3w distance off the fairway

[magmatt]

i carry mine 243ish off the deck and about 255 off the tee. Per trackman

[Tcann32]

I took a total of 2 swings in a LM and the numbers were 249 carry and 259 carry, 106 mph CHS and 110 MPH CHS. 269 total and 270 total. both were 150+ ball speeds and 3000 +/- spin

 

Now, that may sound like a passive brag, but that actually isn't to show you all how tall I am laying down (if you get that reference, great, if not, it's about the proverbial measuring contest this thread is turning in to.)

 

Those were big hits, for sure. Crazy distance, further than PGA tour averages by a decent amount. BUT, wanna know why I don't look in the mirror and say: "Yeah, I'd do me?"

 

Because there is about a 15% chance I could swing like that and still hit landing zone. The 249 carry might be more realistic off the tee, but it ain't happening often off the turf for me. When we look at tour averages, we are looking at the averages of people who are trying to score well and hit the fairway, or green.

 

There's a solid chance that many people can in-fact swing faster than a tour pro. I'm probably stronger than the average guy out there, maybe even more athletic overall, BUT, I can't do it with the consistency they do. Not even close. There's also a good chance that when we say tour pro on here, there's a list of 15-20 names that pops up into peoples heads that aren't just the average professional golfer, because we rarely see the average professional golfer on TV and most likely have never even heard of these average pro's. That's not a shot at them, I'm just saying that there's some pro's that are less skilled, overall, than the top dogs we see all the time, and any way you look at it, it's not very likely that many of them swing their very hardest too often, especially not often enough for it to affect their averages. Their averages are their averages swings with a few outliers either way and if you made a line graph, the line would hold pretty steady, vs most of us would look like the stock market.

[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

 

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.

The point you are making I understand but for myself, as well as others who have commented, is the application by which you apply it as well as compare it to other sports is where the disagreement comes from.

 

The weighted average and course management and everything you've stated just muds the grey area you speak of even more.

 

Yes I do measure my shots from actual rounds when it's warranted. If it's a windy day I pay close attention to how much it's affecting my carry compared to my average(my idea of average) and modifying my clubs accordingly.

[pinestreetgolf]

I took a total of 2 swings in a LM and the numbers were 249 carry and 259 carry, 106 mph CHS and 110 MPH CHS. 269 total and 270 total. both were 150+ ball speeds and 3000 +/- spin

 

Now, that may sound like a passive brag, but that actually isn't to show you all how tall I am laying down (if you get that reference, great, if not, it's about the proverbial measuring contest this thread is turning in to.)

 

Those were big hits, for sure. Crazy distance, further than PGA tour averages by a decent amount. BUT, wanna know why I don't look in the mirror and say: "Yeah, I'd do me?"

 

Because there is about a 15% chance I could swing like that and still hit landing zone. The 249 carry might be more realistic off the tee, but it ain't happening often off the turf for me. When we look at tour averages, we are looking at the averages of people who are trying to score well and hit the fairway, or green.

 

There's a solid chance that many people can in-fact swing faster than a tour pro. I'm probably stronger than the average guy out there, maybe even more athletic overall, BUT, I can't do it with the consistency they do. Not even close. There's also a good chance that when we say tour pro on here, there's a list of 15-20 names that pops up into peoples heads that aren't just the average professional golfer, because we rarely see the average professional golfer on TV and most likely have never even heard of these average pro's. That's not a shot at them, I'm just saying that there's some pro's that are less skilled, overall, than the top dogs we see all the time, and any way you look at it, it's not very likely that many of them swing their very hardest too often, especially not often enough for it to affect their averages. Their averages are their averages swings with a few outliers either way and if you made a line graph, the line would hold pretty steady, vs most of us would look like the stock market.

