3W vs Driver off the tee

[JeffreySpicoli]

Scott Faucett of decade strategy has said that typically not much accuracy is sacrificed hitting driver versus 3w given the stats

 

You're late for the party but I think there's some warm beer on the back deck. Help yourself.

[Pi5seeker]

I hit a 18 degree Orlimar Trimetal off the tee for years until I decided to cut down my driver to 44". I added lead tape and hit that Cobra SZ400 great until the Geek knocked it out of the bag.

[VNutz]

Scott Faucett of decade strategy has said that typically not much accuracy is sacrificed hitting driver versus 3w given the stats

 

You're late for party but I think there's some warm beer on the back deck. Help yourself.

 

Any barleywines left?

[JeffreySpicoli]

Scott Faucett of decade strategy has said that typically not much accuracy is sacrificed hitting driver versus 3w given the stats

 

You're late for party but I think there's some warm beer on the back deck. Help yourself.

 

Any barleywines left?

 

Under the back steps.

[tsecor]

See Phil Michelson...lol....

 

 

"He’s pulling the driver because Royal Birkdale places a heavy emphasis on accuracy, so instead he’s employing the use of what is essentially, a 2-wood. More accuracy than a driver, more distance than a regular 3-wood."

[sfdoddsy]

I'm one of those who choose to hit my driver on every hole unless being long would get me into trouble with bunkers, water or doglegs.

 

I did this out of preference (hitting driver is fun) and instinct (i felt like I it straighter than shorter clubs).

 

Since starting to use Arccos shot tracking, I'm happy to confirm my instinct was right.

 

Length aside, I hit my driver straighter off the tee than my fairway wood. Given the head is 3 times the size this shouldn't be a surprise.

 

It is not as stgaight as my irons, but a wedge rather than a 7 iron second shot makes a massive difference.

[ph00ny]

See Phil Michelson...lol....

 

 

"He’s pulling the driver because Royal Birkdale places a heavy emphasis on accuracy, so instead he’s employing the use of what is essentially, a 2-wood. More accuracy than a driver, more distance than a regular 3-wood."

 

At the same time, we're not playing in championship golf in the toughest conditions. Little rough won't significantly reduce the chance of getting the second shot to the green

[lenman73]

I'm sure Phil has access to all the stats to warrant his decision and the length he hits it, he's not giving up that much.

[tsecor]

A pro says a 3 wood is more accurate and the amateurs in the room will know more and try to form their arguments around "stats"......hilarious. Id love to be in the room with Phil and someone here during that discussion.

[rawdog]

A pro says a 3 wood is more accurate and the amateurs in the room will know more and try to form their arguments around "stats"......hilarious. Id love to be in the room with Phil and someone here during that discussion.

 

God, you're a walking contradiction. First speaking in generalities, now cherry-picking a specific instance to support your argument.

 

First you were talking about ams, now you're talking about Phil. First you asked for a general rule, now you're referencing one specific instance.

 

Geeze, man. How many tournaments does Phil play with a driver, and how many does he play without it? That alone should tell you his general thoughts on the matter. Not one instance out of the hundreds of tournaments he's played.

[ThinkingPlus]

See Phil Michelson...lol....

 

 

"He’s pulling the driver because Royal Birkdale places a heavy emphasis on accuracy, so instead he’s employing the use of what is essentially, a 2-wood. More accuracy than a driver, more distance than a regular 3-wood."

 

At the same time, we're not playing in championship golf in the toughest conditions. Little rough won't significantly reduce the chance of getting the second shot to the green

 

You are right. If you play somewhere with minimal rough and few hazards in play then playing driver all the time is an advantage. This is backed up by all the stats (both pro and amateur). The stats are based on average course conditions by definition. However, if your local course has rough worse than the "average" rough condition represented by the statistics then it is in your best interest to modify your approach to keep the ball in the fairway more often. The more severe the rough, the more distance should be given up to optimize average score.

[JeffreySpicoli]

See Phil Michelson...lol....

 

 

"He’s pulling the driver because Royal Birkdale places a heavy emphasis on accuracy, so instead he’s employing the use of what is essentially, a 2-wood. More accuracy than a driver, more distance than a regular 3-wood."

 

You are a walking and talking confirmation bias. A textbook logical fallacy.

[tsecor]

A pro says a 3 wood is more accurate and the amateurs in the room will know more and try to form their arguments around "stats"......hilarious. Id love to be in the room with Phil and someone here during that discussion.

