Jump to content

3w distance off the fairway


baller4opca

Recommended Posts

I've given up trying to get the thick headed souls in this thread comprehend anything but the dream world they live in. Some of us hit 3w longer ON AVERAGE than the AVERAGE tour pro.

 

*sighs*

 

Yep. Some of you do. I don't believe 75% do. I've said that over and over.

G400 Max 9* Ventus Red 5X, SIM Ventus Red 6X 

Callaway Mavrik 4 (18*) - AW (46*) Project X 5.5

Vokey SM4 50* SM5 56*

Cameron Phantom 5S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The average on the PGA Tour for 3 wood distance off the deck (carry and roll) is 243 yards.

 

I do not believe some of you *Average* 250,60 and 70.

 

I believe that you hit that quite a few times, maybe even more than half the time, but there is no chance it is your average.

 

Most of the time when you ask "how far do you hit X club?" or "how far do you drive?" people hear "how far CAN you drive" not "how far is your AVERAGE drive?"

 

Average means every shot is included. You shouldn't feel bad about an actual average of 230. Most golfers don't actually measure and just eyeball, and really good shots are seared into our brain's memories while so-so ones are quickly forgotten. If you actually average 230, you are probably in the top 5% of 3 wood hitters in the world.

 

I know a million people will reply to this and claim they actually do hit it that far, and I have no doubt they "can" - I very much doubt they do it on average. I also very much doubt a few of the posters in this thread who claim to be longer off the tee with their 3 woods than the average for PGA Tour driver carry, which is 274.

 

I have ZERO doubt that they CAN hit it that far, nor do I have any doubt that they sometimes hit it that far. I have zero belief it is their average.

 

 

So you're saying folks who hit a 3 wood 260 can't possibly be good enough to do it more often than not ? That makes zero sense. How many total misses will it take to bring down a 100 ball average ? Answer. A lot. A guy who can hit a 3 wood 260 isn't hitting 35 out of 100 fat.

Besides that fact. Are you going to play for the well struck ball or the fat miss ? If your playing for your fat miss you may as well layup with something you can hit.

Callaway epic max LS 9* GD-M9003 7x 

TM Sim2 max tour  16* GD  ADHD 8x 

srixon zx 19* elements 9F5T 

Cobra king SZ 25.5* KBS TD cat 5 70 

TM p7mc 5-pw Mmt125tx 

Mizuno T22 raw 52-56-60 s400

LAB Mezz Max armlock 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're a good player Pine. How do you choose which club to hit?

 

Based on your own experiences that have determined how far each club goes?

 

Or on someone else's study?

 

They've concluded that we all only remember our good shots, or we don't accurately remember distances.

 

So how do YOU choose a club?

 

 

I use a GPS app on my phone that tracks all my rounds. I objectively measure them. I don't rely on my memory. I'm sure you've overheard caddies telling PGA pros how far they hit it yesterday on certain holes. Why don't the pros just remember how long they feel they hit it? Why do they need the caddy to have paced it off the day before so they can tell them the next day?

 

There are certain shots where this isn't possible. It would be absurd to figure out how to hit, say, an 81 yard pitch based on this objective data. That is a feel shot. 3 wood carry off the deck is not a feel shot. That was the point of the study. We (meaning humans) are good at feeling tee shots and short irons (including sand irons). We're awful at remembering putts, long irons and 3 woods off the deck.

 

That's why I defended distance claims in the tee shot thread and think they are preposterous here. I've hit a 3 wood carry (longest of my life, I remember the shot) 288. If you asked my playing partners my 3 wood carry, they would likely say 260 or 270. That's 25-35 yards too long per GPS. They remember the bombs because they stick out in our brains. I don't doubt some of these people have hit massive 3 woods in their lives. But I don't believe they can hit it *ON AVERAGE* like a touring professional. I think they can hit it once in a while like a touring professional, maybe even a third of the time, but not on average.

 

No chance. None.

 

I'm curious. You know your yardages are correct because you rely on GPS and not memory. But other people in this thread have said the very same thing and you go back to the study that says we can't remember accurately. I can say for certainty that I remember the 3 wood that ended in the green from 280 year. I also vividly remember the 3 wood that I hit low off the heel that got out there 100 yards.

 

And why would anyone care, or even ask for that matter, how far a person's playing partner thinks he hits a club?

 

To the second question, I agree. Nobody should care. I was specifically asked by the other gentleman about remembering playing partners' yardages.

 

Nobody else in this thread has said they are getting their yardages from actual measurements. That's why they are all "260" and "250" and "280" and "240". Exact, round, whole numbers. That's somebody approximating based on their memory.

 

Sure, with two shots, you'd get a good result using your memory. But if you play two rounds a week for five years, what you think is probably +/- 25 yards.

 

I get it. You think you remember accurately. You are very uncomfortable with the idea that your brain deals in categories and golf doesn't. You can see it in this thread. Its not "good lie" and "bad lie" "(one choice or the other) there are a million varying degrees of lie. There is no "long player" and "short player", there are varying degrees of length. Our brains hate this. Our brains work in categorization, not specificity, especially over a large data set.

 

Here's how the thought process goes (per the 1978 study on memory decay) -

 

1. Guy hits bombs off the tee

2. Guy thinks of himself as "long"

3. Other guy asks how long he is with 3 wood

4. Guy thinks "I'm long, and other long players carry 3 wood 260"

5. Guy answers 260.

 

EDIT: It doesn't have to be bombs off the tee. Guy develops "long" as his self-image and then filters everything through that lens, when in reality he's probably long with some clubs, worse with others, and horrendus with still others.