 

Correct! Off the tee I believe it. You control everything, basically. Off the deck I don't believe it. Its ridiculous. Both the repeat ability of the swing and the proper choice of when and when not to hit the 3 wood control the average. Ams dramatically overestimate their ability in these two areas. Its not "good lie" versus "bad lie". There is an ocean of grey between the two and your ability to make those choices when combined with the repeatability of your swing controls how far you hit your 3 wood off the deck., not speed. And I don't think 75% of the first 16 responders to this thread do it better than tour pros. They probably swing just as fast, but they don't repeat the strike nearly as well and they make stupid decisions more often, which kills their actual averages.

[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.

The point you are making I understand but for myself, as well as others who have commented, is the application by which you apply it as well as compare it to other sports is where the disagreement comes from.

 

The weighted average and course management and everything you've stated just muds the grey area you speak of even more.

 

Yes I do measure my shots from actual rounds when it's warranted. If it's a windy day I pay close attention to how much it's affecting my carry compared to my average(my idea of average) and modifying my clubs accordingly.

 

Your perfect-lie launch monitor statistics with your driver and a similar tee height probably tell us 90% of how you drive the ball on the course

 

Your perfect-lie launch monitor statistics with your 3 wood off the tee probably tell us 90% of how you hit a 3 wood off the tee on the course.

 

Your perfect-lie launch monitor statistics with your 3 wood off the deck probably tell us 40% of how you hit a 3 wood on the actual course because you can hit it too long (a huge mental restriction on distance), you can make bad choices about when to hit it, you don't have "perfect" lies (1st cut, slight downhill, etc...) and you have to repeat the strike much more consistently. Generally, your target is also much smaller.

 

When you couple the fact that translation from launch monitor to course isn't great with 3 wood off the deck with the 2015 study that concluded golfers misremember 35-40% of their shots when not actually measuring them, you get a whole lot of people who think the launch monitor off the deck 3 wood translates to the course like the driver. It doesn't.

[MtlJeff]

My post was the 27th one. In which i said i hit 245 or so off a tee and 235 off the ground. Can someone please give me confirmation as to whether or not i am lying?

 

I know i hit these distances but it's possible i don't. Looking for someone on the internet to tell me

 

Please help

[cardoustie]

This is not trolling Pine

 

... is English your first language?

... I see that no matter what anyone says you find it preposterous .. yet I see tour guys getting home from 250 with irons now on national TV

 

So the leap in logic is simple that strong competing am's ... let's say tourney proven 3's down to +3's ... that swing faster than aforementioned pros should easily handle this on AVERAGE off the deck.

 

What is an am in your mind ? I smell a major disconnect

[slc247]

My post was the 27th one. In which i said i hit 245 or so off a tee and 235 off the ground. Can someone please give me confirmation as to whether or not i am lying?

 

I know i hit these distances but it's possible i don't. Looking for someone on the internet to tell me

 

Please help

Yes...you are telling the truth, but being Canadian really helped you out, it was close....

[pinestreetgolf]

This is not trolling Pine

 

... is English your first language?

... I see that no matter what anyone says you find it preposterous .. yet I see tour guys getting home from 250 with irons now on national TV

 

So the leap in logic is simple that strong competing am's ... let's say tourney proven 3's down to +3's ... that swing faster than aforementioned pros should easily handle this on AVERAGE off the deck.

 

What is an am in your mind ? I smell a major disconnect

 

I literally just wrote "Correct" after quoting a post, so I don't think "no matter what anyone says I find it proposterous".

 

I agree with you. I think tourney proven plus 3s are probably right up there. I don't think 9 of the first 14 responders in this thread are tourney proven +3s.

 

Dude, I didn't say elite amateurs can't keep up with the pros. I said that its extremely unlikely that 75% of the first 18 posters in this thread are that elite. I think they have an incorrect self-image because they don't fully understand how much harder it is to get distance on average off the deck versus tee.

 

I didn't say anything about elite ams keeping up with pros. You are of course correct, and arguing that would be silly. I said that I don't believe 90% of the people here are elite ams. I think they have the speed of elite ams/pros, but hitting off the deck requires much more than speed, and because of that they have a higher opinoin of their distance than reality.

