like I feel more comfortable from 10 feet out putting than 3 feet (missing a 3 foot putt makes me look dumb). Should I lag to 10 feet on purpose? Of course not because your personal feelings are irrelevant. You will hit it closer from closer because misses are expressed in percent in a golf swing (whether driver or putter).



    EDIT: this completely changes IF a stroke-losing hazard (OB, water) is brought into play hitting it that far. But you should always advance it as far as is safely possible.



    SECOND EDIT: To illustrate the point, take a green that is 30 yards wide and deep. The flag is dead in the middle. A bunker is on the right and it is 10 yards from front to bank. Player A is 30 yards out on the right behind the bunker. Player B is in the middle of the fairway with a clean lie from 100 yards. It is obviously 15 yards form the pin to the bunker on the right. In order for Player A to hit his shot poorly (into the bunker) he has to be off by about 70% (he has to clear 10 yards from 30 out). Player B, from 100, can hit into that bunker by simply being 15% off (a 15% push puts him 15 yards right, into the bunker). In this scenario, Player A looks more stupid if he dumps it in the bunker (he's only 30 out, and he didn't make the "smart" play) and Player B looks less stupid (who hasn't pushed a PW 15 yards right?). However, over time, Player A (behind the bunker) will score much better on average because he has a margin for error that is massive compared to Player B 100 yards out.



    Now, could you construct a scenario involving something like the road hole where this isn't true? Of course. Golf isn't chess. But its very rare that farther out is better than closer in.




    Look at amateur scrambling statistics.. I'm lazier than you and won't look up numbers but I'd venture to say that scrambling is horrendous. I've played many a muni track. Never seen a senior hit a flop shot. Never seen a guy putting up 100s thumping bunker shots that cozy up to the pin. I've seen guys and gals pull their ball out of the bunker and put it in their pocket after four embarrassing hacks at the sand. I've seen juniors skull it or pick it clean and shoot it 100 yds into the parking lot.



    Any good golfer, including you, would agree it's advantageous to play a hole backwards (in our mind obviously.) The entire purpose of this mindset is to understand angles. I'd rather put that player 15 yards left of the sand (to use your 30 yd green analogy) and let them blade, chunk, roll, or any other form of miss directly onto the green. If the player 3 putts it's a bogie with an occasional 2 putt. For a high capper this is awesome. For a better player, if you can't hit a SW to 15 ft and hit a putt that's on you. Plus with the appropriate angle I can avoid wind by keeping it low and having room in front of and behind pin, increasing my margin for error yet again ( I already decreased margin of error by clubbing down and laying up)..which leads me to your example



    How often is the pin directly in the middle of the green? And if so I'd love to join your club. ( I joke, I never mean to be pretentious, just sarcastic by nature) Putting the pin in the middle is the one scenario when this makes sense because now 3% miss is around the pin and not in a hazard or short sided with another chip. What it I put a 20 ft pot bunker and a false front that pours balls right into it between you and the pin? Now your 3% error can cause 3 strokes at a minimum. Take that 10% miss by the player (me) who laid up but now that miss radius covers much more green than yours. I can miss by 15 ft plus and be putting. That's the problem with statistical info in golf. Golf is a situational game, and there are too many variables to make a conclusion of that nature. I guarantee you that the people making these claims are assuming it's a middle pin with no danger or analyzing professional play. Play the angles
    Posted:
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • pinestreetgolfpinestreetgolf  3492Members Posts: 3,492
    Joined:  edited Mar 30, 2017 #73


    Look at amateur scrambling statistics.. I'm lazier than you and won't look up numbers but I'd venture to say that scrambling is horrendous. I've played many a muni track. Never seen a senior hit a flop shot. Never seen a guy putting up 100s thumping bunker shots that cozy up to the pin. I've seen guys and gals pull their ball out of the bunker and put it in their pocket after four embarrassing hacks at the sand. I've seen juniors skull it or pick it clean and shoot it 100 yds into the parking lot.



