3w distance off the fairway

[cardoustie]

Pine street,

 

I think your issues are the circular arguments ... while also tweaking the criteria to suit your purposes

 

There's a zillion competing am's from 15-55 that have this shot. Your level of competition must be loaded with popcorn hitters

 

I can't count the number of guys I've played with that can do this .... over 200 anyways is best guess

 

I've seen 340 in a scramble off the deck in the air ... and over a pond in front of the green ... On the fly ... it was nuts watching this guy

 

I can hit this 250 shot myself mid season under the right conditions ... not all the time of course .. even tour pros scarf 3w shots off nice fairway lies

 

Our national mid am champ can get home on 585 yard par 5's with a 3w then 4i, he's been on fox sports if that helps

 

Pics follow, off the deck, 8i and 3HL

 

 

 

 

[RipVan]

No. I read it all. Reminds me of 12 year olds and pissing contest. Is it even an important shot in terms of scoring?

 

I understand stats, dispersion, and variability. Average doesn't mean much in golf

 

Tour players were never long in my book and discrediting others because tour players only hit 3 wood 243 is silly.

 

I played with Jason Zubic many years ago, he hit 6 iron 240 (I hit a little cut 3 iron) on a par 3. 250 for a three wood is nothing.

 

Thought about it, I have no idea how far I hit a 3W off the deck. I never need to hit that shot.

 

At nearly 60 years old, I've only been on a launch monitor three times. Once at Pine Valley, once with Jim Mclean and once at a golf shop. I've been to the Nationals in the Long Driving Championship.

 

Short answer would be a lot shorter than in my late 40's and early 50's. I'd post the driver and 3W swing speeds from those days but the dicks here would harass me and call me a liar.

 

I like people who don't read the entire thread and jump right to the end.

 

"The dicks" issue isn't with your swing speed. We've gone over this ten times. I don't doubt people can mash it off a tee, where its all about speed. Off the deck, especially on average, is about WAY more than speed. That's why its so much harder. That's why,in this particular thread, I'm calling BS and not doing it in driver threads (or 3w off a tee threads). Off a tee and off the ground are worlds apart in terms of skill required to translate speed to distance.

 

I even give most people the benefit of the doubt. But 279 average *carry* with a 16.5* club? Some of these posts are from another planet.

 

Off a tee I'll hit a 3-wood 265 give or take depending on the wind. Off the turf there is no telling since its rare for me to hit a quality shot with a 3-wood off the turf. Its a mystery to me. Its a love hate thing.

 

My most recent 3-wood attempt off the turf was Sunday. After a perfect tee shot on a par 5 I was left with 250 to the pin of a very slight side hill lie. It was a little too far for my 2 or 3-iron and I was in such a good position that I'd have felt like a sissy not to at least try to put it on the green. Hit the 3-wood and the push I hit went wide right leaving me right of the bunker right of the green and almost OB......a little farther than pin high and short sided with the entire green going down hill. Doomed I made double from there. Delicate flop shot that went into the bunker.......followed by short sided bunker shot to a green sloping away. Chip on. 2-putt.

 

Should have layed up.

 

 

Is that google earth? How did you know where to start the line and where to stop it? Did you have it with you on the course? I only ask because its really clean and nice looking. if its a golf program, what program is it? I want to steal it.

 

It seems like the mistake would be attempting the flop. You can't afford to hit that short, ever. You should have had a 10 foot birdie putt, thats a big green. Aim to the front left and hit a simple spinny pitch. 3 wood was the correct play, trying to flop it near the pin and having that bunker in play was insanity. I've never played the hole (obviously) but trying to flop it over what looks to be a deep bunker that you simply cannot afford to be short into was ridiculous. Great wood shot, just take your 15 feet back up the hill for biride. Nothing wrong with that.

[deadsolid...shank]

I'v never really cared exactly how far my 3 wood goes from a tee. I'm much more concerned with direction, otherwise I'd hit driver (outside of those few instances where you have to be short of something offf the tee). Whether it goes 240 or 270 isn't that big of a deal, I'm hitting it just to make sure I'm in play. A couple more clubs for my next shot (if it only goes the 240) usually isnt a drastic problem. When I'm hitting 3 wood off the deck into a green, then the distance it goes is important

[royourboat]

No. Better at modifying will have excellent averages? That doesn't make any sense. I think you mean less discrepancy? Now THAT could support and argument based skill level. Obviously the better ball striker will have a tighter distance discrepancy. But that's not what people are discussing. But if that was what you were trying to get at, the novels trying to explain didnt go well.

 

I have an average carry of every club based off trackman. In to the wind, I club up accordingly, down wind I club down. Bad lie or rough, club up. Endless variables to list of course. Those situations don't change anyone's "averages".

 

TLDR; Rosco I agree with you and I think you got to bottom of this novel. You and everyone else I know uses the environmentally neutral carry distance as a starting point to plan shots, not the on course average distance hit.

 

I think the novels Pinestreet has written attest to using the average you hit on course, affected by the environment as an average to display fairway wood prowess here. I see his point that it's a fairer assessment of a golfers distance for the purpose of a thread like this, but it really muddied the waters in that it seems as if Pinestreet suggests you use it to plan all on course shots with (in conjunction with or what seems to be instead of the environmentally neutral carry distance).

 

This seems stupid to me because of course the freaking environment and your contact gives you a shorter average distance, you determine whether to choose the club in the first place with that in mind (water carry's etc) but a lower marker shouldn't plan on a mishit for his distance because a good ballstriker has a large percentage of strikes landing at the environmentally neutral carry distance or close to, sure there is reasonably horizontal oval shaped dispersion but its mostly left and right with a slight diagonal skew for short right and longer left (for RH).

 

As for hitting fairway, honestly I can f****** nail a TEE CBPro 14.5 (which has a deep face) off lots of lies, but I only really hit it on sensible ones and when the hole calls for it, naturally I adjust based on various environmental variables, but as a single figure cap on golfWRX I plan on flushing it.