 

God, you're a walking contradiction. First speaking in generalities, now cherry-picking a specific instance to support your argument.

 

First you were talking about ams, now you're talking about Phil. First you asked for a general rule, now you're referencing one specific instance.

 

Geeze, man. How many tournaments does Phil play with a driver, and how many does he play without it? That alone should tell you his general thoughts on the matter. Not one instance out of the hundreds of tournaments he's played.

Now Phil is a contradiction...lol....his own quote is wrong? lol....i knew it...

[tsecor]

See Phil Michelson...lol....

 

 

"He’s pulling the driver because Royal Birkdale places a heavy emphasis on accuracy, so instead he’s employing the use of what is essentially, a 2-wood. More accuracy than a driver, more distance than a regular 3-wood."

 

You are a walking and talking confirmation bias. A textbook logical fallacy.

Don't let one of the best players in history prove you wrong. lol....

[tsecor]

See Phil Michelson...lol....

 

 

"He’s pulling the driver because Royal Birkdale places a heavy emphasis on accuracy, so instead he’s employing the use of what is essentially, a 2-wood. More accuracy than a driver, more distance than a regular 3-wood."

 

At the same time, we're not playing in championship golf in the toughest conditions. Little rough won't significantly reduce the chance of getting the second shot to the green

 

You are right. If you play somewhere with minimal rough and few hazards in play then playing driver all the time is an advantage. This is backed up by all the stats (both pro and amateur). The stats are based on average course conditions by definition. However, if your local course has rough worse than the "average" rough condition represented by the statistics then it is in your best interest to modify your approach to keep the ball in the fairway more often. The more severe the rough, the more distance should be given up to optimize average score.

I do agree with Phil as mentioned 1000000x in this thread regarding accuracy. Any logical person knows this.....Phil says the 3 wood is more accurate but the "stat" professionals who aren't playing professional golf and winning 6 majors know more.....its so funny

[JeffreySpicoli]

See Phil Michelson...lol....

 

 

"He’s pulling the driver because Royal Birkdale places a heavy emphasis on accuracy, so instead he’s employing the use of what is essentially, a 2-wood. More accuracy than a driver, more distance than a regular 3-wood."

 

At the same time, we're not playing in championship golf in the toughest conditions. Little rough won't significantly reduce the chance of getting the second shot to the green

 

You are right. If you play somewhere with minimal rough and few hazards in play then playing driver all the time is an advantage. This is backed up by all the stats (both pro and amateur). The stats are based on average course conditions by definition. However, if your local course has rough worse than the "average" rough condition represented by the statistics then it is in your best interest to modify your approach to keep the ball in the fairway more often. The more severe the rough, the more distance should be given up to optimize average score.

I do agree with Phil as mentioned 1000000x in this thread regarding accuracy. Any logical person knows this.....Phil says the 3 wood is more accurate but the "stat" professionals who aren't playing professional golf and winning 6 majors know more.....its so funny

 

We have been over "accuracy" numerous times in this thread. Why do you insist on distorting the views of others? You're being dishonest.

[tsecor]

See Phil Michelson...lol....

 

 

"He’s pulling the driver because Royal Birkdale places a heavy emphasis on accuracy, so instead he’s employing the use of what is essentially, a 2-wood. More accuracy than a driver, more distance than a regular 3-wood."

 

At the same time, we're not playing in championship golf in the toughest conditions. Little rough won't significantly reduce the chance of getting the second shot to the green

 

You are right. If you play somewhere with minimal rough and few hazards in play then playing driver all the time is an advantage. This is backed up by all the stats (both pro and amateur). The stats are based on average course conditions by definition. However, if your local course has rough worse than the "average" rough condition represented by the statistics then it is in your best interest to modify your approach to keep the ball in the fairway more often. The more severe the rough, the more distance should be given up to optimize average score.

I do agree with Phil as mentioned 1000000x in this thread regarding accuracy. Any logical person knows this.....Phil says the 3 wood is more accurate but the "stat" professionals who aren't playing professional golf and winning 6 majors know more.....its so funny

 

We have been over "accuracy" numerous times in this thread. Why do you insist on distorting the views of others? You're being dishonest.

no....the OP was about this very subject Phil describes.....others took it in another direction based on "stats" and added their own twist because of another agenda....i think u are being dishonest or haven't read anything early on....whatever....its over......Phil likes the 3 wood because of accuracy. Time to lock the thread!!!