 

We don't do very well putting ourselves into grey areas. Most high swing speed ams - 80%+ - are massively long off the tee but can't consistently strike the ball well enough off the ground to have a massive carry average. But that isn't how our brain works. Our brain puts us in the category and, absent actual data over a long period of time, makes up a yardage based on which category our self-image is in.

 

Another good example is the guy at every club who scores badly because he is a "bad putter". Its actually almost impossible for bad putting to cost you more than about 2.7 strokes per round (Broadie study). However, that guy will come in and say "I shot 85" "why?" "can't putt dude". He has developed a self-image and constructs his post-round narrative to fit that self-image. That was the conclusion of the study. Very very few golfers were able to objectively analyze themselves without that self-image getting in the way.

 

A ton of 2-9 cap ams are fast. They have a self-image that they are long, which they are off the tee. So when someone asks how far they carry 3w they answer what they think a long player carries 3w. They can't strike the ball nearly that well off the deck though except once in a while.

 

One of the hardest things to do when trying to get better (IMO) is getting rid of your self-image as an 80 shooter, or a guy who can't putt, or a guy who always chokes, or whatever and deal with reality - which is that there are very few hard and fast rules in golf. Once someone brands themselves (or a playing partner) as "long" in their brain, they see everything through that lens. Its how our minds work and its why so many golfers (As a percentage) were so far off about their rounds - they forced the data into their self-image, where they are comfortable.

 

EDIT: If you've ever wondered what in the world some people are doing playing from the tips, its a good bet they have an incorrect self-image. They arn't saying "I stink but F it".

 

One of the craziest things I have ever heard of. We are all equal putters ? Man. What a load of s***. I had an entire summer of 32 plus putt rounds. 7 -3 putts in a club tournament round. Hard work , a better fitting putter and more hard work and I have had a low of 24 this winter. With several 26-27 putt rounds. I am most certainly a better putter now than two years ago. If you argue with that you're getting into semantics ... Might as well ask what the definition of "is" is ?

 

Might want to take your own advice as well and learn to hit 3 wood. If your well struck 3 wood is 270 plus and your average is 230ish you're drop kicking a lot of them. After all you didn't say the 270 ball was with a big wind at your back , wasn't way downhill , etc. I don't normally say things like that about other folks games. But it's a mirror image of what you are saying. Thought it may do you some good to see how it comes across.

Callaway epic max LS 9* GD-M9003 7x 

TM Sim2 max tour  16* GD  ADHD 8x 

srixon zx 19* elements 9F5T 

Cobra king SZ 25.5* KBS TD cat 5 70 

TM p7mc 5-pw Mmt125tx 

Mizuno T22 raw 52-56-60 s400

LAB Mezz Max armlock 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The average on the PGA Tour for 3 wood distance off the deck (carry and roll) is 243 yards.

 

I do not believe some of you *Average* 250,60 and 70.

 

I believe that you hit that quite a few times, maybe even more than half the time, but there is no chance it is your average.

 

Most of the time when you ask "how far do you hit X club?" or "how far do you drive?" people hear "how far CAN you drive" not "how far is your AVERAGE drive?"

 

Average means every shot is included. You shouldn't feel bad about an actual average of 230. Most golfers don't actually measure and just eyeball, and really good shots are seared into our brain's memories while so-so ones are quickly forgotten. If you actually average 230, you are probably in the top 5% of 3 wood hitters in the world.

 

I know a million people will reply to this and claim they actually do hit it that far, and I have no doubt they "can" - I very much doubt they do it on average. I also very much doubt a few of the posters in this thread who claim to be longer off the tee with their 3 woods than the average for PGA Tour driver carry, which is 274.

 

I have ZERO doubt that they CAN hit it that far, nor do I have any doubt that they sometimes hit it that far. I have zero belief it is their average.

 

 

So you're saying folks who hit a 3 wood 260 can't possibly be good enough to do it more often than not ? That makes zero sense. How many total misses will it take to bring down a 100 ball average ? Answer. A lot. A guy who can hit a 3 wood 260 isn't hitting 35 out of 100 fat.

Besides that fact. Are you going to play for the well struck ball or the fat miss ? If your playing for your fat miss you may as well layup with something you can hit.

 

You left out an extremely important word (I keep repeating myself because people keep mis-stating my arguements. That word is "carry". I have no doubt (as ive said over and over) that a guy with a super fast swing speed can hit a 250 carry one day and a 210 carry the next and they both go 270.

 

Of course a guy who can do that isn't hitting that many fat. But he is achieving the contact required to average a 260 carry. I have no doubt (read back, ive said this ten thousand times) that a 2 cap has a relatively consistent total yardage, and that that total yardage is probably right there with tour players. However, his ballflight is not consistent. He can hit a screaming 270 yard line drive, no doubt. As ive said over and over, high swing speed players can average massive total distance consistently with 3 wood.

 

But not with carry.

 

EDIT: Take the guy who said he could hit a 16.5* club 270 carry 280 total. I wouldn't necessarily have posted on 280 total. If you have a massive swing speed, close your stance, hood the thing, and swing for the fences 280 once in a while is possible. 270 carry *on freaking average* isn't.

G400 Max 9* Ventus Red 5X, SIM Ventus Red 6X 

Callaway Mavrik 4 (18*) - AW (46*) Project X 5.5

Vokey SM4 50* SM5 56*

Cameron Phantom 5S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're a good player Pine. How do you choose which club to hit?

 

Based on your own experiences that have determined how far each club goes?

 

Or on someone else's study?

 

They've concluded that we all only remember our good shots, or we don't accurately remember distances.

 

So how do YOU choose a club?