 

First, I appreciate you not using words like "absurd" and "stupid" in your post.

 

This is basically this thread:

 

"I can shoot 60% from 3! I did it three months ago in an empty gym with a perfectly inflated ball and a brand new rim and no defense"

"Awesome! What was your 3 point percentage in the game yesterday, when you have to decide when to shoot and when your guarded, etc...?"

"I don't know I didn't keep track. But I'm a 60% shooter."

"yeah, OK, but what did you shoot in the game?"

"Didn't you hear me idiot? I shoot 60% from 3"

 

"" it seems as if Pinestreet suggests you use it to plan all on course shots with (in conjunction with or what seems to be instead of the environmentally neutral carry distance).""

 

I didn't say that or suggest it. Using actual average to plan shots would be insane. In fact, I specifically said "Why is this useful?" and then wrote a paragraph about how it IS NOT useful to plan on course shots with it. It is a barometer to tell if you are making smart on course decisions because if you are losing a ton of distance from a non-course, perfect condition i.e. trackman bay or whatever to your actual average you are likely hitting a 3 wood when you shouldn't.

 

If you don't know your actual average you can't make that comparison.

 

"You and everyone else I know uses the environmentally neutral carry distance as a starting point to plan shots, not the on course average distance hit."

 

Yup. But how in the world do you know if you are doing a good job or a bad job planning shots if you have no actual data point to compare your environmental neutral shots to? You can't. You know you hit it X in a trackman bay, and you try to use your brain to remember what you did on the course and you remember it very badly (according to the 2015 study).

 

Actual on course average is what it is. And the "Averages" in this thread are silly for 90% of them. I don't know which 90% are wrong and which 10% are telling the truth, but golfers dramatically over-estimate the translation of trackman bay/neutral condition distance to on course actual distance off the deck. They do this because golfers tend to measure their tee shots, and tee shots translate very very well from a trackman bay to the course. There is much less "decay" (to use the word from the study) from off the tee neutral numbers/off the tee course numbers compared to off the deck neutral numbers/off the deck course numbers.

 

I don't think people appreciate the fact that thier inability to translate their trackman average to actual average is primarily a course management issue when it comes to shots off the deck. This is why I am not impressed by trackman bay numbers when discussing actual average off the deck. Most players experience extreme decay in the woods and long irons when moved away from ideal, non course conditions. Those same players experience relatively little decay with tee shots and short irons.

 

Of COURSE you use environmentally neutral distance to plan. Only an idiot would argue otherwise. But if you arn't measuring/averaging actual distance, how do you know the effectiveness of your planning?

 

My whole point in posting in this thread is to point out that there is a SIGNIFICANT decrease in translation between neutral conditions and off the deck shots that doesn't exist with tee shots. As such, people overestimate their off the deck average significantly more than they overestimate their tee average. Further, when and if you hit the club (i.e. making good decisions) matters a lot when you ask someone how far they carry a 3 wood on average. It doesn't matter when you ask how far they hit a driver on average*. Its a basic principle of statistics that for some reason posters are acting like its an absurd idea. Being smart about when you hit 3 wood makes your 3 wood average better. Examining your 3 wood average numbers can tell you if you are or are not making good decisions about when to hit it.

 

In this thread, people are posting their neutral distances but my very strong suspicion is that these degrade significantly when on the course due to bad decisions (either hitting it when you shouldn't or not hitting it when you should) and that, unlike tee shots, decision making is the primary factor in a player's actual, on-course off the deck 3 wood average.

 

*Yes, there are short par 4 layup cases but please don't make that silly point, you know what I mean.

 

I agree with pretty much everything you said, but I don't keep this second number you speak of. Of course the second number is quite a bit lower, it's f***** over by the environment and your strike quality. If I practise on a mat, I might hit 7/10 good 3 woods. and 5/10 on course as a 9 handicap, I don't know these numbers, but lets assume.

 

I'll take into account the 50% misses with my shot planning and choose risk/reward for the game. But I'm not going to keep track of a second average number or consider it, I'm simply thinking if I make the shot, I get X result, if I don't I get tend get Y miss. I can live with Y miss.

 

The decrease from on course numbers is probably worse for longer hits. I am totally guessing, but I presume wind is more like a % multiplier +/- and the larger the original carry, the larger the +/- to modify by. Similarly, the dropoff in distance for suboptimal hits is probably bigger for equal skill in a shorter hitter. If the player has a solid swing this won't be particularly significant, if the guy is a 20 cap yer, the stinker shots will be tops and chunks. (This long hitting higher cap example has already been given).

 

 

I am trying to work out my numbers, between injuries, getting fitted for the first time and a small discrepancy between Trackman/simulator and real world I am pretty lost. But for the sake of numbers, I measured some in google maps to give you both.

 

Simulator = 275y (not trackman)

My number = 260y

On course average 250y (not giving the benefit of the doubt)

 

9 handicap, playing slightly away from the ocean breeze but at sea level, about 110mph average with 14.5deg fairway.

 

I'll let you know if I figure out the reasoning for the discrepancy between simulator and on course because I don't want feed the fire of doubt. Note that, since I asked about the discrepancy (Exactise quoted my thread) I have been fit for irons and the fitted irons are much much better, possibly spin is not always exact or the atmosphere I play at tends toward the thick side.

[justincredible04]

Plus handicaps are in an entirely different category. Their hits sound different and have a different trajectory.

 

That being said I only carry a 5W. Teed up it can go anywhere from 230-240 and off the deck 220-230+. I specifically ditched the 3 wood so that I could hit it off the deck easier. Also, I play a 12 degree driver so it was a better gapping. I'm never going back to a 3W

[Exactice808]

Pine street,

 

I think your issues are the circular arguments ... while also tweaking the criteria to suit your purposes

 

There's a zillion competing am's from 15-55 that have this shot. Your level of competition must be loaded with popcorn hitters

 

I can't count the number of guys I've played with that can do this .... over 200 anyways is best guess

 

I've seen 340 in a scramble off the deck in the air ... and over a pond in front of the green ... On the fly ... it was nuts watching this guy

 

I can hit this 250 shot myself mid season under the right conditions ... not all the time of course .. even tour pros scarf 3w shots off nice fairway lies

 

Our national mid am champ can get home on 585 yard par 5's with a 3w then 4i, he's been on fox sports if that helps

 

Pics follow, off the deck, 8i and 3HL

 

 

 

 

 

Yeeeeeeeaaaahhhh, I got you beat baby....