 

But, yes, of course there are tens of thousands of amaeurs who can hit a 3 wood better or equal to than a tour pro. I never said otherwise. I just don't think all these people can do it, especially given some of them are like 4 caps.

 

EDIT: There is a 5 cap in this thread claiming he is a good enough ball striker to average 265-275 with his 3 wood off the deck. Is that what you mean by "elite ams" ? If he was claiming 320 off the tee, I'd believe him. A tee makes it much easier to get away with nonsense. I don't believe it off the deck on average.

 

SECOND EDIT: There is a +2 claiming really long average distance. I believe him.

[AutomaticTwoDown]

My weighted average carry distance with my 3 wood off the deck is one yard less than the theoretical believable maximum.

[MonBear]

I haven't played a 3w in 17 years. But I game a Titleist 975f 18.5° 4w that I carry about 225 of the fairway and 240 off a tee.

[TinkerGolfMan]

Only getting 230 off deck for me!

[knock it close]

2nd last round of the year last year I had 268 flag, playing a bit downhill, island green, cut 3 wood that I middled carried about 3 yards past the pin and rolled to the back edge. If that's outta the first cut and sitting good it's probably going to carry farther for me but I'm not stretching much more

 

I've only skimmed this thread and tho usually I'm a big proponent of Dunning-Krugger I don't think its at play here. And I've seen from other threads that Rosco has speed to burn, guy could neck it and still fly it 20 by me.

 

Also why would there be huge divergence in on course vs tm? I mean I guess if you're pegging everything at the range you'd see a bit of a difference but who would do that when testing a 3wood? I mean I'd peg a couple but if I can hit it off the deck I can find a way to hit it off the tee pretty easily

[Forged4ever]

Pick your poison Gents....

 

Fairways & Greens 4ever My Friends⛳️

RP

[aliikane]

I only hit it is 295 into the wind with a balata ball, persimmon wood with hickory shaft and no roll.

[Rosco1216]

2nd last round of the year last year I had 268 flag, playing a bit downhill, island green, cut 3 wood that I middled carried about 3 yards past the pin and rolled to the back edge. If that's outta the first cut and sitting good it's probably going to carry farther for me but I'm not stretching much more

 

I've only skimmed this thread and tho usually I'm a big proponent of Dunning-Krugger I don't think its at play here. And I've seen from other threads that Rosco has speed to burn, guy could neck it and still fly it 20 by me.

 

Also why would there be huge divergence in on course vs tm? I mean I guess if you're pegging everything at the range you'd see a bit of a difference but who would do that when testing a 3wood? I mean I'd peg a couple but if I can hit it off the deck I can find a way to hit it off the tee pretty easily

 

I don't think he's trying to discredit how far I hit a 4 wood as I didn't state my averages until today. Him and I were just going back and forth on this theory of applicable averages. Which we just disagree on.

[Miuralovechild]

I haven't played a 3w in 17 years. But I game a Titleist 975f 18.5° 4w that I carry about 225 of the fairway and 240 off a tee.

Nice! I have the 980f 5 wood which I can carry 240-245. It's like persimmon on steroids. I do live at altitude so it would be less at sea level. My 3 wood goes about 265-70 at altitude also. I don't use a tee. Period.

[pinestreetgolf]

2nd last round of the year last year I had 268 flag, playing a bit downhill, island green, cut 3 wood that I middled carried about 3 yards past the pin and rolled to the back edge. If that's outta the first cut and sitting good it's probably going to carry farther for me but I'm not stretching much more

 

I've only skimmed this thread and tho usually I'm a big proponent of Dunning-Krugger I don't think its at play here. And I've seen from other threads that Rosco has speed to burn, guy could neck it and still fly it 20 by me.

