DECADE by BirdieFire

[LeftDaddy]

Can someone give a quick synopsis of the difference between the elite version and the foundations version (other than unlimited yardage books)?  
 

Im finishing up my 6 months with foundations. It was totally worth $99. But I also tend to believe I now have everything I need, given my skill level. Thus I’m currently thinking I won’t extend my access. About the only thing that would change my mind is if you guys said wtte of “you have to get elite because xyz “. 

[Tupperwolf]

I just listened to Scott on the No Putts Given podcast today.  I'm pretty interested in going into the DECADE rabbit hole.  Course management has always been a struggle of mine.  $99 to start, hmmm...

[Hstead]

Take this for what it is worth, but a friend of mine spoke to Bryson about Decade.  Bryson said he doesn't use Decade, that he often fires right at the pin, especially when he thinks he is hitting it well.  

[xmanhockey7]

4 hours ago, Tupperwolf said:

I just listened to Scott on the No Putts Given podcast today.  I'm pretty interested in going into the DECADE rabbit hole.  Course management has always been a struggle of mine.  $99 to start, hmmm...

Do it. Better golf for the rest of your life for $99? Sounds like a steal. 

[gentles]

4 hours ago, Tupperwolf said:

I just listened to Scott on the No Putts Given podcast today.  I'm pretty interested in going into the DECADE rabbit hole.  Course management has always been a struggle of mine.  $99 to start, hmmm...

 

interesting chat - I do find it funny how the No Laying Up guys seem to have a permanent spot inside his head. Seems like Scott cares more about trying to "own" and "destroy" anyone who has a conflicting view to his, to the point where it must be starting to put people off. 

[Myherobobhope]

11 minutes ago, gentles said:

 

interesting chat - I do find it funny how the No Laying Up guys seem to have a permanent spot inside his head. Seems like Scott cares more about trying to "own" and "destroy" anyone who has a conflicting view to his, to the point where it must be starting to put people off. 

I’ve listened to a lot of Scott, and disagree with this… he definitely can come across as arrogant and will occasionally go after people he disagrees with, but overall he seems to mostly be trying to talk about his product and the good that it does. 
 

If you listen to him on hack it out, he is a pretty fun guy and has an interesting perspective on the professional world of golf.

 

im a huge fan of his work, though… it makes sense and is logical for what I’m trying to do… it’s helped me make less big mistakes on the course, identify my patterns and take better aim overall… it’s been stuff like a good putting tempo drill, not trying to move my driver both ways, taking more club into front and middle pins…

 

Scott will tell you it’s not complicated… still easy to do incorrectly.

 

I just got elite, and haven’t dug in… I’ll follow up with my thoughts.

[gentles]

1 minute ago, Myherobobhope said:

I’ve listened to a lot of Scott, and disagree with this… he definitely can come across as arrogant and will occasionally go after people he disagrees with, but overall he seems to mostly be trying to talk about his product and the good that it does. 
 

If you listen to him on hack it out, he is a pretty fun guy and has an interesting perspective on the professional world of golf.

 

im a huge fan of his work, though… it makes sense and is logical for what I’m trying to do… it’s helped me make less big mistakes on the course, identify my patterns and take better aim overall… it’s been stuff like a good putting tempo drill, not trying to move my driver both ways, taking more club into front and middle pins…

 

Scott will tell you it’s not complicated… still easy to do incorrectly.

 

I just got elite, and haven’t dug in… I’ll follow up with my thoughts.

 

I paid for a year of Elite and cancelled because the yardage books didn't work where I live - was a Meters / Yards issue that they never resolved. I'm 100% in on the concepts he teaches, but he is a very hard follow on social media and very quickly descends into petty arguments IMO...i eventually got blocked for "liking" a tweet from someone disagreeing with him. 

 

The hack it out podcast with Adam Young was a perfect example of this - Adam came on to debate block vs random practice, and all Scott did was put up a strawman of what he though random practice was and argued against that, ignoring everything Adam had as a response (i.e. maybe its differnet if you're not a +6 handicap). Then they complain that no one wants to come on and debate with them...

 

I'll continue to preach the benefits of his approach (IMO there are a handful of rules of thumb which will get you 85% of the way there), but I do believe he doesn't do himself any favours with his combative approach.

[Myherobobhope]

Just now, gentles said:

 

The hack it out podcast with Adam Young was a perfect example of this - Adam came on to debate block vs random practice, and all Scott did was put up a strawman of what he though random practice was and argued against that, ignoring everything Adam had as a response (i.e. maybe its differnet if you're not a +6 handicap). Then they complain that no one wants to come on and debate with them...