 

 

I use a GPS app on my phone that tracks all my rounds. I objectively measure them. I don't rely on my memory. I'm sure you've overheard caddies telling PGA pros how far they hit it yesterday on certain holes. Why don't the pros just remember how long they feel they hit it? Why do they need the caddy to have paced it off the day before so they can tell them the next day?

 

There are certain shots where this isn't possible. It would be absurd to figure out how to hit, say, an 81 yard pitch based on this objective data. That is a feel shot. 3 wood carry off the deck is not a feel shot. That was the point of the study. We (meaning humans) are good at feeling tee shots and short irons (including sand irons). We're awful at remembering putts, long irons and 3 woods off the deck.

 

That's why I defended distance claims in the tee shot thread and think they are preposterous here. I've hit a 3 wood carry (longest of my life, I remember the shot) 288. If you asked my playing partners my 3 wood carry, they would likely say 260 or 270. That's 25-35 yards too long per GPS. They remember the bombs because they stick out in our brains. I don't doubt some of these people have hit massive 3 woods in their lives. But I don't believe they can hit it *ON AVERAGE* like a touring professional. I think they can hit it once in a while like a touring professional, maybe even a third of the time, but not on average.

 

No chance. None.

 

I'm curious. You know your yardages are correct because you rely on GPS and not memory. But other people in this thread have said the very same thing and you go back to the study that says we can't remember accurately. I can say for certainty that I remember the 3 wood that ended in the green from 280 year. I also vividly remember the 3 wood that I hit low off the heel that got out there 100 yards.

 

And why would anyone care, or even ask for that matter, how far a person's playing partner thinks he hits a club?

 

To the second question, I agree. Nobody should care. I was specifically asked by the other gentleman about remembering playing partners' yardages.

 

Nobody else in this thread has said they are getting their yardages from actual measurements. That's why they are all "260" and "250" and "280" and "240". Exact, round, whole numbers. That's somebody approximating based on their memory.

 

Sure, with two shots, you'd get a good result using your memory. But if you play two rounds a week for five years, what you think is probably +/- 25 yards.

 

I get it. You think you remember accurately. You are very uncomfortable with the idea that your brain deals in categories and golf doesn't. You can see it in this thread. Its not "good lie" and "bad lie" "(one choice or the other) there are a million varying degrees of lie. There is no "long player" and "short player", there are varying degrees of length. Our brains hate this. Our brains work in categorization, not specificity, especially over a large data set.

 

Here's how the thought process goes (per the 1978 study on memory decay) -

 

1. Guy hits bombs off the tee

2. Guy thinks of himself as "long"

3. Other guy asks how long he is with 3 wood

4. Guy thinks "I'm long, and other long players carry 3 wood 260"

5. Guy answers 260.

 

EDIT: It doesn't have to be bombs off the tee. Guy develops "long" as his self-image and then filters everything through that lens, when in reality he's probably long with some clubs, worse with others, and horrendus with still others.

 

We don't do very well putting ourselves into grey areas. Most high swing speed ams - 80%+ - are massively long off the tee but can't consistently strike the ball well enough off the ground to have a massive carry average. But that isn't how our brain works. Our brain puts us in the category and, absent actual data over a long period of time, makes up a yardage based on which category our self-image is in.

 

Another good example is the guy at every club who scores badly because he is a "bad putter". Its actually almost impossible for bad putting to cost you more than about 2.7 strokes per round (Broadie study). However, that guy will come in and say "I shot 85" "why?" "can't putt dude". He has developed a self-image and constructs his post-round narrative to fit that self-image. That was the conclusion of the study. Very very few golfers were able to objectively analyze themselves without that self-image getting in the way.

 

A ton of 2-9 cap ams are fast. They have a self-image that they are long, which they are off the tee. So when someone asks how far they carry 3w they answer what they think a long player carries 3w. They can't strike the ball nearly that well off the deck though except once in a while.

 

One of the hardest things to do when trying to get better (IMO) is getting rid of your self-image as an 80 shooter, or a guy who can't putt, or a guy who always chokes, or whatever and deal with reality - which is that there are very few hard and fast rules in golf. Once someone brands themselves (or a playing partner) as "long" in their brain, they see everything through that lens. Its how our minds work and its why so many golfers (As a percentage) were so far off about their rounds - they forced the data into their self-image, where they are comfortable.

 

EDIT: If you've ever wondered what in the world some people are doing playing from the tips, its a good bet they have an incorrect self-image. They arn't saying "I stink but F it".

 

One of the craziest things I have ever heard of. We are all equal putters ? Man. What a load of s***. I had an entire summer of 32 plus putt rounds. 7 -3 putts in a club tournament round. Hard work , a better fitting putter and more hard work and I have had a low of 24 this winter. With several 26-27 putt rounds. I am most certainly a better putter now than two years ago. If you argue with that you're getting into semantics ... Might as well ask what the definition of "is" is ?

 

Might want to take your own advice as well and learn to hit 3 wood. If your well struck 3 wood is 270 plus and your average is 230ish you're drop kicking a lot of them. After all you didn't say the 270 ball was with a big wind at your back , wasn't way downhill , etc. I don't normally say things like that about other folks games. But it's a mirror image of what you are saying. Thought it may do you some good to see how it comes across.

 

Read this book: https://www.amazon.c...e/dp/1592407501

 

You have no idea if you are a better putter or not. All you know is that you have made more putts. If I hit my ball to 10 feet, and you hit yours to 30, on average, I'll be 3x better at putting. But it has nothing to do with putting. Its because I am starting closer to the hole because I am a better ball striker.

 

The number one factor in whether a putt is made or missed at all skill levels is the length of the putt. 10 feet is easier than 50. And if you either 1. miss a lot of greens (so you are chipping a ton) or 2. become a better ballstriker (so you hit it closer) your putting will magically improve.