....

 

wait.... nvm........

 

Wait... this was a 3 wood thread..... damn this was my driver.......

 

 

crap......

[Rosco1216]

Pinestreet we can just agree to disagree. It's the absolute novels you're going into in an attempt explain and this theory of yours. DeChambeau, is that you?

 

On course average of all shots hit, from good lies to bad lies, from down wind to into the wind, is obviously going to be lower because of outside factors and variables. Course management and when you should hit a club or not is a different topic. If I'm in the fairway and fall into a divot and hit an approach into the green with more club that I just try and knock down and it goes 25-30 shorter than my full shot, from what you're saying, would bring down my average with that club.

 

The 3 pointers from practice to a game is not a good comparison. we don't have guys popping out from behind the trees throwing stuff at us or putting their hands in our face trying to disrupt our shot.

[mn44]

250 3 woods are a piece of cake for a lot of players. I'll never understand why so many of you get upset on the internet because someone can swing a golf club at a fast speed. That other distance thread was a disaster because of this. Dude was so upset because he couldn't hit his club far and starting crying about dispersion and stuff. The second you disagreed with him he refused to discuss the matter and instead used all caps and got pissed off.

 

Its golf, no two players are identical. Hit the club that gets the ball to go the proper distance for you. What someone else hits is completely meaningless.

 

One of the best players at my club is an older guy who can't drive it more than 230. Guess what? He doesn't give a crap that hes 70 yards behind you off the tee and still finishes in the top 5 each year in the club championship.

[VNutz]

This thread makes me miss JonesScott

[pinestreetgolf]

Pine street,

 

I think your issues are the circular arguments ... while also tweaking the criteria to suit your purposes

 

There's a zillion competing am's from 15-55 that have this shot. Your level of competition must be loaded with popcorn hitters

 

I can't count the number of guys I've played with that can do this .... over 200 anyways is best guess

 

I've seen 340 in a scramble off the deck in the air ... and over a pond in front of the green ... On the fly ... it was nuts watching this guy

 

I can hit this 250 shot myself mid season under the right conditions ... not all the time of course .. even tour pros scarf 3w shots off nice fairway lies

 

Our national mid am champ can get home on 585 yard par 5's with a 3w then 4i, he's been on fox sports if that helps

 

Pics follow, off the deck, 8i and 3HL

 

 

 

 

 

I've said at least fifteen times that my doubts arn't about if you "can" do it they are if you actually do it on average during golf rounds. I think you probably do it once in a while, maybe even half the time. i don't think its your average. What seperates good ams from pros is consistency. The unit of measurement we use for consistency is "average". I'm not impressed with one shot or someone who "can" do something on the golf course. I'm impressed by someone who can do it over and over and over and who makes good decisions about when to try it. Nothing you've posted has anything to do with this.

 

Here is basically what you are saying:

 

"I shot 100 3 pointers in an empty gym with no defense. I hit 60 of them. I shot 60%. I am a 60% 3 point shooter."

"Oh, great! What did you do in the game, with weird lies and pressure and a specific target etc... What was your percentage in the game?"

"I don't know, I didn't keep track during the actual game. But I'm a 60% 3 point shooter. Heres a video of me doing it in an empty gym with a new rim and a perfect background As good as anyone in the NBA"

"But what about the game? Why not keep track there?"

"Didn't you hear me idiot? I shot 60% from 3 in an empty gym. I'm a 60% 3 point shooter. NBA level. There are plenty of ams who can shoot like NBA players. I did it yesterday in an empty gym. Duh."

 

Off the tee, trackman translates almost perfectly. You control the lie and the target is huge compared to a green. Off the deck, trackman translates much worse. If you arn't keeping track of your on-course numbers, you have no idea if your distance under ideal conditions is translating to the course. AGAIN I agree off the tee the translation is almost perfect. I am seriously skeptical that the perfect lie trackman bay with no target and no penalty for missing long (so you can just whale) is translating to the course on a 1:1 basis with your 3 wood off the ground.

 

EDIT: If you have a GPS-enabled cell phone, you can get your on course average numbers for free really easily. I wonder why nobody ever does it? (PLEASE NOTE i am not suggesting you use those to plan shots, so we don't have to have that discussion again). But it would tell you the truth. You might be in the top .5% in the world at hitting a 3 wood during actual play off the deck (The toughest ball-striking shot in golf by proximity) and its just your putting keeping you off the tour. Or you might be really good at swinging out of your shoes at no target in a trackman bay. Either could be true, but I know which my money would be on.

 

SECOND EDIT: I think I posted this, but I can bust it (Relatively speaking) in a trackman bay. The longest 3 wood I've ever hit on my GPS is 288. My average is around 236ish. Its alot shorter than you think it is from your trackman data when it comes to woods and long irons off the ground. Trackman and course are almost identical with driver and short irons.

[MtlJeff]

Why did we get to this point? In an actual golf round you are not hitting clubs for pure distance all the time, sometimes you do , sometimes you don't. When i got fit at Callaway i hit 7 irons 160-165yds on average over 20 swings. Yes in a round i'll "average" less than that for sure, because i use my 7 iron for some punches to keep balls out the wind or whatever. You will almost always average less on a course than what you do on a trackman due to the variableness of shots that you hit (often on purpose!). Does anyone disagree with that? Is that what it takes to end this madness? I think we can probably all agree on this

 

But how far does someone hit on average when they are trying to hit it far....i think that's what most posters are talking about here.