[rawdog]

A pro says a 3 wood is more accurate and the amateurs in the room will know more and try to form their arguments around "stats"......hilarious. Id love to be in the room with Phil and someone here during that discussion.

 

God, you're a walking contradiction. First speaking in generalities, now cherry-picking a specific instance to support your argument.

 

First you were talking about ams, now you're talking about Phil. First you asked for a general rule, now you're referencing one specific instance.

 

Geeze, man. How many tournaments does Phil play with a driver, and how many does he play without it? That alone should tell you his general thoughts on the matter. Not one instance out of the hundreds of tournaments he's played.

Now Phil is a contradiction...lol....his own quote is wrong? lol....i knew it...

 

The quote is from an article, not from Phil himself. Why would Phil lead off a quote with "He's"? Is he speaking third person now? So the reasons given aren't Phil's they are inferences from the writer. If the article directly quotes words from Phil's mouth, by all means, share.

 

Second, Phil isn't contradicting himself. He's affirmation of an opinion shared many times in this thread- there is no hard and fast rule on when to use driver. In the hundreds of other tournaments where he bagged driver, he obviously thought there was value to using the club. In this one, specific instance (as in 2013), he doesn't think the club has enough value as compared to an additional wedge and driving iron.

[tsecor]

A pro says a 3 wood is more accurate and the amateurs in the room will know more and try to form their arguments around "stats"......hilarious. Id love to be in the room with Phil and someone here during that discussion.

 

God, you're a walking contradiction. First speaking in generalities, now cherry-picking a specific instance to support your argument.

 

First you were talking about ams, now you're talking about Phil. First you asked for a general rule, now you're referencing one specific instance.

 

Geeze, man. How many tournaments does Phil play with a driver, and how many does he play without it? That alone should tell you his general thoughts on the matter. Not one instance out of the hundreds of tournaments he's played.

Now Phil is a contradiction...lol....his own quote is wrong? lol....i knew it...

 

The quote is from an article, not from Phil himself. Why would Phil lead off a quote with "He's"? Is he speaking third person now? So the reasons given aren't Phil's they are inferences from the writer. If the article directly quotes words from Phil's mouth, by all means, share.

 

Second, Phil isn't contradicting himself. He's affirmation of an opinion shared many times in this thread- there is no hard and fast rule on when to use driver. In the hundreds of other tournaments where he bagged driver, he obviously thought there was value to using the club. In this one, specific instance (as in 2013), he doesn't think the club has enough value as compared to an additional wedge and driving iron.

Phil was interviewed...lol.........

[tsecor]

MODS

 

CAN YOU LOCK THE THREAD. TOPIC IS COMPLETE.

[JeffreySpicoli]

MODS

 

CAN YOU LOCK THE THREAD. TOPIC IS COMPLETE.

 

No need to lock the thread. You don't own it, BTW.

 

It's disappointing that you're being so dishonest and histrionic.

 

It's been very clear in this thread that the general argument of those with whom you disagree is that driver should be the first choice but not the only choice. In fact, I posted Fawcett's rules of thumb as well as a link to one of his videos where he covers his decision tree as to when to hit driver and when not to hit driver.

 

Phil's strategy for the Open is for a specific course with specific conditions. One always needs to evaluate use of the driver and that is what he is doing.

 

Ultimately, your premise is so weak that you can only "win the argument" by distorting your opponent's views. That reflects quite poorly on your character.

[tsecor]

MODS

 

CAN YOU LOCK THE THREAD. TOPIC IS COMPLETE.

 

No need to lock the thread. You don't own it, BTW.

 

It's disappointing that you're being so dishonest and histrionic.

 

It's been very clear in this thread that the general argument of those with whom you disagree is that driver should be the first choice but not the only choice. In fact, I posted Fawcett's rules of thumb as well as a link to one of his videos where he covers his decision tree as to when to hit driver and when not to hit driver.

 

Phil's strategy for the Open is for a specific course with specific conditions. One always needs to evaluate use of the driver and that is what he is doing.

 

Ultimately, your premise is so weak that you can only "win the argument" by distorting your opponent's views. That reflects quite poorly on your character.

and you must be very insecure because your character is on full display and its not nice.....good luck with that........I am the OP.....just so you know.

[rawdog]

MODS

 

CAN YOU LOCK THE THREAD. TOPIC IS COMPLETE.

 

No need to lock the thread. You don't own it, BTW.

 

It's disappointing that you're being so dishonest and histrionic.