 

Unless you factor out where the ball starts and compare apples to apples (i.e. make percentage from 10 feet versus make percentage from 10 feet) you arn't actually measuring your putting. You are measuring how close you can get the ball to the hole before you start putting.

 

"Total putts" is meaningless. Its like saying someone is better at basketball because they score more points in a game without mentioning how many minutes each player played. Its silly. if you don't factor out starting distance your putting statistics are garbage. You arn't measuring putting. You are measuring mainly how far away you are before you start putting.

 

The book I linked to took a statistics professor from Columbia 8 years to compile and write. He invented the "Strokes gained" putting statistic. He found that there is virtually no difference between golfers of any skill level in putting. Virtually all golfers make 97% inside 4 feet. From 4-8 feet, there is variation but it is very minor. From 8-40 feet all golfers 2 putt 98% of the time. Outside of 40 feet again we see variation in skill level. Because of the equalizing factor of the two - putt, putting skill contributes almost nothing to score. I know that cuts against conventional wisdom, but it is absolutely true. He studied over 100,000 rounds and found that all the "good putters" had one thing in common - the ball started close to the hole before they putted it.

 

Your not a good golfer because you are good at putting. You are good at putting because you are a good golfer (you hit it close to the hole alot).

 

EDIT: Again, you missed an important word, which is "carry". My carry average is around 238. Like most low cap amateurs, I have a fairly line-drive ball flight with my 3 wood off the deck. (NOTE I SAID MOST NOT ALL).

G400 Max 9* Ventus Red 5X, SIM Ventus Red 6X 

Callaway Mavrik 4 (18*) - AW (46*) Project X 5.5

Vokey SM4 50* SM5 56*

Cameron Phantom 5S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As others have said. I give up . It's mind numbing. Of course if I hit it to two feet and claim 18 putts that doesn't mean I'm a better putter. if a bullfrog had wings. Here's s newsflash. Because its in a book doesn't make it true. Likely more lies in print than truth.

Callaway epic max LS 9* GD-M9003 7x 

TM Sim2 max tour  16* GD  ADHD 8x 

srixon zx 19* elements 9F5T 

Cobra king SZ 25.5* KBS TD cat 5 70 

TM p7mc 5-pw Mmt125tx 

Mizuno T22 raw 52-56-60 s400

LAB Mezz Max armlock 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As others have said. I give up . It's mind numbing. Of course if I hit it to two feet and claim 18 putts that doesn't mean I'm a better putter. if a bullfrog had wings. Here's s newsflash. Because its in a book doesn't make it true. Likely more lies in print than truth.

 

That's unfortunate. It would make you a much better player. Its odd that you would say all of that about a book you have never read and, for some reason, refuse to read. Its probably the best golf book written in the past five years. Most of what we think makes a golfer good is nonsense, and people waste time practicing things like putting and bunker shots that have a tiny effect on score.

 

Of course it being in a book doesn't make it true. You read and decide for yourself. I found it incredibly convincing, given the background of the author and how extensive the study was. You would think with that many golfers put on shotlink you would find at least some who were better putters once you equalized for distance (i.e. 20 foot putt versus 20 foot putt), but he found very few.

 

But, if you won't read it, I guess we will agree to disagree. Hit 'em straight!

G400 Max 9* Ventus Red 5X, SIM Ventus Red 6X 

Callaway Mavrik 4 (18*) - AW (46*) Project X 5.5

Vokey SM4 50* SM5 56*

Cameron Phantom 5S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As others have said. I give up . It's mind numbing. Of course if I hit it to two feet and claim 18 putts that doesn't mean I'm a better putter. if a bullfrog had wings. Here's s newsflash. Because its in a book doesn't make it true. Likely more lies in print than truth.

 

That's unfortunate. It would make you a much better player. Its odd that you would say all of that about a book you have never read and, for some reason, refuse to read. Its probably the best golf book written in the past five years. Most of what we think makes a golfer good is nonsense, and people waste time practicing things like putting and bunker shots that have a tiny effect on score.

 

Of course it being in a book doesn't make it true. You read and decide for yourself. I found it incredibly convincing, given the background of the author and how extensive the study was. You would think with that many golfers put on shotlink you would find at least some who were better putters once you equalized for distance (i.e. 20 foot putt versus 20 foot putt), but he found very few.

 

But, if you won't read it, I guess we will agree to disagree. Hit 'em straight!

 

 

 

that is a fair point as far as reading vs not and making up my own mind.... But i feel like i have a pretty good handle on it from your posts.... I gather that the book is saying the place for improvement is in the long and approach game? I suppose.. i just dont see how that makes sense other than the obvious...which would be that improvement in any part of the game is , well improvement.... I think you can apply that logic to any part of the game.. if you lag putt better you eliminate 3 putts.. if you hit approaches closer you make more birdies... if you pitch and play bunker shots better you eliminate bogeys... if you drive it straighter you almost eliminate double bogey... all obvious things

Callaway epic max LS 9* GD-M9003 7x 

TM Sim2 max tour  16* GD  ADHD 8x 

srixon zx 19* elements 9F5T 

Cobra king SZ 25.5* KBS TD cat 5 70 

TM p7mc 5-pw Mmt125tx 

Mizuno T22 raw 52-56-60 s400

LAB Mezz Max armlock 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've given up trying to get the thick headed souls in this thread comprehend anything but the dream world they live in. Some of us hit 3w longer ON AVERAGE than the AVERAGE tour pro.

 

*sighs*

 

Yep. Some of you do. I don't believe 75% do. I've said that over and over.