 

I was a kicker in college football, my average field goal definitely was longer in practice than in games, but not due to nerves or choking or whatever. It's because you attempt short FG's in games that you don't in practice. Your coach won't let you kick a 58 yarder in games unless its at the end of a half due to field position etc etc....These skew averages. I think grown humans with brains can agree on this.

 

But if i go out and kick twenty straight 40yd field goals in practice and than some dude tells me "you can't average 40yd field goals bro"....i mean that's a silly, dumb argument. What does it even mean? Should i tell my coach "Hey coach, for the next 10 games, i'm only attempting 40 yarders, gotta work on my average".

[pinestreetgolf]

250 3 woods are a piece of cake for a lot of players. I'll never understand why so many of you get upset on the internet because someone can swing a golf club at a fast speed. That other distance thread was a disaster because of this. Dude was so upset because he couldn't hit his club far and starting crying about dispersion and stuff. The second you disagreed with him he refused to discuss the matter and instead used all caps and got pissed off.

 

Its golf, no two players are identical. Hit the club that gets the ball to go the proper distance for you. What someone else hits is completely meaningless.

 

One of the best players at my club is an older guy who can't drive it more than 230. Guess what? He doesn't give a crap that hes 70 yards behind you off the tee and still finishes in the top 5 each year in the club championship.

 

Nobody is upset or responding in all caps. We're having a discussion that has morphed away from the original topic. I believe (and the study I linked to earlier is really detailed and links to further studies) that golfers don't know their own games very well, and a lot of people in this thread confuse what they happen to remember with "average". I think they would play better if they computed their actual average and compared it to their "range" (trackman, whatever you want to use for practice situation) average. I think they would find a massive divergence like there is on tour with three wood off the deck, which is a unique shot in this respect. They are arguing that I am incorrect, and that they should hit the shot that they know they can hit (i.e. the trackman/range shot) and that they do that on average, relatively speaking.

 

I find this discussion interesting, with valid points on both sides. I don't think anyone is upset.

 

I don't care about shouting out distances. I care about trying to understand perspectives on the game that are not mine.

[pinestreetgolf]

Why did we get to this point? In an actual golf round you are not hitting clubs for pure distance all the time, sometimes you do , sometimes you don't. When i got fit at Callaway i hit 7 irons 160-165yds on average over 20 swings. Yes in a round i'll "average" less than that for sure, because i use my 7 iron for some punches to keep balls out the wind or whatever. You will almost always average less on a course than what you do on a trackman due to the variableness of shots that you hit (often on purpose!). Does anyone disagree with that? Is that what it takes to end this madness? I think we can probably all agree on this

 

But how far does someone hit on average when they are trying to hit it far....i think that's what most posters are talking about here.

 

I was a kicker in college football, my average field goal definitely was longer in practice than in games, but not due to nerves or choking or whatever. It's because you attempt short FG's in games that you don't in practice. Your coach won't let you kick a 58 yarder in games unless its at the end of a half due to field position etc etc....These skew averages. I think grown humans with brains can agree on this.

 

But if i go out and kick twenty straight 40yd field goals in practice and than some dude tells me "you can't average 40yd field goals bro"....i mean that's a silly, dumb argument. What does it even mean? Should i tell my coach "Hey coach, for the next 10 games, i'm only attempting 40 yarders, gotta work on my average".

 

This is the second time you've posted this (I think, at least five people have posted "if you average every shot its meaningless..." posts). It isn't a pure average. Its a weighted average. You can read about how they compute it. They even account for wind. They throw out outliers and average within a certain median. They don't average in "punch out" 7 irons into the 7 iron average. They don't average in a zero if you hit your driver OB. They arn't just averaging every ball hit with the club and neither should you.

 

Obviously you wouldn't average in a shot where you are trying to hit is 220 and then think you hit it shorter because of it. That would be stupid. You would decide not to include that shot in your average because you are being honest with yourself. Obviously robotically including every single shot in average would render it silly.

 

What you would actually do is convert it to strokes gained, but for our purposes average distance is fine as long as you use common sense when you compute it. Obviously if you decide to make the statistic absurd, you can make fun of someone for relying on it.

 

EDIT: As a good example of this, you don't use a 3 pointer heaved at the end of the half to determine if someone is a good shooter. It doesn't go in the average kept by the team.

[cardoustie]

Pine street ... reading comprehension bud

 

I never said I average carried a 3 or 4w at 250

 

I have some tales of loooong 3w carries for my speed .. I've posted them on here .. no need to rehash

 

I know my carry numbers with driver 110ish ... but the forest if full of 120-125 young bombers ... sorry you doubt it and/or haven't experienced it like others

[slc247]

Pine...it morphed away because you caused it morph away....

[MtlJeff]

Why did we get to this point? In an actual golf round you are not hitting clubs for pure distance all the time, sometimes you do , sometimes you don't. When i got fit at Callaway i hit 7 irons 160-165yds on average over 20 swings. Yes in a round i'll "average" less than that for sure, because i use my 7 iron for some punches to keep balls out the wind or whatever. You will almost always average less on a course than what you do on a trackman due to the variableness of shots that you hit (often on purpose!). Does anyone disagree with that? Is that what it takes to end this madness? I think we can probably all agree on this

 

But how far does someone hit on average when they are trying to hit it far....i think that's what most posters are talking about here.

 

I was a kicker in college football, my average field goal definitely was longer in practice than in games, but not due to nerves or choking or whatever. It's because you attempt short FG's in games that you don't in practice. Your coach won't let you kick a 58 yarder in games unless its at the end of a half due to field position etc etc....These skew averages. I think grown humans with brains can agree on this.

 

But if i go out and kick twenty straight 40yd field goals in practice and than some dude tells me "you can't average 40yd field goals bro"....i mean that's a silly, dumb argument. What does it even mean? Should i tell my coach "Hey coach, for the next 10 games, i'm only attempting 40 yarders, gotta work on my average".