    Any good golfer, including you, would agree it's advantageous to play a hole backwards (in our mind obviously.) The entire purpose of this mindset is to understand angles. I'd rather put that player 15 yards left of the sand (to use your 30 yd green analogy) and let them blade, chunk, roll, or any other form of miss directly onto the green. If the player 3 putts it's a bogie with an occasional 2 putt. For a high capper this is awesome. For a better player, if you can't hit a SW to 15 ft and hit a putt that's on you. Plus with the appropriate angle I can avoid wind by keeping it low and having room in front of and behind pin, increasing my margin for error yet again ( I already decreased margin of error by clubbing down and laying up)..which leads me to your example



    How often is the pin directly in the middle of the green? And if so I'd love to join your club. ( I joke, I never mean to be pretentious, just sarcastic by nature) Putting the pin in the middle is the one scenario when this makes sense because now 3% miss is around the pin and not in a hazard or short sided with another chip. What it I put a 20 ft pot bunker and a false front that pours balls right into it between you and the pin? Now your 3% error can cause 3 strokes at a minimum. Take that 10% miss by the player (me) who laid up but now that miss radius covers much more green than yours. I can miss by 15 ft plus and be putting. That's the problem with statistical info in golf. Golf is a situational game, and there are too many variables to make a conclusion of that nature. I guarantee you that the people making these claims are assuming it's a middle pin with no danger. Play the angles




    This is why I'm telling people to read the book and examine 8 years worth of amateur shotlink data for themselves. Your argument makes sense logically, but when you actually measure it it doesn't work. For a long, long time people made great arguments that the earth was flat. The problem is that when we actually were able to measure it it was wrong, no matter how much sense the argument made. You can make a great case that people *should* be better from 100, but their not. Virtually everyone got closer to the hole the closer the ball started when the data was actually measured and examined.



    I'm not arguing a bad player is likely to hit a 30 yard flop shot well. I'm arguing he has a better chance than a 100 yard shot. That's not the same thing. I agree him hitting in the bunker is bad, but he has a better chance of hitting it in the bunker from 100 than from 30.



    Your example assumes that every player must aim directly at the flag on every shot. If the 100 yard player can aim at a safe spot on the green that doesn't feed into the pot bunker, so can the guy who is 30 out and over the bunker. No matter how you spin it, its better to be closer given the same aim line. Like I said, you can construct elaborate scenarios where it isn't true, but they are very, very rare. The data is irrefutable.
    Posted:
    Ping g30 driver, Tight Lies 3 wood
    910H 19*, Hi-Bore Hybrid 24*
    j40 DPC 5-PW x100
    Vokey SM7 50, 55, 60
    Edel Putter
  • GdaneGdane  239Members Posts: 239
    Joined:  #74
    I went with 12 for years before I added a 2 iron last year. I don't play it often but its nice to have on certain tee shots. I'd really like to add a 3 wood, but just haven't found one that I like, and I'm steady enough with my driver that the only time I'd even consider using a 3 wood is on par 5's where I have a chance to reach the green.
    Posted:
    TaylorMade M2 9° Fujikuri Pro Stiff
    Ping I3 2-PW Blue
    Cleveland 588 RTX Tour Satin 52°
    Cleveland 588 RTX Tour Satin 56°
    Ping Karsten Ally i Putter
  • tap in birdietap in birdie  531Members Posts: 531
    Joined:  #75


    Look at amateur scrambling statistics.. I'm lazier than you and won't look up numbers but I'd venture to say that scrambling is horrendous. I've played many a muni track. Never seen a senior hit a flop shot. Never seen a guy putting up 100s thumping bunker shots that cozy up to the pin. I've seen guys and gals pull their ball out of the bunker and put it in their pocket after four embarrassing hacks at the sand. I've seen juniors skull it or pick it clean and shoot it 100 yds into the parking lot.