 

Do us all a favor and read this book

 

https://www.amazon.com/When-Speak-Up-Shut/dp/0800787420/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1488979733&sr=8-1&keywords=know+when+to+shut+up+book

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As others have said. I give up . It's mind numbing. Of course if I hit it to two feet and claim 18 putts that doesn't mean I'm a better putter. if a bullfrog had wings. Here's s newsflash. Because its in a book doesn't make it true. Likely more lies in print than truth.

 

That's unfortunate. It would make you a much better player. Its odd that you would say all of that about a book you have never read and, for some reason, refuse to read. Its probably the best golf book written in the past five years. Most of what we think makes a golfer good is nonsense, and people waste time practicing things like putting and bunker shots that have a tiny effect on score.

 

Of course it being in a book doesn't make it true. You read and decide for yourself. I found it incredibly convincing, given the background of the author and how extensive the study was. You would think with that many golfers put on shotlink you would find at least some who were better putters once you equalized for distance (i.e. 20 foot putt versus 20 foot putt), but he found very few.

 

But, if you won't read it, I guess we will agree to disagree. Hit 'em straight!

 

 

 

that is a fair point as far as reading vs not and making up my own mind.... But i feel like i have a pretty good handle on it from your posts.... I gather that the book is saying the place for improvement is in the long and approach game? I suppose.. i just dont see how that makes sense other than the obvious...which would be that improvement in any part of the game is , well improvement.... I think you can apply that logic to any part of the game.. if you lag putt better you eliminate 3 putts.. if you hit approaches closer you make more birdies... if you pitch and play bunker shots better you eliminate bogeys... if you drive it straighter you almost eliminate double bogey... all obvious things

 

The crucial thing you are missing is rate of return. If you had infinite practice time, you'd be right. But you don't. So it isn't about working on "things that make you better" its about working on things that have the biggest effect on your score compared to the amount of time you have to spend working on them to turn 3 shots into 2. That is what he studied - the *most time efficient way* for a golfer to improve his score.

 

For example, if you became as good as a PGA Tour player from the sand, that would take a really, really long time. But it wouldn't save you many strokes. The average PGA Tour player gets up and down from the sand in 2.7 strokes. So if all you do is chop it out and 2-putt you lose three tenths of a stroke to them, on average, each time you hit it in the sand. Further, if you know that (in the book, most players guessed PGA Tour players averaged 1.2-1.5 from the sand, which they don't) you know a sand trap actually is a full stroke hazard for even the best players in the world (well, .7 hazard).

 

So, if you practice your sand shots until you are decent (just chop out and 2 putt) you will shoot .3 strokes higher than a tour pro for every bunker you hit, per round. So if I hit four bunkers, I'll shoot 1.2 strokes higher. However, when we think about how much TIME it takes to get good enough to turn that 2 putt into a 1 putt its not worth 1.2 strokes (and that assumes four bunkers, which is a ton for a good player). Its about efficiency of practice time. So once I can chop it out and 2 putt from a bunker, its a stupid use of practice time to continue to try to get better. Its not worth it, it saves me almost no strokes.

 

Contrast that to distance, where his study found that as you get closer to the hole you lose about .6 strokes per club down! So if I add ten yards of driver distance (obviously still straight) I'll cut my score 8.4 strokes a round! Now, adding 10 yards of driver distance per hole isn't easy, but its certainly easier than becoming a PGA Tour level bunker player, and it saves me 7 more strokes per round.

 

Same with putting. Its not that it "isn't important", its that once you become average the amount of time it takes to become above-average is insane compared to the return, which is virtually zero (i'm not going to retype the statistics, but the "good putters" saved around 2-3 strokes a round when we factor out the distance the putt starts from the hole).

 

In other words, the best use of time to improve putting is to use that time to learn how to hit the ball closer. There is NO amount of work on your putting stroke that can make up for the fact that you start 3 yards closer.

 

So, he found that average approach shots are most important followed by tee shots. After that, *once you become decent* (which almost all golfers are*), practicing anything besides ballstriking is a complete waste of time for all but incredibly elite players. The most efficient way to become a better putter is to hit it closer, not work on your stroke or routine or other nonsense. Similarly, think about short game. You need short game when you miss greens. The BEST way BY FAR to "improve" your short game is to become a better ballstriker so you hit fewer short game shots. No amount of chipping or pitching practice is going to make you score lower than hitting a few more greens a round. In other words the easiest way BY FAR to get up and down two more times a round IS NOT to work on short game, its to hit two more greens (so you "get up and down" by two putting). This is what his study found. Stop practicing chipping and pitching once you are at an acceptable level of consistent contact. Hitting greens is the best way to improve your short game score.

 

 

*if you are blading chips, you should work on that. It makes you lose strokes fast. He says this in the book. In both putting and short game you get to an acceptable level and then you stop until you are about a +1. There are simply no strokes to gain.

 

** Incidentaly, this book's data set is why I posted in this thread. He studied average with shotlink over a massive data sample spanning 8 years, and like 70% of the yahoos in this thread would be in the top 2% of the golfers he studied. There is no chance that's true.

G400 Max 9* Ventus Red 5X, SIM Ventus Red 6X 

Callaway Mavrik 4 (18*) - AW (46*) Project X 5.5

Vokey SM4 50* SM5 56*

Cameron Phantom 5S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll claim a 300 yard carry average with a 4 wood if it means no more 9 paragraph responses from pine.