 

This is the second time you've posted this (I think, at least five people have posted "if you average every shot its meaningless..." posts). It isn't a pure average. Its a weighted average. You can read about how they compute it. They even account for wind. They throw out outliers and average within a certain median. They don't average in "punch out" 7 irons into the 7 iron average. They don't average in a zero if you hit your driver OB. They arn't just averaging every ball hit with the club and neither should you.

 

Obviously you wouldn't average in a shot where you are trying to hit is 220 and then think you hit it shorter because of it. That would be stupid. You would decide not to include that shot in your average because you are being honest with yourself. Obviously robotically including every single shot in average would render it silly.

 

What you would actually do is convert it to strokes gained, but for our purposes average distance is fine as long as you use common sense when you compute it. Obviously if you decide to make the statistic absurd, you can make fun of someone for relying on it.

 

EDIT: As a good example of this, you don't use a 3 pointer heaved at the end of the half to determine if someone is a good shooter. It doesn't go in the average kept by the team.

 

I didn't say "punch out" i said punch shot. Meaning i might play a 7 iron from 151 or something because i'm just comfortable with the shot. And that would bring down my "average" of hitting a 7 iron 160-165 when i make a full swing. I'm not talking about extreme examples i'm talking about normal shots you would hit during a round, whereas during practice on a trackman you are often making full swings only to calculate average distance. In a round you are not always making "full swings" and thus your average distance with each club will be lower

 

My "average" with each club on swings where i am going for a full swing will be the same in practice as it is during rounds.

[pinestreetgolf]

Pine...it morphed away because you caused it morph away....

 

Yep. I thought it was an interesting discussion to have - why 3 wood off the deck translates so differently than a tee shot. I thought that was more interesting than people yelling out numbers for pages on end. I could be wrong.

[pinestreetgolf]

Why did we get to this point? In an actual golf round you are not hitting clubs for pure distance all the time, sometimes you do , sometimes you don't. When i got fit at Callaway i hit 7 irons 160-165yds on average over 20 swings. Yes in a round i'll "average" less than that for sure, because i use my 7 iron for some punches to keep balls out the wind or whatever. You will almost always average less on a course than what you do on a trackman due to the variableness of shots that you hit (often on purpose!). Does anyone disagree with that? Is that what it takes to end this madness? I think we can probably all agree on this

 

But how far does someone hit on average when they are trying to hit it far....i think that's what most posters are talking about here.

 

I was a kicker in college football, my average field goal definitely was longer in practice than in games, but not due to nerves or choking or whatever. It's because you attempt short FG's in games that you don't in practice. Your coach won't let you kick a 58 yarder in games unless its at the end of a half due to field position etc etc....These skew averages. I think grown humans with brains can agree on this.

 

But if i go out and kick twenty straight 40yd field goals in practice and than some dude tells me "you can't average 40yd field goals bro"....i mean that's a silly, dumb argument. What does it even mean? Should i tell my coach "Hey coach, for the next 10 games, i'm only attempting 40 yarders, gotta work on my average".

 

This is the second time you've posted this (I think, at least five people have posted "if you average every shot its meaningless..." posts). It isn't a pure average. Its a weighted average. You can read about how they compute it. They even account for wind. They throw out outliers and average within a certain median. They don't average in "punch out" 7 irons into the 7 iron average. They don't average in a zero if you hit your driver OB. They arn't just averaging every ball hit with the club and neither should you.

 

Obviously you wouldn't average in a shot where you are trying to hit is 220 and then think you hit it shorter because of it. That would be stupid. You would decide not to include that shot in your average because you are being honest with yourself. Obviously robotically including every single shot in average would render it silly.

 

What you would actually do is convert it to strokes gained, but for our purposes average distance is fine as long as you use common sense when you compute it. Obviously if you decide to make the statistic absurd, you can make fun of someone for relying on it.

 

EDIT: As a good example of this, you don't use a 3 pointer heaved at the end of the half to determine if someone is a good shooter. It doesn't go in the average kept by the team.

 

I didn't say "punch out" i said punch shot. Meaning i might play a 7 iron from 151 or something because i'm just comfortable with the shot. And that would bring down my "average" of hitting a 7 iron 160-165 when i make a full swing. I'm not talking about extreme examples i'm talking about normal shots you would hit during a round, whereas during practice on a trackman you are often making full swings only to calculate average distance. In a round you are not always making "full swings" and thus your average distance with each club will be lower

 

My "average" with each club on swings where i am going for a full swing will be the same in practice as it is during rounds.

 

Sure, and a little common sense is required.

 

I said exactly this in an earlier post. If you are on trackman at 265 3 wood and you average 250 you probably can say you average around 265 because you are only losing 15 yards, and that is likely due to course management and tactics. I said this two pages ago.

 

However, if your trackman is at 280 and your on course is 240 (throwing out silly shots to include) you likely have an issue with course management causing you to either not hit it when you should or hit it when you shouldnt.

 

The part of this I feel like is being missed is that my argument is that your 3 wood average is influenced primarily by WHEN and out of WHAT LIES you choose to hit 3 wood (EDIT: if you are a high skill player). If you are good at picking your spots well it should lag just behind your trackman average. If you are not picking spots well, it will likely lag significantly behind, either because you arn't being aggressive enough or you are being too aggressive.

 

There is an element here beyond mechanics and speed when discussing average off the deck. Its course management - what lies do you try it out of, how aggressive are you, etc... I think a whole lot of ams arn't very good at this, and because of this they see significant degredation with 3 wood off deck from range/trackman that they don't see with tee shots.

 

Obviously I'm not trying to shout "gotcha" at somebody whose real average is 12 yards behind their trackman yardage. I'm addressing folks like the guy who claimed a carry of 260-280 with a 16.5* club on average (Still waiting for that video, by the way).

 

EDIT: Think about basketball 3 pointers. A players average would stink if he just hoisted one every posession if he was guarded or open. A players average would be much better if nobody defended him. A KEY element in his ability to have a good average is judging when to shoot and when not to shoot given the situation in the game. I believe the same is true for 3 wood off the deck b/c of lie and target issues that arn't there wtih tee shots. NOBODY would argue that deciding whether or not to shoot in a given situaiton doesn't effect a player's 3 point average. A HUGE part of the players' ability to translate what he can do in an empty gym to a game is when to shoot and when not to shoot. Why is it different?