    Any good golfer, including you, would agree it's advantageous to play a hole backwards (in our mind obviously.) The entire purpose of this mindset is to understand angles. I'd rather put that player 15 yards left of the sand (to use your 30 yd green analogy) and let them blade, chunk, roll, or any other form of miss directly onto the green. If the player 3 putts it's a bogie with an occasional 2 putt. For a high capper this is awesome. For a better player, if you can't hit a SW to 15 ft and hit a putt that's on you. Plus with the appropriate angle I can avoid wind by keeping it low and having room in front of and behind pin, increasing my margin for error yet again ( I already decreased margin of error by clubbing down and laying up)..which leads me to your example



    How often is the pin directly in the middle of the green? And if so I'd love to join your club. ( I joke, I never mean to be pretentious, just sarcastic by nature) Putting the pin in the middle is the one scenario when this makes sense because now 3% miss is around the pin and not in a hazard or short sided with another chip. What it I put a 20 ft pot bunker and a false front that pours balls right into it between you and the pin? Now your 3% error can cause 3 strokes at a minimum. Take that 10% miss by the player (me) who laid up but now that miss radius covers much more green than yours. I can miss by 15 ft plus and be putting. That's the problem with statistical info in golf. Golf is a situational game, and there are too many variables to make a conclusion of that nature. I guarantee you that the people making these claims are assuming it's a middle pin with no danger. Play the angles




    This is why I'm telling people to read the book and examine 8 years worth of amateur shotlink data for themselves. Your argument makes sense logically, but when you actually measure it it doesn't work. For a long, long time people made great arguments that the earth was flat. The problem is that when we actually were able to measure it it was wrong, no matter how much sense the argument made. You can make a great case that people *should* be better from 100, but their not. Virtually everyone got closer to the hole the closer the ball started when the data was actually measured and examined.



    I'm not arguing a bad player is likely to hit a 30 yard flop shot well. I'm arguing he has a better chance than a 100 yard shot. That's not the same thing. I agree him hitting in the bunker is bad, but he has a better chance of hitting it in the bunker from 100 than from 30.



    Your example assumes that every player must aim directly at the flag on every shot. If the 100 yard player can aim at a safe spot on the green that doesn't feed into the pot bunker, so can the guy who is 30 out and over the bunker. No matter how you spin it, its better to be closer given the same aim line. Like I said, you can construct elaborate scenarios where it isn't true, but they are very, very rare. The data is irrefutable.




    It makes sense because they recently put out data stating players that went for the green on driveable par 4s also faired better than those who laid up. I also agree that I was assuming you had to go after the pin. I reiterate, if you play the angles, you'll always have enough room to go at the pin (moreorless) and won't have to hit away from it.



    I do find this scenario different than the driveable par 4 stats. Through my experiences. I've found it's poor management to assume ripping a wood or long iron is going to fair well and leave u in a good place. In that regard, "going for it" poses two separate threats. It's not just about the 100 yd vs 30 yd approach..if you slice a 3 wood or hook a hybrid OB you've introduced a higher probability for error before you even get to play that 30 yd shot. I'm talking about the entire hole. If I gave 10 pros and 10 high cappers a 7 iron and a SW I believe they would finish with significantly less penalty strokes than the group with 3W and LW.



    Again, I'm going off of what I see in front of me when I play some of the courses around here. A lot of that data stuff is nonsense and misinterpretation in my opinion. I realize this is ignorant cause I haven't/won't bother to read the cited publication. At this point I'm enjoying playing devils advocate more than anything..but I still stand by my original statement that golf is about angles and that this advice of going for it all the time is not a one-size-fits-all type of advice. Can't knock those who try it or abide by it..just not for me. And that's from years of being dumb and firing at everything.











    Posted:
  • morrisminormorrisminor Come back zinc! Come back!  199Members Posts: 199
    Joined:  edited Mar 31, 2017 #76
    This thread seems to have got tangled up with a 'improve by 0.167 strokes per hole by eating fruit - 32.7% of tour players eat bananas for breakfast' kind of insignificant statistical rambling. Shame.



    I'm sure no one thinks that they are better off with 12 clubs but not everyone likes to carry 14 clubs, and carrying is so much easier than pushing a trolly around. Also most people don't get clubs for free, so for some cost may play a part in their club selection.



    I played with 12 yesterday and enjoyed it immensely. D,5W,4-W,52,58,P.



    I did not score badly because of a lack of clubs, more due to the fact that I couldn't keep my driver on the golf course. That, and I could have done to have been 16.4% closer after my approach shots...
    Posted:
    Winter Mode on.
    Ping Rapture 10.5* Aldila NV Protopype 65X
    Orlimar Trimetal 16+ Aldila Voodoo S
    Taylormade Rescue Dual 22* DG X100
    Mizuno MP-57 5-PW DG X100
    Mizuno MP T11 51.5/56/60.5 DG Wedge
    Odyssey White Hot XG #9

  • danielryanwdanielryanw  316Members Posts: 316
    Joined:  #77
    Pinestreetgolf



    Thanks for sharing. You make some incredibly interesting points.