 

Also why would there be huge divergence in on course vs tm? I mean I guess if you're pegging everything at the range you'd see a bit of a difference but who would do that when testing a 3wood? I mean I'd peg a couple but if I can hit it off the deck I can find a way to hit it off the tee pretty easily

 

I've stated it a bunch of times, but basically its a huge mental edge to speed when you can't hit it too far. When your hitting on the trackman you can just pound it. Theres no lake over the green, theres no woods behind, theres no cart path back right - you just whale. Generally that is true of tee shots on the course but not 3 woods off the deck. Having no long miss is a massive mental edge to speed, even if it isn't actually in play, your brain operates differently when you have an unlimited distance miss versus a limit to distance, even if you know you can't reach that limit. Further, your lie isn't perfect. That isn't to say its out of "deep rough" (if you take my arguement to its absurd length, it becomes silly) - but that is to say that there are lies that could go either way. Slight downhill sidehill out of first cut, for example. You can probably get your 3 wood on that, but its not nearly as easy as in a trackman bay.

 

Given that speed (assuming your a low cap and your speed is relatively consistent) and club (assuming you don't carry multiple 3 woods) are constant, the only variables are strike quality and the decision of when and when not to hit the club. I am not saying there are no ams that can do it. I am saying I don't believe 75% of the first 18 responders in this thread can maintain that strong average strike quality and decision making to average a 250+ 3 wood carry off the deck.

 

As i said in an earlier post, they can probably do it with a line drive. But carry on average? The strike has to be too precise and on-course lies are too variable.

 

We know that off the deck 3 woods and long irons have the worst translation to course. That has been studied (see 2015 study linked earlier in thread) and that tee shots and short irons translate almost perfectly. Now, the first 13 of 17 responses in this thread could be "elite ams" as another poster said and buck that study. I just don't believe that is the case. I think they swing fast and assume they hit 3 woods off the deck far on average and I think they are wrong.

 

It doesn't mean they are lying to us. I think they actually believe it. I just think they are deluded when it comes to off the deck. The memory decay study (Also linked earlier) concluded that golfers are awful at remembering what they actually do on the course (some too positive, some too negative, depending on the person). I don't think these posters are lying to us, I think they are lying to themselves. They are long off the tee and generate a ton of speed. That translates to a very very good MAX 3 wood off the deck but does not necessarily translate to a good AVERAGE 3 wood off the deck.

[Rosco1216]

2nd last round of the year last year I had 268 flag, playing a bit downhill, island green, cut 3 wood that I middled carried about 3 yards past the pin and rolled to the back edge. If that's outta the first cut and sitting good it's probably going to carry farther for me but I'm not stretching much more

 

I've only skimmed this thread and tho usually I'm a big proponent of Dunning-Krugger I don't think its at play here. And I've seen from other threads that Rosco has speed to burn, guy could neck it and still fly it 20 by me.

 

Also why would there be huge divergence in on course vs tm? I mean I guess if you're pegging everything at the range you'd see a bit of a difference but who would do that when testing a 3wood? I mean I'd peg a couple but if I can hit it off the deck I can find a way to hit it off the tee pretty easily

 

I've stated it a bunch of times, but basically its a huge mental edge to speed when you can't hit it too far. When your hitting on the trackman you can just pound it. Theres no lake over the green, theres no woods behind, theres no cart path back right - you just whale. Generally that is true of tee shots on the course but not 3 woods off the deck. Having no long miss is a massive mental edge to speed, even if it isn't actually in play, your brain operates differently when you have an unlimited distance miss versus a limit to distance, even if you know you can't reach that limit. Further, your lie isn't perfect. That isn't to say its out of "deep rough" (if you take my arguement to its absurd length, it becomes silly) - but that is to say that there are lies that could go either way. Slight downhill sidehill out of first cut, for example. You can probably get your 3 wood on that, but its not nearly as easy as in a trackman bay.

 

Given that speed (assuming your a low cap and your speed is relatively consistent) and club (assuming you don't carry multiple 3 woods) are constant, the only variables are strike quality and the decision of when and when not to hit the club. I am not saying there are no ams that can do it. I am saying I don't believe 75% of the first 18 responders in this thread can maintain that strong average strike quality and decision making to average a 250+ 3 wood carry off the deck.