Haha, that episode was the peak of my dislike for Scott… he got way better after that… 

 

i 100% agree that it was a terrible episode and that Scott was basically just blowing off Adam… he definitely has some issues with empathy and helping higher handicaps (honestly, I think their amount of variance makes his math not work, and that frustrates him)

 

He’s not a good debater, but he also doesn’t need to be debating… he has the math and can show why his ideas work… when he gets into arguments he makes himself look worse… I 100% get why people don’t like him, but I think he’s a smart guy and has good information… (I also love Adam, but his podcast outs really to sleep)

[LeftDaddy]

16 hours ago, Tupperwolf said:

I just listened to Scott on the No Putts Given podcast today.  I'm pretty interested in going into the DECADE rabbit hole.  Course management has always been a struggle of mine.  $99 to start, hmmm...

Do it. Seriously. I’ve had a LOT of course management questions over the years that have never been answered to my satisfaction. But DECADE covers it all pretty thoroughly. And even if you disagree with a few things here or there, you at least have a system / plan of attack. I find with golf course management that merely having a system, even if sometimes wrong, is better than no system at all. And for what it’s worth I don’t have many, if any, bones to pick with DECADE. I get a lot more than $99 value out of it. 

[BigManSlim]

11 hours ago, Myherobobhope said:

Haha, that episode was the peak of my dislike for Scott… he got way better after that… 

 

i 100% agree that it was a terrible episode and that Scott was basically just blowing off Adam… he definitely has some issues with empathy and helping higher handicaps (honestly, I think their amount of variance makes his math not work, and that frustrates him)

 

He’s not a good debater, but he also doesn’t need to be debating… he has the math and can show why his ideas work… when he gets into arguments he makes himself look worse… I 100% get why people don’t like him, but I think he’s a smart guy and has good information… (I also love Adam, but his podcast outs really to sleep)

I have "known" Scott since he was posting on the poker forum he often references. That was 12-ish years ago. He was way more aggressive back then. The golf threads he participated in way back then were legendary but he would get PISSED. Believe it or not he has mellowed since then.  But looking back now as I recently did, you could see the kernels of the ideas behind DECADE forming in those threads. Really kind of interesting to see how much it has developed.

 

He can come across as a bit of a know it all at times (suspect he would agree with that assessment). Overall his contribution to the golf discussion is a huge net positive. I don't care much for the NLU guys and think their approach to golf is fairly lazy with hot takes, etc. Their videos and such seem really well done of what I have seen but don't particularly interest me.

 

I'm not sure it is "in his head" or not but when you have people attacking your product on the regular I'd imagine that can get the blood boiling. It's not just NLU either: it's Fried Egg, Geoff Shackleford and his ilk, the GCA crowd, etc. Frankly most of them spit idiotic old school tropes that just simply aren't true or are at a minimum lazy.

 

Honestly having people like Scott push back on narratives, etc. is important to getting knowledge out there. It's similar to how analytics have changed how people watch football, baseball, basketball, etc.  Frankly golf has been WAY behind in becoming a modern game in that respect.

[North Butte]

12 hours ago, Myherobobhope said:

...he definitely has some issues with empathy and helping higher handicaps (honestly, I think their amount of variance makes his math not work, and that frustrates him)

Kind of like the line in Moneyball where Billy Beane said "his [stuff] doesn't work in the playoffs". 

 

There's a certain degree to which you've got to pin down your dispersion and tendencies with each club in the bag in order for DECADE to offer any insight into your game. I agree with you that it may not even be possible and certainly isn't practical for most 15+ handicappers to nail that stuff down. 

 

So in my opinion a bogey golfer could buy in to the basic 30,000 foot overview of DECADE (really just a handful of rules of thumb) and pretty much go work on their golf swing and short game. All that extreme note taking and transcription into the app would be wasted effort until they can get their "variances" down into a range where DECADE can start to click for them. 

[Myherobobhope]

3 hours ago, North Butte said:

Kind of like the line in Moneyball where Billy Beane said "his [stuff] doesn't work in the playoffs". 

 

There's a certain degree to which you've got to pin down your dispersion and tendencies with each club in the bag in order for DECADE to offer any insight into your game. I agree with you that it may not even be possible and certainly isn't practical for most 15+ handicappers to nail that stuff down. 