    Aside from ease of transportation/weight/fatigue etc, I believe that you're going to play better with 14 clubs compared to 12. If someone thinks they play better with 12 I believe it's due to the fact that they are concentrating/focusing/visualizing their shots better; due to the fact that they have to be a little creative at times.
    Posted:
    M3 8.5* | Synergy Black Proto 70tx
    M2 T3 13* DF | Tensei Pro Blue 80tx
    P790 2 UDI 17* | Tensei Pro White Hy 90tx
    '17 M1 20* hybrid | UST VTS Black 100hx
    Z745 4-PW | C-taper 125
    SM7 50*F 54*S 58*D | S400 TI Onyx
    Spider Tour Black
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • pinestreetgolfpinestreetgolf  3492Members Posts: 3,492
    Joined:  #78


    This thread seems to have got tangled up with a 'improve by 0.167 strokes per hole by eating fruit - 32.7% of tour players eat bananas for breakfast' kind of insignificant statistical rambling. Shame.



    I'm sure no one thinks that they are better off with 12 clubs but not everyone likes to carry 14 clubs, and carrying is so much easier than pushing a trolly around. Also most people don't get clubs for free, so for some cost may play a part in their club selection.



    I played with 12 yesterday and enjoyed it immensely. D,5W,4-W,52,58,P.



    I did not score badly because of a lack of clubs, more due to the fact that I couldn't keep my driver on the golf course. That, and I could have done to have been 16.4% closer after my approach shots...




    One of the posters (OP I think?) suggested they played better because they took out their 3w and laid up every hole. I posted to point out that that is incredibly unlikely to be true.



    As I've said twice (three times now?) if your goal is a heavy wallet or a light bag ignore me. My posts only apply to shooting the lowest possible score, on average, over time.



    If you don't care, that's fine. But that doesn't mean other people don't care, and it certainly doesn't mean playing fewer clubs so you "have to lay up" makes sense to a low score.




    Pinestreetgolf



    Thanks for sharing. You make some incredibly interesting points.





    Aside from ease of transportation/weight/fatigue etc, I believe that you're going to play better with 14 clubs compared to 12. If someone thinks they play better with 12 I believe it's due to the fact that they are concentrating/focusing/visualizing their shots better; due to the fact that they have to be a little creative at times.




    No worries, you should grab the book and give it a read. I'm just parroting his conclusions. There's a reason the PGA Tour is 75%+ bomb-and-gauge players. Its by far the most efficient way to score, at any level of golf.



    Its incredibly unlikely someone would shoot better with 12 over a significant sample size (like, getting hit by a plane that missed the airport unlikely). You'd shoot better with 18 than 14, and better with 22 than 18. You'd have more options for the only thing in golf that matters (assuming constant mechanical skill level) - advancing your ball as far toward the hole as possible while remaining safe from stroke-costing hazards.
    Posted:
    Ping g30 driver, Tight Lies 3 wood
    910H 19*, Hi-Bore Hybrid 24*
    j40 DPC 5-PW x100
    Vokey SM7 50, 55, 60
    Edel Putter
  • tap in birdietap in birdie  531Members Posts: 531
    Joined:  #79
    Pinestreetgolf.. I'm pretty sure you said that those who go for the green are better off than those who lay up. Consider this.. there's maybe one driveable par 4 per round. There are definitely 2 to 3 par 5s a round and a few holes where a bad drive leaves you a ways back. In this instance you're the one hitting 3wood, which you just admitted is unlikely to be a better play. And you're doing it several times. As I said before, bombing it at the green w a 3W or hybrid or 3 iron is not safe because of the dangers you encounter before that 30 yd pitch.