AI Smoke Max @ 7* +8g front weight - Diamana DF 70tx(tipped 1.25”)

BRNR Mini 13.5(@12.5*) 43.25” - Diamana DF 70tx(tipped 1.75”)

TSR 3h 19* - AV Raw White 9x    OR   FliHi 3(19*) - Modus 125x

Edel SMS 4,5 SMS Pro 6-P - PX LS 6.5

Cleveland RTX 6 50/55 - X100

Titleist SM9 60.12 D grind - S400

Piretti Savona 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll claim a 300 yard carry average with a 4 wood if it means no more 9 paragraph responses from pine.

 

Anything worth saying takes a long time to say.

G400 Max 9* Ventus Red 5X, SIM Ventus Red 6X 

Callaway Mavrik 4 (18*) - AW (46*) Project X 5.5

Vokey SM4 50* SM5 56*

Cameron Phantom 5S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll claim a 300 yard carry average with a 4 wood if it means no more 9 paragraph responses from pine.

 

Anything worth saying takes a long time to say.

 

Umm... No

 

Lighten up. It was a Lord of the Rings joke.

G400 Max 9* Ventus Red 5X, SIM Ventus Red 6X 

Callaway Mavrik 4 (18*) - AW (46*) Project X 5.5

Vokey SM4 50* SM5 56*

Cameron Phantom 5S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As others have said. I give up . It's mind numbing. Of course if I hit it to two feet and claim 18 putts that doesn't mean I'm a better putter. if a bullfrog had wings. Here's s newsflash. Because its in a book doesn't make it true. Likely more lies in print than truth.

 

That's unfortunate. It would make you a much better player. Its odd that you would say all of that about a book you have never read and, for some reason, refuse to read. Its probably the best golf book written in the past five years. Most of what we think makes a golfer good is nonsense, and people waste time practicing things like putting and bunker shots that have a tiny effect on score.

 

Of course it being in a book doesn't make it true. You read and decide for yourself. I found it incredibly convincing, given the background of the author and how extensive the study was. You would think with that many golfers put on shotlink you would find at least some who were better putters once you equalized for distance (i.e. 20 foot putt versus 20 foot putt), but he found very few.

 

But, if you won't read it, I guess we will agree to disagree. Hit 'em straight!

 

 

 

that is a fair point as far as reading vs not and making up my own mind.... But i feel like i have a pretty good handle on it from your posts.... I gather that the book is saying the place for improvement is in the long and approach game? I suppose.. i just dont see how that makes sense other than the obvious...which would be that improvement in any part of the game is , well improvement.... I think you can apply that logic to any part of the game.. if you lag putt better you eliminate 3 putts.. if you hit approaches closer you make more birdies... if you pitch and play bunker shots better you eliminate bogeys... if you drive it straighter you almost eliminate double bogey... all obvious things

 

The crucial thing you are missing is rate of return. If you had infinite practice time, you'd be right. But you don't. So it isn't about working on "things that make you better" its about working on things that have the biggest effect on your score compared to the amount of time you have to spend working on them to turn 3 shots into 2. That is what he studied - the *most time efficient way* for a golfer to improve his score.

 

For example, if you became as good as a PGA Tour player from the sand, that would take a really, really long time. But it wouldn't save you many strokes. The average PGA Tour player gets up and down from the sand in 2.7 strokes. So if all you do is chop it out and 2-putt you lose three tenths of a stroke to them, on average, each time you hit it in the sand. Further, if you know that (in the book, most players guessed PGA Tour players averaged 1.2-1.5 from the sand, which they don't) you know a sand trap actually is a full stroke hazard for even the best players in the world (well, .7 hazard).

 

So, if you practice your sand shots until you are decent (just chop out and 2 putt) you will shoot .3 strokes higher than a tour pro for every bunker you hit, per round. So if I hit four bunkers, I'll shoot 1.2 strokes higher. However, when we think about how much TIME it takes to get good enough to turn that 2 putt into a 1 putt its not worth 1.2 strokes (and that assumes four bunkers, which is a ton for a good player). Its about efficiency of practice time. So once I can chop it out and 2 putt from a bunker, its a stupid use of practice time to continue to try to get better. Its not worth it, it saves me almost no strokes.

 

Contrast that to distance, where his study found that as you get closer to the hole you lose about .6 strokes per club down! So if I add ten yards of driver distance (obviously still straight) I'll cut my score 8.4 strokes a round! Now, adding 10 yards of driver distance per hole isn't easy, but its certainly easier than becoming a PGA Tour level bunker player, and it saves me 7 more strokes per round.

 

Same with putting. Its not that it "isn't important", its that once you become average the amount of time it takes to become above-average is insane compared to the return, which is virtually zero (i'm not going to retype the statistics, but the "good putters" saved around 2-3 strokes a round when we factor out the distance the putt starts from the hole).

 

In other words, the best use of time to improve putting is to use that time to learn how to hit the ball closer. There is NO amount of work on your putting stroke that can make up for the fact that you start 3 yards closer.

 

So, he found that average approach shots are most important followed by tee shots. After that, *once you become decent* (which almost all golfers are*), practicing anything besides ballstriking is a complete waste of time for all but incredibly elite players. The most efficient way to become a better putter is to hit it closer, not work on your stroke or routine or other nonsense. Similarly, think about short game. You need short game when you miss greens. The BEST way BY FAR to "improve" your short game is to become a better ballstriker so you hit fewer short game shots. No amount of chipping or pitching practice is going to make you score lower than hitting a few more greens a round. In other words the easiest way BY FAR to get up and down two more times a round IS NOT to work on short game, its to hit two more greens (so you "get up and down" by two putting). This is what his study found. Stop practicing chipping and pitching once you are at an acceptable level of consistent contact. Hitting greens is the best way to improve your short game score.

 

 

*if you are blading chips, you should work on that. It makes you lose strokes fast. He says this in the book. In both putting and short game you get to an acceptable level and then you stop until you are about a +1. There are simply no strokes to gain.