 

So in my opinion a bogey golfer could buy in to the basic 30,000 foot overview of DECADE (really just a handful of rules of thumb) and pretty much go work on their golf swing and short game. All that extreme note taking and transcription into the app would be wasted effort until they can get their "variances" down into a range where DECADE can start to click for them. 

YEah, he actually made sure I was a single digit cap before giving me access to elite... I need to spend some time getting acquainted with it and then put it into use!

[LeftDaddy]

I wondered what Scott would say about folks who don’t have a consistent dispersion pattern (high handicappers), or who at least have a pattern so wide and / or long that it doesn’t fit neatly into any sort of system. I even resisted diving in to this stats based approach to course management because I thought I might fit into that camp (dispersion too unpredictable). 
 

But here’s how I would summarize what I think he has to say about this. Basically, if your dispersion is much wider than 65 yards from tee or 30 yards on approach, then you are going to be hitting a lot of penalty/hazard shots anyway, and so you may as well at least center your pattern as best you can, make as good of a swing as you can, and live with whatever happens next. Don’t hit irons off the tee, because on the off chance you hit it straight your driver will gain you so much yardage. And no amount of course management strategies can “fix” foul balls, so you may as well aim as best you can and try to at least stand confident over the ball knowing you have chosen a good shot / target (which hopefully decreases the chances of a foul ball). 
 

Im a 10 handicap who’s biggest weakness is the occasional foul ball off the tee. That advice alone has helped me so much as I’ve learned more about DECADE. And Scott also basically says Elite probably isn’t for you if you fit into the above, and so I’m generally leaning towards not renewing Foundations nor signing up for Elite. I’ve gotten what I needed to out of it and have loved it. 

[Krt22]

2 hours ago, LeftDaddy said:

I wondered what Scott would say about folks who don’t have a consistent dispersion pattern (high handicappers), or who at least have a pattern so wide and / or long that it doesn’t fit neatly into any sort of system. I even resisted diving in to this stats based approach to course management because I thought I might fit into that camp (dispersion too unpredictable). 
 

But here’s how I would summarize what I think he has to say about this. Basically, if your dispersion is much wider than 65 yards from tee or 30 yards on approach, then you are going to be hitting a lot of penalty/hazard shots anyway, and so you may as well at least center your pattern as best you can, make as good of a swing as you can, and live with whatever happens next. Don’t hit irons off the tee, because on the off chance you hit it straight your driver will gain you so much yardage. And no amount of course management strategies can “fix” foul balls, so you may as well aim as best you can and try to at least stand confident over the ball knowing you have chosen a good shot / target (which hopefully decreases the chances of a foul ball). 
 

Im a 10 handicap who’s biggest weakness is the occasional foul ball off the tee. That advice alone has helped me so much as I’ve learned more about DECADE. And Scott also basically says Elite probably isn’t for you if you fit into the above, and so I’m generally leaning towards not renewing Foundations nor signing up for Elite. I’ve gotten what I needed to out of it and have loved it. 

I think you are looking at this correctly, there isn't any real different change in strategy for higher index players, even if your dispersion pattern is wider than prescribed. However with the correct targets and really knowing your true distances, you can absolutely turn some foul balls into playable misses. The only thing that changes is the first E in Decade, expectations. At that point you just need to accept that you will occasionally hit a major outlier, with the goal/intent to improve your swing to the point those outliers start to get less extreme. With a few swing tweaks you very well might drop a few strokes 

[xmanhockey7]

2 hours ago, LeftDaddy said:

I wondered what Scott would say about folks who don’t have a consistent dispersion pattern (high handicappers), or who at least have a pattern so wide and / or long that it doesn’t fit neatly into any sort of system. I even resisted diving in to this stats based approach to course management because I thought I might fit into that camp (dispersion too unpredictable). 
 

But here’s how I would summarize what I think he has to say about this. Basically, if your dispersion is much wider than 65 yards from tee or 30 yards on approach, then you are going to be hitting a lot of penalty/hazard shots anyway, and so you may as well at least center your pattern as best you can, make as good of a swing as you can, and live with whatever happens next. Don’t hit irons off the tee, because on the off chance you hit it straight your driver will gain you so much yardage. And no amount of course management strategies can “fix” foul balls, so you may as well aim as best you can and try to at least stand confident over the ball knowing you have chosen a good shot / target (which hopefully decreases the chances of a foul ball). 
 

Im a 10 handicap who’s biggest weakness is the occasional foul ball off the tee. That advice alone has helped me so much as I’ve learned more about DECADE. And Scott also basically says Elite probably isn’t for you if you fit into the above, and so I’m generally leaning towards not renewing Foundations nor signing up for Elite. I’ve gotten what I needed to out of it and have loved it. 