    If someone hits 3wood off the tee they're not laying up unless they can reach the green...they're just playing conservative. Maybe their playing the angles or maybe they're minimizing their risk like I discussed before. Bomb and gauge only works if you can hit the ball 300+ and go over all the fairway hazards and danger. Although this is wrx where we all make Dustin Johnson look like a sissy off the tee, you have to understand that in reality most the players on this site and in the world cannot bomb the ball far enough for bomb and gauge. Bomb and gauge isn't an option if you're hitting driver 6 iron or driver 7 iron. And if you're driving the ball that far to where you're going driver LW than you're on the wrong set of tees. In the off chance you're already on the tips than you are 1% of golfers and the statistics and strategies you imply are not sensible for the average player.
    Posted:
  • ebazebaz  13Members Posts: 13
    Joined:  #80
    I play 9.



    D

    3h

    3i

    5i

    7i

    9i

    PW

    SW 57.5

    P
    Posted:
  • ajschn06ajschn06  2398Banned Posts: 2,398
    Joined:  #81








    Discussed / debated extensively in this thread:



    http://www.golfwrx.c...d#entry14469580



    Claiming you are better from 100 than 50 is like saying you are a better putter from 20 feet than 3. Its ridiculous.



    I'm assuming you haven't read the book I linked to earlier.




    I haven't, nor do I need to. I think of someone like me, who doesn't have the funds or the time to be out hitting range balls every day and spending hours on a short game. I know on the course I typically play, I'll have 4 par 5's and 2 par 4's that I can use a hybrid or fairway and put myself 95-110 yards out 9 times out of 10. The flip side would be trying to get as close to the hole as possible on those holes. Maybe I'll end up 75 yards out, maybe it'll be 50, maybe it'll be 60. Let's say I have 2 hours a week to devote to practice. That would probably mean one bucket of balls, a half hour on putting, a half hour on greenside chipping, and a half hour with a wedge in my hand hitting that 100 yard shot.



    In this scenario, there is no way I'd want to get myself into that 50-75 yard range... EVER! I want to be 90-110 out or else right by the green, no in between.



    In the majority of situations, yes, people are better from 50 than they are from 100. But EVERYBODY....no sorry
    Posted:
  • morrisminormorrisminor Come back zinc! Come back!  199Members Posts: 199
    Joined:  #82




    One of the posters (OP I think?) suggested they played better because they took out their 3w and laid up every hole. I posted to point out that that is incredibly unlikely to be true.






    Yeah but you could have done that in a PM, rather than filling another thread with this stuff...
    Posted:
    Winter Mode on.
    Ping Rapture 10.5* Aldila NV Protopype 65X
    Orlimar Trimetal 16+ Aldila Voodoo S
    Taylormade Rescue Dual 22* DG X100
    Mizuno MP-57 5-PW DG X100
    Mizuno MP T11 51.5/56/60.5 DG Wedge
    Odyssey White Hot XG #9

  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • Double DutchDouble Dutch  561Members Posts: 561
    Joined:  #83
    I have agree with Pinestreet that Every Shot Counts is an excellent and invaluable book. Broadie provides the average scores from any place on the course, based on his expertise In quantitative finance. And yes, everyone is better from 30 yards then 100 yards. 100 may seem easier, but that's because your expectations are lower from 100.



    However the book is not quite a biblical as some think. While the data may be irrefutable, the data is limited and the conclusions drawn from that data are open to debate. 10 years ago, the data on subprime mortgage bond portfolios was extensive and irrefutable, but the conclusions that these were risk-free were proven to be wrong. And like with other biblical publications, there will be people who like the book so much that they draw their own conclusions from what they read and then evangelize their own opinions as if they were the gospel, even if these opinions are not based on the data in the book.



    While Broadie explains in a thorough way that the average 90-shooter isn't that much worse at putting than a pro, and that the long game is a much bigger factor in scoring, that doesn't necessarily mean that you shouldn't practice your short game. In fact, to me, Broadie's book suggests that for almost everyone, the best and surest way to lower your score is to work on the short game, because because rapid improvement is possible there, quickly.

    Posted:
    Ping G400 Max 9* Tour75R
    Taylormade M1 3HL
    Callaway Apex 3 hybrid
    Callaway Apex CF16 4-P
    Callaway MackDaddy 4 50& 56 W-grind
    Scotty Cameron Newport original
  • pinestreetgolfpinestreetgolf  3492Members Posts: 3,492
    Joined:  #84


    Pinestreetgolf.. I'm pretty sure you said that those who go for the green are better off than those who lay up.