[slc247]

Pine...it morphed away because you caused it morph away....

 

Yep. I thought it was an interesting discussion to have - why 3 wood off the deck translates so differently than a tee shot. I thought that was more interesting than people yelling out numbers for pages on end. I could be wrong.

Why jack someone else thread to find out

[mn44]

Why did we get to this point? In an actual golf round you are not hitting clubs for pure distance all the time, sometimes you do , sometimes you don't. When i got fit at Callaway i hit 7 irons 160-165yds on average over 20 swings. Yes in a round i'll "average" less than that for sure, because i use my 7 iron for some punches to keep balls out the wind or whatever. You will almost always average less on a course than what you do on a trackman due to the variableness of shots that you hit (often on purpose!). Does anyone disagree with that? Is that what it takes to end this madness? I think we can probably all agree on this

 

But how far does someone hit on average when they are trying to hit it far....i think that's what most posters are talking about here.

 

I was a kicker in college football, my average field goal definitely was longer in practice than in games, but not due to nerves or choking or whatever. It's because you attempt short FG's in games that you don't in practice. Your coach won't let you kick a 58 yarder in games unless its at the end of a half due to field position etc etc....These skew averages. I think grown humans with brains can agree on this.

 

But if i go out and kick twenty straight 40yd field goals in practice and than some dude tells me "you can't average 40yd field goals bro"....i mean that's a silly, dumb argument. What does it even mean? Should i tell my coach "Hey coach, for the next 10 games, i'm only attempting 40 yarders, gotta work on my average".

 

This is the second time you've posted this (I think, at least five people have posted "if you average every shot its meaningless..." posts). It isn't a pure average. Its a weighted average. You can read about how they compute it. They even account for wind. They throw out outliers and average within a certain median. They don't average in "punch out" 7 irons into the 7 iron average. They don't average in a zero if you hit your driver OB. They arn't just averaging every ball hit with the club and neither should you.

 

Obviously you wouldn't average in a shot where you are trying to hit is 220 and then think you hit it shorter because of it. That would be stupid. You would decide not to include that shot in your average because you are being honest with yourself. Obviously robotically including every single shot in average would render it silly.

 

What you would actually do is convert it to strokes gained, but for our purposes average distance is fine as long as you use common sense when you compute it. Obviously if you decide to make the statistic absurd, you can make fun of someone for relying on it.

 

EDIT: As a good example of this, you don't use a 3 pointer heaved at the end of the half to determine if someone is a good shooter. It doesn't go in the average kept by the team.

 

I didn't say "punch out" i said punch shot. Meaning i might play a 7 iron from 151 or something because i'm just comfortable with the shot. And that would bring down my "average" of hitting a 7 iron 160-165 when i make a full swing. I'm not talking about extreme examples i'm talking about normal shots you would hit during a round, whereas during practice on a trackman you are often making full swings only to calculate average distance. In a round you are not always making "full swings" and thus your average distance with each club will be lower

 

My "average" with each club on swings where i am going for a full swing will be the same in practice as it is during rounds.

 

Sure, and a little common sense is required.

 

I said exactly this in an earlier post. If you are on trackman at 265 3 wood and you average 250 you probably can say you average around 265 because you are only losing 15 yards, and that is likely due to course management and tactics. I said this two pages ago.

 

However, if your trackman is at 280 and your on course is 240 (throwing out silly shots to include) you likely have an issue with course management causing you to either not hit it when you should or hit it when you shouldnt.

 

The part of this I feel like is being missed is that my argument is that your 3 wood average is influenced primarily by WHEN and out of WHAT LIES you choose to hit 3 wood (EDIT: if you are a high skill player). If you are good at picking your spots well it should lag just behind your trackman average. If you are not picking spots well, it will likely lag significantly behind, either because you arn't being aggressive enough or you are being too aggressive.

 

There is an element here beyond mechanics and speed when discussing average off the deck. Its course management - what lies do you try it out of, how aggressive are you, etc... I think a whole lot of ams arn't very good at this, and because of this they see significant degredation with 3 wood off deck from range/trackman that they don't see with tee shots.

 

Obviously I'm not trying to shout "gotcha" at somebody whose real average is 12 yards behind their trackman yardage. I'm addressing folks like the guy who claimed a carry of 260-280 with a 16.5* club on average (Still waiting for that video, by the way).

 

EDIT: Think about basketball 3 pointers. A players average would stink if he just hoisted one every posession if he was guarded or open. A players average would be much better if nobody defended him. A KEY element in his ability to have a good average is judging when to shoot and when not to shoot given the situation in the game. I believe the same is true for 3 wood off the deck b/c of lie and target issues that arn't there wtih tee shots. NOBODY would argue that deciding whether or not to shoot in a given situaiton doesn't effect a player's 3 point average. A HUGE part of the players' ability to translate what he can do in an empty gym to a game is when to shoot and when not to shoot. Why is it different?

 

You are mixing different topics and picking and choosing extreme examples between the topics to somehow try and prove your view point on one topic. That's not a constructive way to build an argument nor convince anyone of your point of view.

 

I can carry a 3 wood 250+ with ease out of pretty much any lie in the fairway (i.e. not out of a divot, plugged mud ball, etc) and a good # of lies out of the rough. This isn't anything special, I know plenty of people who can do this. But if I'm buried in 6" of rough I'm not going to even bother trying that shot. I would most likely punch out w/ a 2-4 iron to a more manageable distance from the middle of the fairway and try to get up and down for birdie that way.

 

That said, just because I don't hit my 3 wood 250+ out of 6" of rough doesn't mean I don't average 250+ with a 3 wood.......this whole idea of finding a single 'average' distance for each club by aggregating every possible lie and shot combination is absurd and quite useless (outside of these meaningless distance conversations on the internet). At the end of the day it is all about the one single shot in front of you....the # on the bottom of the club that executes that shot is irrelevant.