 

** Incidentaly, this book's data set is why I posted in this thread. He studied average with shotlink over a massive data sample spanning 8 years, and like 70% of the yahoos in this thread would be in the top 2% of the golfers he studied. There is no chance that's true.

 

Pine, I know Broadie's book is your Bible, but 100,000 rounds over 8 years is not a massive sample. My local club registers around 60,000 rounds per annum. There are at least 25 courses within a 20 mile radius of where I live that have similar levels of play. 100,000 rounds barely scratches the surface.

 

The R and A distance report is even worse:

 

http://www.randa.org/~/media/Files/EquipmentStandards/2016DistanceReport.ashx?la=en

 

The thing about any data set is that it can be manipulated to serve a particular purpose unless it is carried out fully independently and then verified by independent checkers.

 

Callaway Big Bertha Alpha Fubuki ZT Stiff
Callaway XR Speed 3W Project X HZRDUS T800 65 Stiff
Wilson Staff FG Tour M3 21* Hybrid Aldila RIP Stiff
Cobra King CB/MB Flow 4-6, 7-PW C-Taper Stiff or Mizuno MP4 4-PW
Vokey SM8 52/58; MD Golf 56
Radius Classic 8

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll claim a 300 yard carry average with a 4 wood if it means no more 9 paragraph responses from pine.

 

You say that like someone is making you sit in this thread and read his posts. If you don't want to, then don't.

taylormade aeroburner tp 10.5
exotics e8 beta fw 16.5
exotics xcg7 beta hy 19
ping ie1 4-U
vokey SM6 54S, 60S
studio style newport 2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, what's a mere 100,000 rounds compared to what you already know with zero data, right?

 

True, I only have the 3,000 or so rounds that I have played in my lifetime to measure against. I remember well when I was averaging 37 putts a round and shooting in the 90s. A putting lesson and some hard practice has got that down to 30 putts a round and scores in the 80s. GIR is about the same so I know from my data that my scoring has improved not through more distance or being closer to the hole on approaches, it is purely through my putting

 

I know that DJ would have had no chance of winning at the weekend until he started holing out those putts...he was ranked first in the field for holing putts longer than ten feet btw.

 

We all know deep down that it is a good all round game that scores best. Very rarely is the best player in the field top in one of the measured stats. More likely they are near the top in several of the categories. The stats that skew improvements in scoring solely towards gaining distance are being manipulated in that way to serve a purpose - the sale of new and improved £500 drivers every six months. Enlightened golfers are seeing through it hence the difficulties that TM are experiencing.

Callaway Big Bertha Alpha Fubuki ZT Stiff
Callaway XR Speed 3W Project X HZRDUS T800 65 Stiff
Wilson Staff FG Tour M3 21* Hybrid Aldila RIP Stiff
Cobra King CB/MB Flow 4-6, 7-PW C-Taper Stiff or Mizuno MP4 4-PW
Vokey SM8 52/58; MD Golf 56
Radius Classic 8

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About a 1/4 Mile

 

Uncle Rico .. is that you ?? Makes sense if you can toss a ball over them mountains

Ping G400 LST 11* Ventus Black TR 5x

Ping G400 3w 15.1* GD AD IZ 5x

Ping G400 7w 19.5* Ventus Red 6x 

Ping G425 4h 22* Blueboard HY 80x

Ping i210 6i & s55 7i - PW Steelfiber 110s

Ping Glide Wrx 49*, 54*, 59*ES, Tour W 64* SF 125s

EvnRoll ER9
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Driver swing speed is down to 94ish. Hit my Titleist 917 F2 around 210 carry 220 total off the deck average. Compared to 225 and 240 for the driver

 

When i was playing better a few years ago and swinging 101 with the driver my 3 Wood went 220 carry 230 total vs 240 and 260 for driver.

G430 LST 9 Matrix 50M4 R Black Tie

BRNR Mini 11.5 Midr Proto 65R*

Epic Speed 16.5 4w 21 7w IM10 60 5.5*

Apex UW 2021 17 Smoke Black RDX 70 5.5*

Stealth DHY 17 20 23 AV Raw Blue 70R*

TSR2 21 & 24 AV Raw Blue 75R*

T350 6-48 AMT Red R300

RTX Full Face Black 54 60 KBS Hi Rev 2 115

Odyssey White Hot OG 7 CH 34in SS Pistol 1.0

Srixon  Star XV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, lots of arguing here. Lets play guess how far I should hit a 15* 3 Wood!

 

Using Google Earth to measure, I normally hit my driver between 245-275. That takes into account good/bad swings, hitting into and with the wind, etc. A no wind normal solid drive would be about 260.

 

Mid Ball flight.

 

How far should I hit a 3 wood off the deck?

Driver - Cobra F8+ Black 11* Project X HZRDUS Yellow 76g Stiff
3 wood- TEE EX9 15*, Matrix Ozik MFS 75M4 Black Tie 75g Stiff
7 wood- Maltby UFW 21*, Grafalloy ProLaunch Blue 95x (-.5")
4I-GW - Maltby TS1 Forged, Project X 6.0 Flighted
56.12 - Maltby TSW Forged, Project X 7.0 Flighted (8i)
60.08 - Maltby TSW Forged, Project X 6.0 Flighted
Putter - TaylorMade Classic 79 TM-880

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, what's a mere 100,000 rounds compared to what you already know with zero data, right?