    That isn't what I said. What I said is that you shouldn't lay up to a specific yardage. That doesn't mean you shouldn't lay up. If 55 out is the safest distance, hit it to that yardage, not 100. Not once did I say you should hit it at the green all the time. I disagree that players are good from a specific yardage because its a "full swing" or whatever, not that they shouldn't lay up. They should advance as far as they safely can given their game and the course they are playing.




    Consider this.. there's maybe one driveable par 4 per round. There are definitely 2 to 3 par 5s a round and a few holes where a bad drive leaves you a ways back. In this instance you're the one hitting 3wood, which you just admitted is unlikely to be a better play. And you're doing it several times. As I said before, bombing it at the green w a 3W or hybrid or 3 iron is not safe because of the dangers you encounter before that 30 yd pitch.



    If someone hits 3wood off the tee they're not laying up unless they can reach the green...they're just playing conservative. Maybe their playing the angles or maybe they're minimizing their risk like I discussed before. Bomb and gauge only works if you can hit the ball 300+ and go over all the fairway hazards and danger. Although this is wrx where we all make Dustin Johnson look like a sissy off the tee, you have to understand that in reality most the players on this site and in the world cannot bomb the ball far enough for bomb and gauge. Bomb and gauge isn't an option if you're hitting driver 6 iron or driver 7 iron. And if you're driving the ball that far to where you're going driver LW than you're on the wrong set of tees. In the off chance you're already on the tips than you are 1% of golfers and the statistics and strategies you imply are not sensible for the average player.




    They are absolutely minimizing the risk. They are also, at the same time, minimizing the gain. You are correct that you will make fewer double bogies under your theory. You will also make fewer birdies. When you examine the data, you will find that players who hit it as close as is safely possible consistently (95%+) outscore those who hang back. Nobody is advocating driving every green and whaling away with a three wood from 260 as a 20 cap. I'm advocating that you should think of distance as your friend, always. If you can get closer without risking a stroke-causing hazard, you should.
    Posted:
    Ping g30 driver, Tight Lies 3 wood
    910H 19*, Hi-Bore Hybrid 24*
    j40 DPC 5-PW x100
    Vokey SM7 50, 55, 60
    Edel Putter
  • pinestreetgolfpinestreetgolf  3492Members Posts: 3,492
    Joined:  #85


    I have agree with Pinestreet that Every Shot Counts is an excellent and invaluable book. Broadie provides the average scores from any place on the course, based on his expertise In quantitative finance. And yes, everyone is better from 30 yards then 100 yards. 100 may seem easier, but that's because your expectations are lower from 100.



    However the book is not quite a biblical as some think. While the data may be irrefutable, the data is limited and the conclusions drawn from that data are open to debate. 10 years ago, the data on subprime mortgage bond portfolios was extensive and irrefutable, but the conclusions that these were risk-free were proven to be wrong. And like with other biblical publications, there will be people who like the book so much that they draw their own conclusions from what they read and then evangelize their own opinions as if they were the gospel, even if these opinions are not based on the data in the book.



    While Broadie explains in a thorough way that the average 90-shooter isn't that much worse at putting than a pro, and that the long game is a much bigger factor in scoring, that doesn't necessarily mean that you shouldn't practice your short game. In fact, to me, Broadie's book suggests that for almost everyone, the best and surest way to lower your score is to work on the short game, because because rapid improvement is possible there, quickly.




    This is correct, and he says this in the book, but IIRC (and I might not) he means this for people who struggle with contact in the short game, not people who make clean contact but end up 7 feet instead of 4.



    I'm posting on a message board. If that qualifies as "evangelizing my own opinion as if it were gospel", then you've got me I guess.
    Posted:
    Ping g30 driver, Tight Lies 3 wood
    910H 19*, Hi-Bore Hybrid 24*
    j40 DPC 5-PW x100
    Vokey SM7 50, 55, 60
    Edel Putter
  • MountainGoatMountainGoat Mid-Maryland 2354Members Posts: 2,354
    Joined:  #86
    Most people wouldn't score much worse if all they carried was a 6-iron, a wedge and a putter. Try it.
    Posted:
  • pinestreetgolfpinestreetgolf  3492Members Posts: 3,492
    Joined:  #87
    Most people wouldn't score much worse if all they carried was a 6-iron, a wedge and a putter. Try it.