You have a perfect attitude. I think as a 10 handicap you’d be fine getting elite which really just goes into more detail. I think it will bump you up for the price difference so it’s only like another $100 or whatever for access. I immediately did elite and couldn’t stop watching. Granted it was the middle of COVID when everything shut down. And my golf IQ is much higher than the average person so it wasn’t as crazy for me to dive into it.  

[gentles]

On 8/13/2021 at 2:33 AM, BigManSlim said:

I have "known" Scott since he was posting on the poker forum he often references. That was 12-ish years ago. He was way more aggressive back then. The golf threads he participated in way back then were legendary but he would get PISSED. Believe it or not he has mellowed since then.  But looking back now as I recently did, you could see the kernels of the ideas behind DECADE forming in those threads. Really kind of interesting to see how much it has developed.

 

He can come across as a bit of a know it all at times (suspect he would agree with that assessment). Overall his contribution to the golf discussion is a huge net positive. I don't care much for the NLU guys and think their approach to golf is fairly lazy with hot takes, etc. Their videos and such seem really well done of what I have seen but don't particularly interest me.

 

I'm not sure it is "in his head" or not but when you have people attacking your product on the regular I'd imagine that can get the blood boiling. It's not just NLU either: it's Fried Egg, Geoff Shackleford and his ilk, the GCA crowd, etc. Frankly most of them spit idiotic old school tropes that just simply aren't true or are at a minimum lazy.

 

Honestly having people like Scott push back on narratives, etc. is important to getting knowledge out there. It's similar to how analytics have changed how people watch football, baseball, basketball, etc.  Frankly golf has been WAY behind in becoming a modern game in that respect.

Not quite sure having a slightly differing opinion counts as “attacking your product on the regular” to NLU etc. 

 

If you’ve got a massive ego and  interpret any disagreeing opinion as a direct attack and spite, that’s on you not the other guy. 
 

100% agree it’s good to have both sides of the coin being argued here - but it’s no surprise (and a shame) that there isn’t actually any healthy debate taking place and that’s solely because of the way one side conducts themselves in the arguments 

[Krt22]

30 minutes ago, gentles said:

Not quite sure having a slightly differing opinion counts as “attacking your product on the regular” to NLU etc. 

 

If you’ve got a massive ego and  interpret any disagreeing opinion as a direct attack and spite, that’s on you not the other guy. 
 

100% agree it’s good to have both sides of the coin being argued here - but it’s no surprise (and a shame) that there isn’t actually any healthy debate taking place and that’s solely because of the way one side conducts themselves in the arguments 

I think that is a bit hard at times, because 9 times out of 10 these debates turn into opinion vs data. It happens on here every single time SG comes up, I can imagine it being pretty frustrating when you are the person producing the data and constantly getting "gotcha" type arguments that are purely anecdotal based.

[pinhigh27]

1 hour ago, gentles said:

Not quite sure having a slightly differing opinion counts as “attacking your product on the regular” to NLU etc. 

 

If you’ve got a massive ego and  interpret any disagreeing opinion as a direct attack and spite, that’s on you not the other guy. 
 

100% agree it’s good to have both sides of the coin being argued here - but it’s no surprise (and a shame) that there isn’t actually any healthy debate taking place and that’s solely because of the way one side conducts themselves in the arguments 

meh NLU guys are insufferably woke while being hypocritical and having their own problems. Love the videos they produce, not sure I love the guys themselves, maybe except DJ. 

[xmanhockey7]

3 hours ago, Krt22 said:

I think that is a bit hard at times, because 9 times out of 10 these debates turn into opinion vs data. It happens on here every single time SG comes up, I can imagine it being pretty frustrating when you are the person producing the data and constantly getting "gotcha" type arguments that are purely anecdotal based.

This. Too many people go “well that’s your opinion”. No. It’s not. It’s backed up by facts and data. A lot of it. And there are people who see it that will take one side over the other and that may be taking the side that makes them shoot higher scores. The way I see it, they’re essentially arguing if 2 + 2 = 4. When NLU says there are spots it better to be 180y in the fairway with a good angle than 100 in the fairway with a bad angle….I mean it’s just absurd. There was a huge debate over that and it shouldn’t have even been a debate. 100y will win every time. Like the debate on this forum over a 4 handicap male vs an LPGA Tour player. That 4 handicap loses every single time and it’s not even close. 