[Exactice808]

Pine...it morphed away because you caused it morph away....

 

[CutsandPutts]

I don't hit my 3 wood as the shaft is too whippy but this is from a 19 deg rescue.

Rbz (original) with Voodoo X.

[SurfDuffer]

There was a thread on here a while back asking how far everyone hits a 3-iron. That one was a doozy. Some of the guys who can't hit one at all were very bent especially towards those who hit them 200, 215 or 235. It was pretty comical. Some were insisting it was impossible or that you'd have to be a tour player. Funny stuff. Worth a search. :superman2:

[pinestreetgolf]

Why did we get to this point? In an actual golf round you are not hitting clubs for pure distance all the time, sometimes you do , sometimes you don't. When i got fit at Callaway i hit 7 irons 160-165yds on average over 20 swings. Yes in a round i'll "average" less than that for sure, because i use my 7 iron for some punches to keep balls out the wind or whatever. You will almost always average less on a course than what you do on a trackman due to the variableness of shots that you hit (often on purpose!). Does anyone disagree with that? Is that what it takes to end this madness? I think we can probably all agree on this

 

But how far does someone hit on average when they are trying to hit it far....i think that's what most posters are talking about here.

 

I was a kicker in college football, my average field goal definitely was longer in practice than in games, but not due to nerves or choking or whatever. It's because you attempt short FG's in games that you don't in practice. Your coach won't let you kick a 58 yarder in games unless its at the end of a half due to field position etc etc....These skew averages. I think grown humans with brains can agree on this.

 

But if i go out and kick twenty straight 40yd field goals in practice and than some dude tells me "you can't average 40yd field goals bro"....i mean that's a silly, dumb argument. What does it even mean? Should i tell my coach "Hey coach, for the next 10 games, i'm only attempting 40 yarders, gotta work on my average".

 

This is the second time you've posted this (I think, at least five people have posted "if you average every shot its meaningless..." posts). It isn't a pure average. Its a weighted average. You can read about how they compute it. They even account for wind. They throw out outliers and average within a certain median. They don't average in "punch out" 7 irons into the 7 iron average. They don't average in a zero if you hit your driver OB. They arn't just averaging every ball hit with the club and neither should you.

 

Obviously you wouldn't average in a shot where you are trying to hit is 220 and then think you hit it shorter because of it. That would be stupid. You would decide not to include that shot in your average because you are being honest with yourself. Obviously robotically including every single shot in average would render it silly.

 

What you would actually do is convert it to strokes gained, but for our purposes average distance is fine as long as you use common sense when you compute it. Obviously if you decide to make the statistic absurd, you can make fun of someone for relying on it.

 

EDIT: As a good example of this, you don't use a 3 pointer heaved at the end of the half to determine if someone is a good shooter. It doesn't go in the average kept by the team.

 

I didn't say "punch out" i said punch shot. Meaning i might play a 7 iron from 151 or something because i'm just comfortable with the shot. And that would bring down my "average" of hitting a 7 iron 160-165 when i make a full swing. I'm not talking about extreme examples i'm talking about normal shots you would hit during a round, whereas during practice on a trackman you are often making full swings only to calculate average distance. In a round you are not always making "full swings" and thus your average distance with each club will be lower

 

My "average" with each club on swings where i am going for a full swing will be the same in practice as it is during rounds.

 

Sure, and a little common sense is required.

 

I said exactly this in an earlier post. If you are on trackman at 265 3 wood and you average 250 you probably can say you average around 265 because you are only losing 15 yards, and that is likely due to course management and tactics. I said this two pages ago.

 

However, if your trackman is at 280 and your on course is 240 (throwing out silly shots to include) you likely have an issue with course management causing you to either not hit it when you should or hit it when you shouldnt.

 

The part of this I feel like is being missed is that my argument is that your 3 wood average is influenced primarily by WHEN and out of WHAT LIES you choose to hit 3 wood (EDIT: if you are a high skill player). If you are good at picking your spots well it should lag just behind your trackman average. If you are not picking spots well, it will likely lag significantly behind, either because you arn't being aggressive enough or you are being too aggressive.

 

There is an element here beyond mechanics and speed when discussing average off the deck. Its course management - what lies do you try it out of, how aggressive are you, etc... I think a whole lot of ams arn't very good at this, and because of this they see significant degredation with 3 wood off deck from range/trackman that they don't see with tee shots.

 

Obviously I'm not trying to shout "gotcha" at somebody whose real average is 12 yards behind their trackman yardage. I'm addressing folks like the guy who claimed a carry of 260-280 with a 16.5* club on average (Still waiting for that video, by the way).

 

EDIT: Think about basketball 3 pointers. A players average would stink if he just hoisted one every posession if he was guarded or open. A players average would be much better if nobody defended him. A KEY element in his ability to have a good average is judging when to shoot and when not to shoot given the situation in the game. I believe the same is true for 3 wood off the deck b/c of lie and target issues that arn't there wtih tee shots. NOBODY would argue that deciding whether or not to shoot in a given situaiton doesn't effect a player's 3 point average. A HUGE part of the players' ability to translate what he can do in an empty gym to a game is when to shoot and when not to shoot. Why is it different?

 

You are mixing different topics and picking and choosing extreme examples between the topics to somehow try and prove your view point on one topic. That's not a constructive way to build an argument nor convince anyone of your point of view.

 

I can carry a 3 wood 250+ with ease out of pretty much any lie in the fairway (i.e. not out of a divot, plugged mud ball, etc) and a good # of lies out of the rough. This isn't anything special, I know plenty of people who can do this. But if I'm buried in 6" of rough I'm not going to even bother trying that shot. I would most likely punch out w/ a 2-4 iron to a more manageable distance from the middle of the fairway and try to get up and down for birdie that way.