 

It's been very clear in this thread that the general argument of those with whom you disagree is that driver should be the first choice but not the only choice. In fact, I posted Fawcett's rules of thumb as well as a link to one of his videos where he covers his decision tree as to when to hit driver and when not to hit driver.

 

Phil's strategy for the Open is for a specific course with specific conditions. One always needs to evaluate use of the driver and that is what he is doing.

 

Ultimately, your premise is so weak that you can only "win the argument" by distorting your opponent's views. That reflects quite poorly on your character.

and you must be very insecure because your character is on full display and its not nice.....good luck with that........I am the OP.....just so you know.

 

I happen to think his character is very nice. And if he were insecure, I doubt he'd put himself out there on a website full of thousands of very good golfers.

[lenman73]

So you found one person who agrees with you, time to lock it up !

 

Wow

[JeffreySpicoli]

MODS

 

CAN YOU LOCK THE THREAD. TOPIC IS COMPLETE.

 

No need to lock the thread. You don't own it, BTW.

 

 

I am the OP.....just so you know.

 

I'm well aware of the entire thread and I have been the whole time.

 

You don't seem to understand that you are on a public forum. You are allowed to start threads but you don't own the threads that you start and you surely don't unilaterally decide when a topic is "complete."

 

Further, the idea of public discourse is one where ideas are debated back and forth and participants hone their arguments in response to what their opponents put forth. At issue here is that you don't want to engage in public discourse and you are dishonest in your representations of your opponents.

[rawdog]

I think this thread serves as great reading material on the topic because it covered so many angles (probably due to the lack of specificity in the OP).

 

It would be a disservice to the site and those looking for information on the topic to close this thread and have it disappear into the bowels of WRX.

[Stuart_G]

You don't seem to understand that you are on a public forum. You are allowed to start threads but you don't own the threads that you start and you surely don't unilaterally decide when a topic is "complete."

 

Actually, the mods will quite frequently lock up a thread at the OP's request. It isn't normally needed but considering the fact that this is going nowhere real fast - probably not a bad idea in this case.

[JeffreySpicoli]

You don't seem to understand that you are on a public forum. You are allowed to start threads but you don't own the threads that you start and you surely don't unilaterally decide when a topic is "complete."

 

Actually, the mods will quite frequently lock up a thread at the OP's request. It isn't normally needed but considering the fact that this is going nowhere real fast - probably not a bad idea in this case.

 

Depends on the thread and it is the mods' decision rather than the OP's. I've been on the site for a decade so I have some idea of things here.

 

The thread does fine until the OP jumps back in and takes dishonest potshots at others. Rather than close the thread we'd be better served if the OP demonstrated some integrity.

[tsecor]

You don't seem to understand that you are on a public forum. You are allowed to start threads but you don't own the threads that you start and you surely don't unilaterally decide when a topic is "complete."

 

Actually, the mods will quite frequently lock up a thread at the OP's request. It isn't normally needed but considering the fact that this is going nowhere real fast - probably not a bad idea in this case.

 

Depends on the thread and it is the mods' decision rather than the OP's. I've been on the site for a decade so I have some idea of things here.

 

The thread does fine until the OP jumps back in and takes dishonest potshots at others. Rather than close the thread we'd be better served if the OP demonstrated some integrity.

opinions are like ......well you know......move on......this is going nowhere.

[JeffreySpicoli]

You don't seem to understand that you are on a public forum. You are allowed to start threads but you don't own the threads that you start and you surely don't unilaterally decide when a topic is "complete."

 

Actually, the mods will quite frequently lock up a thread at the OP's request. It isn't normally needed but considering the fact that this is going nowhere real fast - probably not a bad idea in this case.

 

Depends on the thread and it is the mods' decision rather than the OP's. I've been on the site for a decade so I have some idea of things here.

 

The thread does fine until the OP jumps back in and takes dishonest potshots at others. Rather than close the thread we'd be better served if the OP demonstrated some integrity.

opinions are like ......well you know......move on......this is going nowhere.

 

So if everything is relative (you claim this over and over in various ways) why do you participate in a public discussuion forum? Wherever you're challenged you fall back on empty platitudes like "statistics lie" and "everyone has an opinion." If there is no such such thing as truth and rationality, why bother with public dialogue?

 

This thread has a lot of useful information but you refuse to listen to anything that doesn't support your perceived position and you continually run for cover in a dank swamp of sophomoric relativism.