 

As i said in an earlier post, they can probably do it with a line drive. But carry on average? The strike has to be too precise and on-course lies are too variable.

 

We know that off the deck 3 woods and long irons have the worst translation to course. That has been studied (see 2015 study linked earlier in thread) and that tee shots and short irons translate almost perfectly. Now, the first 13 of 17 responses in this thread could be "elite ams" as another poster said and buck that study. I just don't believe that is the case. I think they swing fast and assume they hit 3 woods off the deck far on average and I think they are wrong.

 

It doesn't mean they are lying to us. I think they actually believe it. I just think they are deluded when it comes to off the deck. The memory decay study (Also linked earlier) concluded that golfers are awful at remembering what they actually do on the course (some too positive, some too negative, depending on the person). I don't think these posters are lying to us, I think they are lying to themselves. They are long off the tee and generate a ton of speed. That translates to a very very good MAX 3 wood off the deck but does not necessarily translate to a good AVERAGE 3 wood off the deck.

What lies beyond the hole has nothing to do with the average someone hits the ball. That's a completely different topic and argument. Precision with a 3 wood, or any club for that matter, is different than knowing your average carry for your clubs. Your argument for believing better players have "better averages" has relevance on a tighter dispersion and more precision, not on average.

 

Calculating an average and how far a ball carries doesn't differentiate from a +2 or a 5. Numbers are numbers. The +2 probably has a tighter sample pool but that's not the point.

[pinestreetgolf]

2nd last round of the year last year I had 268 flag, playing a bit downhill, island green, cut 3 wood that I middled carried about 3 yards past the pin and rolled to the back edge. If that's outta the first cut and sitting good it's probably going to carry farther for me but I'm not stretching much more

 

I've only skimmed this thread and tho usually I'm a big proponent of Dunning-Krugger I don't think its at play here. And I've seen from other threads that Rosco has speed to burn, guy could neck it and still fly it 20 by me.

 

Also why would there be huge divergence in on course vs tm? I mean I guess if you're pegging everything at the range you'd see a bit of a difference but who would do that when testing a 3wood? I mean I'd peg a couple but if I can hit it off the deck I can find a way to hit it off the tee pretty easily

 

I've stated it a bunch of times, but basically its a huge mental edge to speed when you can't hit it too far. When your hitting on the trackman you can just pound it. Theres no lake over the green, theres no woods behind, theres no cart path back right - you just whale. Generally that is true of tee shots on the course but not 3 woods off the deck. Having no long miss is a massive mental edge to speed, even if it isn't actually in play, your brain operates differently when you have an unlimited distance miss versus a limit to distance, even if you know you can't reach that limit. Further, your lie isn't perfect. That isn't to say its out of "deep rough" (if you take my arguement to its absurd length, it becomes silly) - but that is to say that there are lies that could go either way. Slight downhill sidehill out of first cut, for example. You can probably get your 3 wood on that, but its not nearly as easy as in a trackman bay.

 

Given that speed (assuming your a low cap and your speed is relatively consistent) and club (assuming you don't carry multiple 3 woods) are constant, the only variables are strike quality and the decision of when and when not to hit the club. I am not saying there are no ams that can do it. I am saying I don't believe 75% of the first 18 responders in this thread can maintain that strong average strike quality and decision making to average a 250+ 3 wood carry off the deck.

 

As i said in an earlier post, they can probably do it with a line drive. But carry on average? The strike has to be too precise and on-course lies are too variable.

 

We know that off the deck 3 woods and long irons have the worst translation to course. That has been studied (see 2015 study linked earlier in thread) and that tee shots and short irons translate almost perfectly. Now, the first 13 of 17 responses in this thread could be "elite ams" as another poster said and buck that study. I just don't believe that is the case. I think they swing fast and assume they hit 3 woods off the deck far on average and I think they are wrong.