 

That said, just because I don't hit my 3 wood 250+ out of 6" of rough doesn't mean I don't average 250+ with a 3 wood.......this whole idea of finding a single 'average' distance for each club by aggregating every possible lie and shot combination is absurd and quite useless (outside of these meaningless distance conversations on the internet). At the end of the day it is all about the one single shot in front of you....the # on the bottom of the club that executes that shot is irrelevant.

 

*sighs*

 

You are not everyone. If you are correct in what you say you do, then you probably average 250. But there are people who do hit it 280 in a trackman bay who do try to hit it out of deep rough. If you followed the link to the 2015 study I posted, you'd read that golfers mis-remember approximately 35-40% of their golf shots *right after the round* let alone weeks later. It is very unlikely the people in this thread (including you) are being told the truth by their memories about their distance on the course.

 

I think if you actually measured it you might back off words like "always" and "never" when it comes to golf.

 

"You are mixing different topics and picking and choosing extreme examples between the topics to somehow try and prove your view point on one topic. "

 

What I'm saying is pretty simple, and you didn't address it directly. I am saying that our memories lie to us, and trackman numbers translate very poorly to course conditions when it comes to three wood off the deck. That's been my assertion for 13 pages. You say you "never hit 3 wood out of deep rough" and you say you can hit 3 wood "out of pretty much any lie in the fairway" - both of these are bold assertions and study after study (which I linked to earlier in response to a request) have shown pretty convincingly that golfers have no idea what they did in their last round, let alone a round a week ago. I'm simply suggesting that without keeping better records the posters in this thread are throwing darts in a pitch black room at a board with yardages on it.

 

Since memory decay exists and 3 wood numbers translate poorly from a pristine lie/no target trackman bay to a course I believe most of these numbers are inaccurate as actual in-play averages.

 

I don't think 250 is ridiculous. I've said that fifteen times, including a post about three up from the one you quoted. I think 260-280 *carry* with a 16.5* club is ridiculous. I think 270 is ridiculous (for an average).

[Exactice808]

There was a thread on here a while back asking how far everyone hits a 3-iron. That one was a doozy. Some of the guys who can't hit one at all were very bent especially towards those who hit them 200, 215 or 235. It was pretty comical. Some were insisting it was impossible or that you'd have to be a tour player. Funny stuff. Worth a search. :superman2:

 

Surfer, you need to check out the "AVERAGE 150 Club" it actually asks for "average" LOL..... but here is the kicker....... Its in the "Average Joe Section".....

 

Lets ask a really stupid absolutely mind numbing "dumb" questions, In the "average joe" section, what club do you think and average Joe would hit for a 150 yard shot, And then.....Imagine...what the potential responses are......less the trolls with their 150 putter..... seriously.....

[Rosco1216]

Pinestreet-

"There are people who do hit it 280 in a trackman bay and try to to do it out of deep rough." Statements like that is where your theory/argument completely loses it's traction here. I carry my 16* 4 wood 292 on trackman(grass not bay) and I sure as hell don't try to do it out of deep rough and neither would a tour pro or a 20 cap. Nobody in their right mind expects or tries to hit said club the same distance out of deep rough as they do from a "good" lie. Nor should a shot out of deep rough be included in someone's "average club distance

[Albatross85]

This is hands down the worst thread I've read on WRX. I know I'm not adding anything of substance with this post either but i am astonished at the amount of time two posters have put into writing novels of absolute jibberish.

 

While you think you are making "points", you are digging yourselves deeper and deeper. I can imagine im not the only one that feels this way. I will never give anything said by either of you any semblance of respect or consideration in any thread in the future.

 

This thread is a shining example of why i don't work with the public...

[pinestreetgolf]

Pinestreet-

"There are people who do hit it 280 in a trackman bay and try to to do it out of deep rough." Statements like that is where your theory/argument completely loses it's traction here. I carry my 16* 4 wood 292 on trackman(grass not bay) and I sure as hell don't try to do it out of deep rough and neither would a tour pro or a 20 cap. Nobody in their right mind expects or tries to hit said club the same distance out of deep rough as they do from a "good" lie. Nor should a shot out of deep rough be included in someone's "average club distance

 

Thanks for a respectful response.

 

Right, but it isn't black and white. There are tons of shades of grey. What about a lie in the first cut on a slight downhill lie?

 

The point I'm making is pretty simple - there is a massive divergence between on course numbers and trackman numbers with this particular shot.

 

Just out of curiosity, do you ever measure the shots during actual rounds? I'm not trolling you or implying anything, I'm curious.

[jusme]

This is hands down the worst thread I've read on WRX. I know I'm not adding anything of substance with this post either but i am astonished at the amount of time two posters have put into writing novels of absolute jibberish.

 

While you think you are making "points", you are digging yourselves deeper and deeper. I can imagine im not the only one that feels this way. I will never give anything said by either of you any semblance of respect or consideration in any thread in the future.

 

This thread is a shining example of why i don't work with the public...

 

Been reading bits of it on and off and could not agree more.

[Exactice808]

This is hands down the worst thread I've read on WRX. I know I'm not adding anything of substance with this post either but i am astonished at the amount of time two posters have put into writing novels of absolute jibberish.

 

While you think you are making "points", you are digging yourselves deeper and deeper. I can imagine im not the only one that feels this way. I will never give anything said by either of you any semblance of respect or consideration in any thread in the future.

 

This thread is a shining example of why i don't work with the public...

This is hands down the worst thread I've read on WRX. I know I'm not adding anything of substance with this post either but i am astonished at the amount of time two posters have put into writing novels of absolute jibberish.

 

While you think you are making "points", you are digging yourselves deeper and deeper. I can imagine im not the only one that feels this way. I will never give anything said by either of you any semblance of respect or consideration in any thread in the future.

 

This thread is a shining example of why i don't work with the public...

 

Been reading bits of it on and off and could not agree more.

 

 

While I even had to take a huge step back.... common..... its not THAT bad........ you know you have seen worse blades vs GI threads and product bashing..... in other threads..... even the big cat didnt show up in this thread saying the SLDR C 3wood is the longest?