[thejazzmarauder]

On 8/13/2021 at 5:14 PM, xmanhockey7 said:

When NLU says there are spots it better to be 180y in the fairway with a good angle than 100 in the fairway with a bad angle….I mean it’s just absurd. There was a huge debate over that and it shouldn’t have even been a debate. 100y will win every time. 

Exactly. I really like the analogy to how analytics have informed us of controversial realities in other sports. For example, there are still a TON of people (including NFL GMs) who will argue that running backs matter. But we know for sure that they don't. And yet RBs are still being drafted in the first round and getting fat contracts; these things are dying, but it's a slower death than it should be given the quantity and certainty of the data. 

Edited August 23, 2021 by thejazzmarauder

[QMany]

Google Maps latest update SUCKS for how I’ve plotted courses for years, basically makes it impossible now. Big bummer for those of us that used DECADE decision tree strategy. 

[xmanhockey7]

14 minutes ago, QMany said:

Google Maps latest update SUCKS for how I’ve plotted courses for years, basically makes it impossible now. Big bummer for those of us that used DECADE decision tree strategy. 

whats the update? Have you tried earth pro?

[Tupperwolf]

Is it that you can't rotate the view around?  I noticed that too.

 

Google Earth is 1000% better.

[Deepy]

in google maps, go to layers (where the satellite layer is selected), more -> select satellite layer and mark "earth view" (or something like this).

 

you will get this icon in the lower right corner. Now you can rotate the map using Ctrl + drag with the cursor.

 

 

enjoy

[QMany]

Measure Distance feature has changed. Can no longer drag your previous points, it creates a new point which is a mess. 

[RCGA]

Why is anyone still drawing these out in regular Google Earth?

 

Use Google Earth Pro and set up a dispersion tree as a layer. My lines are 300 (@70y wide), 275 and 240. Copy and paste for each hole. I can map a course in 15 minutes and move around my "tree" based on tees, wind, angle, etc. Everything is square and consistent.

[xmanhockey7]

3 hours ago, RCGA said:

Why is anyone still drawing these out in regular Google Earth?

 

Use Google Earth Pro and set up a dispersion tree as a layer. My lines are 300 (@70y wide), 275 and 240. Copy and paste for each hole. I can map a course in 15 minutes and move around my "tree" based on tees, wind, angle, etc. Everything is square and consistent.

I’ll have to try that. How exactly do you create the first?

[RCGA]

1 hour ago, xmanhockey7 said:

I’ll have to try that. How exactly do you create the first?

 

It's a 4 year old video and I'm honestly surprised Scott doesn't use this method. His driver/3wood/2i decision tree is right there in plain view. 

 

If I was going to recreate this, I think I'd go with lines at 225/250/275/300/325 to account for wind and roll. There's a few 500y par 5s on my course with dogleg that play down wind. I can hit it 325y, but if I'm not aggressive enough with my line off the tee, I can fly it in the woods with a straight ball. 

 

 

 

[golfortennis]

On 8/23/2021 at 12:33 PM, thejazzmarauder said:

Exactly. I really like the analogy to how analytics have informed us of controversial realities in other sports. For example, there are still a TON of people (including NFL GMs) who will argue that running backs matter. But we know for sure that they don't. And yet RBs are still being drafted in the first round and getting fat contracts; these things are dying, but it's a slower death than it should be given the quantity and certainty of the data. 

 

I have no idea, but do RBs not matter, or do RBs no longer matter because the rules have changed to favor passing much more than in the past?  

 

The analytics people may be taking one on the chin in baseball, as they were the ones who pushed for the minor leagues to be shrunk, and it's causing some pretty big player development problems.  I typically support the analytics approach, but there are times it's overdone/done wrong.  (Notwithstanding the fact they seem to have made baseball completely unwatchable).   This may be one of them.

 

Getting back on topic, it is funny to still hear people talk as though being closer to the hole is not better.  If you are not in real trouble, how does it not improve your chances when that is what happens at the pro level?  

 

 

[Krt22]

13 hours ago, golfortennis said:

 

 

 

Getting back on topic, it is funny to still hear people talk as though being closer to the hole is not better.  If you are not in real trouble, how does it not improve your chances when that is what happens at the pro level?  

 

 

This one is hard. People in general don't like change, telling them the myths they have been believing/following/reiterating for years or even decades is a tough pill to swallow. Even tougher when PGA tour announcers continue to reiterate these myths of the past. A few weeks ago idiot Azinger said "I'd rather have a 20ft uphill putt than a 10ft downhill one".