 

It doesn't mean they are lying to us. I think they actually believe it. I just think they are deluded when it comes to off the deck. The memory decay study (Also linked earlier) concluded that golfers are awful at remembering what they actually do on the course (some too positive, some too negative, depending on the person). I don't think these posters are lying to us, I think they are lying to themselves. They are long off the tee and generate a ton of speed. That translates to a very very good MAX 3 wood off the deck but does not necessarily translate to a good AVERAGE 3 wood off the deck.

What lies beyond the hole has nothing to do with the average someone hits the ball. That's a completely different topic and argument. Precision with a 3 wood, or any club for that matter, is different than knowing your average carry for your clubs. Your argument for believing better players have "better averages" has relevance on a tighter dispersion and more precision, not on average.

 

Calculating an average and how far a ball carries doesn't differentiate from a +2 or a 5. Numbers are numbers. The +2 probably has a tighter sample pool but that's not the point.

 

You are 260 from the green (or whatever your 3 wood is). There is a massive lake behind it and fairway in front. Next hole, there is a massive lake in front of the green and fairway behind it. You are telling me that these features wouldn't effect how you would hit that shot, and thus your average? You'd swing just as hard as the trackman bay for both those scenarios?!

 

In a trackman bay, you don't have to worry about being too long. Off the tee, you rarely do. Off deck, you have to all the time. Its psychological. You'll hit it shorter, on average. Just like backdrops behind the hoop dramatically effect basketball shooters (they do, numerous studies done on this) what is behind your landing area psychologically influences your swing. You are more likely to come up short (And thus reduce your average) if trouble is behind. "Trouble behind" doesn't exist in a trackman bay.

 

Please note that I AM NOT saying that you should shorten the average because of the hazard (obviously it would be stupid to hurt your average because water is behind). I am saying that the translation from the launch monitor or the range isn't as good because the target is smaller and you can miss long. It is a *psychological* issue that doesn't exist off the tee or in the trackman bay but does exist off the deck. Its psychological. You swing harder when you literally can't miss long.

 

I totally, 100% agree with you off the tee re: the +2 just has better dispersion because the tee makes strike quality much easier. However, off the deck, strike quality is a very important factor in distance and I seriously doubt the 5 cap is hitting it that pure on average from off the ground.

[Rosco1216]

Absolutely that scenario should affect how you should approach the shot! Trouble long but nothing short you avoid it with your club selection, trouble short but not long you play plenty of club. That is not how one should calculate their club averages, that is what I've said. That is course management and playing smart for a score which is a DIFFERENT TOPIC, not for applicable average carry distance for a player.

[knock it close]

Yea I agree I think we're having two different conversations. Pine you are not wrong when talking averages but I think thats a silly way to look at it. Why you're thinking of average in a mean aspect I think others are thinking what there stock yardage would be. I absolutely see your argument from that point of view but I don't know if its a good way to judge. So if theres a guy out there that can fly it 250 say but tops a bunch his average is going to be say 180 which is a yardage he'd never pull his 3 wood at. I get it from a logical average perspective but it doesn't make much sense for talking about golf shots. Maybe a better way would be saying what is your stock yardage and how confident are you in flying it that far for the shot.

[pinestreetgolf]

Absolutely that scenario should affect how you should approach the shot! Trouble long but nothing short you avoid it with your club selection, trouble short but not long you play plenty of club. That is not how one should calculate their club averages, that is what I've said. That is course management and playing smart for a score which is a DIFFERENT TOPIC, not for applicable average carry distance for a player.

 

From my post:

 

"Please note that I AM NOT saying that you should shorten the average because of the hazard (obviously it would be stupid to hurt your average because water is behind). I am saying that the translation from the launch monitor or the range isn't as good because the target is smaller and you can miss long. It is a *psychological* issue that doesn't exist off the tee or in the trackman bay but does exist off the deck. Its psychological. You swing harder when you literally can't miss long."