 

True, I only have the 3,000 or so rounds that I have played in my lifetime to measure against. I remember well when I was averaging 37 putts a round and shooting in the 90s. A putting lesson and some hard practice has got that down to 30 putts a round and scores in the 80s. GIR is about the same so I know from my data that my scoring has improved not through more distance or being closer to the hole on approaches, it is purely through my putting

 

I know that DJ would have had no chance of winning at the weekend until he started holing out those putts...he was ranked first in the field for holing putts longer than ten feet btw.

 

We all know deep down that it is a good all round game that scores best. Very rarely is the best player in the field top in one of the measured stats. More likely they are near the top in several of the categories. The stats that skew improvements in scoring solely towards gaining distance are being manipulated in that way to serve a purpose - the sale of new and improved £500 drivers every six months. Enlightened golfers are seeing through it hence the difficulties that TM are experiencing.

 

That's why I said practicing putting is a waste of time for "all but incredibly elite players". DJ is an incredibly elite player. He likely doesn't have many strokes left to gain from ballstriking improvement. We do. The whole point of strokes gained is that you should practice whatever part of the game you can make up the most strokes the quickest. For virtually every amateur worse than around a +1, thats ballstriking (approach shots and tee shots).

 

I can't argue with your gut feeling as to why you got better (I'm assuming you don't have the data from those 3000 rounds stored somewhere). I think its unlikely that you are one of the most unique putters in the world, but it is certainly possible. I would also suggest, without being offensive because i have read and agreed with a lot of your posts in the past, that others should model their practice plans on the 8 year study, not your gut feeling about how you got from the 90s to the 80s.

G400 Max 9* Ventus Red 5X, SIM Ventus Red 6X 

Callaway Mavrik 4 (18*) - AW (46*) Project X 5.5

Vokey SM4 50* SM5 56*

Cameron Phantom 5S

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About a 1/4 Mile

 

Is that average or your best? :rofl:

 

Just don't get why people care about other people's distances and then call them liars when they think it's not possible to hit it that far! Too funny!

 

Two reasons.

 

1. The psychology of thinking people can't be better or that much better than they are at something. Its an ego thing.

2. Some people simply lack a frame of reference. They've not played with people outside their little sphere.

_____________________________________________

Titleist 915 D2 60gX Rogue Silver
Titleist 906F2 13* ProForce V2 90gX
Titleist 690mb 2-P 6.0PX
Titleist Vokey 52* and 58*
SeeMore FPG Putter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Our picks

    • 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Discussion and links to Photos
      Please put any questions or Comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Monday #1
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Monday #2
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Tuesday #1
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Tuesday #2
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Tuesday #3
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Thorbjorn Olesen - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Ben Silverman - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Jesse Droemer - SoTX PGA Section POY - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      David Lipsky - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Martin Trainer - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Zac Blair - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Jacob Bridgeman - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Trace Crowe - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Jimmy Walker - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Daniel Berger - WITB(very mini) - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Chesson Hadley - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Callum McNeill - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Rhein Gibson - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Patrick Fishburn - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Peter Malnati - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Raul Pereda - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Gary Woodland WITB (New driver, iron shafts) – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Padraig Harrington WITB – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      Tom Hoge's custom Cameron - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Cameron putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Piretti putters - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Ping putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Kevin Dougherty's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Bettinardi putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Cameron putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Erik Barnes testing an all-black Axis1 putter – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Tony Finau's new driver shaft – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
       
       
       
       
       
      • 7 replies
    • 2024 Valspar Championship WITB Photos (Thanks to bvmagic)- Discussion & Links to Photos
      This weeks WITB Pics are from member bvmagic (Brian). Brian's first event for WRX was in 2008 at Bayhill while in college. Thanks so much bv.
       
      Please put your comments or question on this thread. Links to all the threads are below...
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 31 replies
    • 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #1
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #2
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #3
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Matt (LFG) Every - WITB - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Sahith Theegala - WITB - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Cameron putters (and new "LD" grip) - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      New Bettinardi MB & CB irons - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Custom Bettinardi API putter cover - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Custom Swag API covers - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      New Golf Pride Reverse Taper grips - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 15 replies
    • 2024 Cognizant Classic - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #1
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #2
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #3
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #4
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Brandt Snedeker - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Max Greyserman - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Eric Cole - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Carl Yuan - WITb - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Russell Henley - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Justin Sun - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Alex Noren - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Shane Lowry - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Taylor Montgomery - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Jake Knapp (KnappTime_ltd) - WITB - - 2024 Cognizant Classic
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Super Stoke Pistol Lock 1.0 & 2.0 grips - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      LA Golf new insert putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      New Garsen Quad Tour 15 grip - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      New Swag covers - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Jacob Bridgeman's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Bud Cauley's custom Cameron putters - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Ryo Hisatsune's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Chris Kirk - new black Callaway Apex CB irons and a few Odyssey putters - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Alejandro Tosti's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 2 replies
    • 2024 Genesis Invitational - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Monday #1
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Monday #2
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #1
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #2
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #3
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #4
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Rory McIlroy - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Sepp Straka - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Patrick Rodgers - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Brendon Todd - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Denny McCarthy - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Corey Conners - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Chase Johnson - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tommy Fleetwood - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Matt Fitzpatrick - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Si Woo Kim - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Viktor Hovland - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Wyndham Clark - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Cam Davis - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Nick Taylor - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Ben Baller WITB update (New putter, driver, hybrid and shafts) – 2024 Genesis Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Vortex Golf rangefinder - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      New Fujikura Ventus shaft - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods & TaylorMade "Sun Day Red" apparel launch event, product photos – 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods Sun Day Red golf shoes - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Aretera shafts - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      New Toulon putters - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods' new white "Sun Day Red" golf shoe prototypes – 2024 Genesis Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      • 22 replies

×
×
  • Create New...