    I might agree with you if you added a 460cc driver. That's too much of an advantage to overcome. Most people can't hit 6 irons either and they ain't 460cc.
    Posted:
    Ping g30 driver, Tight Lies 3 wood
    910H 19*, Hi-Bore Hybrid 24*
    j40 DPC 5-PW x100
    Vokey SM7 50, 55, 60
    Edel Putter
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • jslane57jslane57  3929Members Posts: 3,929
    Joined:  #88

    Most people wouldn't score much worse if all they carried was a 6-iron, a wedge and a putter. Try it.




    I might agree with you if you added a 460cc driver. That's too much of an advantage to overcome. Most people can't hit 6 irons either and they ain't 460cc.
    Golf is a funny game. Most people can't hit a 460cc driver, but a 6 iron is not so bad. That 460cc driver becomes a disadvantage quickly when the golf ball doesn't land on the golf course. Lol.
    Posted:
  • drn92drn92  1807Members Posts: 1,807
    Joined:  #89
    I played 8-9 clubs last year for most of my rounds. My handicap went down by a half stroke (6.8 to 6.3).



    drn92
    Posted:
  • asw7576asw7576  1094Members Posts: 1,094
    Joined:  #90
    Driver #1

    3h , 5h

    5i , 6i , 7i, 8i, 9i , P

    54, 60

    Putter
    Posted:
  • GolfWRXGolfWRX Warning Points: 0  11 Members Posts: 11 #ad
    Joined:  ...

    Advertisement
  • pinestreetgolfpinestreetgolf  3492Members Posts: 3,492
    Joined:  edited Apr 2, 2017 #91
    jslane57 wrote:


    Most people wouldn't score much worse if all they carried was a 6-iron, a wedge and a putter. Try it.




    I might agree with you if you added a 460cc driver. That's too much of an advantage to overcome. Most people can't hit 6 irons either and they ain't 460cc.
    Golf is a funny game. Most people can't hit a 460cc driver, but a 6 iron is not so bad. That 460cc driver becomes a disadvantage quickly when the golf ball doesn't land on the golf course. Lol.




    You're not comparing apples to apples.



    The 6 iron only appears more accurate because its shorter. If you miss a club going 250 yards (driver) by 3* open and a club that goes 170 yards (6 iron) by 3* open the 250 will be in the wood and the 170 (6 iron) will be in the fairway. But the golfer didn't "hit one better" - he missed both equally on the same line. All these people are just fooling themselves. They arn't playing "better" or "smarter" they're just shorter (which is, by definition, more accurate and will also score way worse over time).



    Hitting a 460cc driver 170 yards is much much easier for anyone than hitting a 6 iron 170 yards. That is comparing apples to apples. You think about the game the way everyone does - that certain clubs go certain yardages, so one is less accurate. Just hit a driver a 6 iron distance and it would be 10x eaiser than an actual 6 iron. This is the point. This is the point of thinking about it from a numerical perspective - realizing that "more accurate" isn't the same thing as "shorter on the same line".



    A driver is much much MUCH easier to hit a 6 iron distance than a 6 iron is. Of course its harder to hit a driver farther, but because you have less margin for error (a degree off shows up more) NOT because its a driver. If you just learn to not think of "driver is boom boom club" you don't need to do ridiculous things like take clubs out of your bag so you won't hit them. This is a similar concept to chipping with an 8 iron. You don't hit your 8 on a full swing as accurately as a sand wedge on its full swing, so how could you possibly chip with an 8 and be accurate? Just like chipping with a low lofted club is easier for a ton of players, bunting a driver is way easier than hitting all out with a 5.
    Posted:
    Ping g30 driver, Tight Lies 3 wood
    910H 19*, Hi-Bore Hybrid 24*
    j40 DPC 5-PW x100
    Vokey SM7 50, 55, 60
    Edel Putter
4

Leave a Comment

BoldItalicStrikethroughOrdered listUnordered list
Emoji
Image
Align leftAlign centerAlign rightToggle HTML viewToggle full pageToggle lights
Drop image/file