 

I am not saying you reduce your average because you hit it shorter because there is a hazard there. I'm saying that when you are over the ball playing a round your brain sends different signals to your body than in a trackman bay. You don't swing as hard. Its a psychological issue. When its off the deck on the actual course the speed goes down subconsciously to insure pure contact. That doesn't exist off the tee.

 

Yea I agree I think we're having two different conversations. Pine you are not wrong when talking averages but I think thats a silly way to look at it. Why you're thinking of average in a mean aspect I think others are thinking what there stock yardage would be. I absolutely see your argument from that point of view but I don't know if its a good way to judge. So if theres a guy out there that can fly it 250 say but tops a bunch his average is going to be say 180 which is a yardage he'd never pull his 3 wood at. I get it from a logical average perspective but it doesn't make much sense for talking about golf shots. Maybe a better way would be saying what is your stock yardage and how confident are you in flying it that far for the shot.

 

I agree, somewhat. We don't disagree on the methodology, we disagree on how good you have to be to consistently carry a 3 wood 240 in the air. My point is that people don't remember their rounds very well (See linked study) and that 3 wood off the deck translates very poorly from a range lie / trackman bay to a golf course when compared to a tee shot. So, they don't remember their rounds and trackman tells them X so they think their stock shot is X. I think it degrades significanty *for this particular shot*. Not for all shots, for this particular shot (3 wood off the deck).

 

We agree that "stock yardage" and "Average" are interchangable. We agree that using once in a while, silly bad shots to reduce a stock yardage or average is stupid. We disagree on the methodology that should be used to establish a player's stock yardage when it comes to 3 wood off the deck. I don't think the translation of trackman to course is nearly as good with a 3 wood off the deck as it is with a driver.

 

I think people who swing fast and can absolutely pound a driver assume they can do it off the deck when its a whole different world.

 

So, we totally agree on stock yardage and average and not being silly and averaging in topped shots. We disagree that posting up a launch monitor number of 107 / 270 with a 3 wood off the deck means you can consistently do it during a round. Note that launch monitor data and the driver move to the course almost identically. 3 wood off the ground does not.

[VNutz]

You keep referencing carry distance, but that was never part of the OPs question. The OP was asking off the tee or off the deck and how far they can reach, which are the answers you're annoyed with. In reality very few amateurs know their actual carry distance on a 3w as there's no way to track it on the course, unless you have a forced carry or do a hop and stop. The reality is that roll is part of the shot. And Trackman numbers you are discounting, so there's really no win in the situation for anyone with an opinion other than your own.

[pinestreetgolf]

You keep referencing carry distance, but that was never part of the OPs question. The OP was asking off the tee or off the deck and how far they can reach, which are the answers you're annoyed with. In reality very few amateurs know their actual carry distance on a 3w as there's no way to track it on the course, unless you have a forced carry or do a hop and stop. The reality is that roll is part of the shot. And Trackman numbers you are discounting, so there's really no win in the situation for anyone with an opinion other than your own.

 

I agree very few amateurs know their actual carry distance. I disagree there is "no way" to measure it. That's silly. Its pretty easy to ballpark with a GPS app. "It landed about two feet in front of that tree" so you walk there and look down at your phone. As I've said ten thousand times, you have to be reasonable. No, you can't compute your carry to 256.78, but you can absolutely compute it to 235 or 240 or 270 etc... If that 5 cap had a 260 forced carry over water, there is no way he's hitting 3 wood off the deck. None. Zero chance. That is not his stock shot.

 

I also agree (And have also said like ten thousand times) that the OP wasn't asking about average. Totally agree. We got in an argument about it after the OP's post.

 

"Hey man, what's up?"

"Not much. Where are you thinking about for dinne..."

"THAT WASN'T THE ORIGINAL QUESTION"

 

A lot of the carry distances posted in this thread are absurd. They arn't just a little off. They're absolutely ridiculous. 275-288 with a 16.5* club "regularly". Still waiting for that video by the way. As another poster pointed out, a 12 better than a tour pro. Off the tee? absolutely I believe it. Off the deck? no freaking chance. Off tee and off deck are different worlds in terms of required skill to consistently repeat carry distance. If they were a little off I wouldn't have said anything.

[Rosco1216]

Ballpark GPS using a tree a ball landed near to calculate anything is not an acceptable application. Forced 260 carry, damn right I'm hitting the club I carry over 275-280. Every time.

[Pworld]

215-220ish if i can keep it straight.

[pinestreetgolf]

Ballpark GPS using a tree a ball landed near to calculate anything is not an acceptable application. Forced 260 carry, damn right I'm hitting the club I carry over 275-280. Every time.

 

Yeah OK, *you* might. I don't believe 9 out of the first 14 responders would. I don't know why this is hard to understand. I'm not attacking you specifically. I've said over and over that I believe probably 15-20% of the people in this thread are telling the truth and the rest are lying to themselves. There is no way in the world that 75% of the first 18 responses in a golf wrx thread compress a 3 wood off the deck better than a touring professional. Zero chance.

 

I'm not attacking you. I don't know who is lying and who isn't, but I know most are. They arn't doing it on purpose, they just hit a long tee ball and think off the deck is the same thing. It isn't.

 

Me: "I don't think all these people hit their 3 wood that far. Some do, but most don't. Its absurd to think that 75-80% of this forum has a membership that compresses a 3 wood better than a touring professional."

You: "OH YEAH? WELL *I* HIT IT THAT FAR SO SHUT UP"

 

*hard eye roll*

[Rosco1216]

Ballpark GPS using a tree a ball landed near to calculate anything is not an acceptable application. Forced 260 carry, damn right I'm hitting the club I carry over 275-280. Every time.

 

Yeah OK, *you* might. I don't believe 9 out of the first 14 responders would. I don't know why this is hard to understand. I'm not attacking you specifically. I've said over and over that I believe probably 15-20% of the people in this thread are telling the truth and the rest are lying to themselves. There is no way in the world that 75% of the first 18 responses in a golf wrx thread compress a 3 wood off the deck better than a touring professional. Zero chance.

 

I'm not attacking you. I don't know who is lying and who isn't, but I know most are. They arn't doing it on purpose, they just hit a long tee ball and think off the deck is the same thing. It isn't.

 

I don't believe you are attacking me at all and I hope you don't think I'm attacking you either. It's just a difference of philosophy and approach. A lot of guys may not know how far they hit their clubs. But if guys have done true fittings on trackman, off grass, I believe they have their average carry distance to apply on the course. I mean the pros have trackman at the range before all their rounds dialing in their yardages to apply on the course.

 

But everyone knows off the tee is not the same as off the deck. It's different as one is off a tee and one is off the ground. One goes farther than the other. Etc

[Fade]

Ballpark GPS using a tree a ball landed near to calculate anything is not an acceptable application. Forced 260 carry, damn right I'm hitting the club I carry over 275-280. Every time.

 

Yeah OK, *you* might. I don't believe 9 out of the first 14 responders would. I don't know why this is hard to understand. I'm not attacking you specifically. I've said over and over that I believe probably 15-20% of the people in this thread are telling the truth and the rest are lying to themselves. There is no way in the world that 75% of the first 18 responses in a golf wrx thread compress a 3 wood off the deck better than a touring professional. Zero chance.

 

I'm not attacking you. I don't know who is lying and who isn't, but I know most are. They arn't doing it on purpose, they just hit a long tee ball and think off the deck is the same thing. It isn't.

 

Me: "I don't think all these people hit their 3 wood that far. Some do, but most don't. Its absurd to think that 75-80% of this forum has a membership that compresses a 3 wood better than a touring professional."

You: "OH YEAH? WELL *I* HIT IT THAT FAR SO SHUT UP"

 

*hard eye roll*

 

Keep in mind that a golfer that hits 3W 275 yards might be more eager to share than a golfer that hits 3W 175 yards.