Age Old Question: The Archer or the Arrow?

[pinestreetgolf]

Just got back from the range, trying out my new (to me) Ping iBlades. Man, I'm hitting these things like I actually know what I'm doing. So easy to work the ball.

 

One two hour range session and they're going in the bag for tomorrow's round. Gotta love this new high-tech stuff. :D

 

The power steering in my Chevy Cruze is way easier to drive than the Model T. Therefore, I am a much worse driver than anyone who lived in the 1920s.

[mlido02]

Just got back from the range, trying out my new (to me) Ping iBlades. Man, I'm hitting these things like I actually know what I'm doing. So easy to work the ball.

 

One two hour range session and they're going in the bag for tomorrow's round. Gotta love this new high-tech stuff. :D

 

Let me know how much lower your handicap gets after putting those in the bag old man :)

[bogey777]

Based on modern equipment, I would put the equation at 70% Archer and 30% Arrow. The archer still has to make a good swing for the equipment to help, but there's NO help equipment wise, that will turn a bad swing into a good shot. Granted, it will be a far better shot than days of old, using blades with a sweet spot the size of a dime, but none the less, still a bad shot.

i agree it's funny just the other day i was looking at my set i used in high school golf titleist tour blades an real wood woods lol still manage to shoot in the mid 80's .But the new equipment is alot more forgiving than those old sticks

[caniac6]

Both. The archer has to have good arrows.

[dcopp7]

I dunno. I'm in a new league this year and some of the ugliest swings I've ever witnessed are out there with us. Those guys are hitting some miraculous shots with hideous, short, hacking swings. I'm seriously baffled. Dumbfounded.

[ihatecats18]

My driver arrow was broken. So it cant be 100% archer.

[third-times-a-charm]

Its always the arrow, obviously!

 

Deny. Deflect. Make counter accusations.

[bluedot]

Depends on what the bar is for the archer's arrow.

 

There are NO clubs that will make a player with limited ability who doesn't practice a good player. And likewise, a really gifted player can adapt reasonably to almost anything.

 

But none of that, of course, is the point. The point is that, all other things equal, you need to take advantage of every opportunity to play your best. That means practice. That means solid fundamentals. That means good equipment. And so on...

 

Take two "archers" that are equal in every respect EXCEPT equipment. One has carefully selected, optimized, fitted clubs, while the other doesn't. And THAT is the real question: Can I play my best without the best equipment?

[Bonesaw]

The equipment has changed. The courses are much faster (fairways and greens). The players are in better shape.

 

People tend to undersell the athletic abilities of Jack, Sam snead, arnie etc. While they were playing, NFL players were drinking beer and smoking cigs at halftime and had part time jobs. It was a different time. They were great athletes.

 

The equipment has made it more fun for the average joe. At the highest level I think there are enough guys hitting it week to week that it comes dowm to getting it in the hole ( a la webb at the players).

 

It is the archer 100%.

 

 

 

 

 

[mlido02]

Depends on what the bar is for the archer's arrow.

 

There are NO clubs that will make a player with limited ability who doesn't practice a good player. And likewise, a really gifted player can adapt reasonably to almost anything.

 

But none of that, of course, is the point. The point is that, all other things equal, you need to take advantage of every opportunity to play your best. That means practice. That means solid fundamentals. That means good equipment. And so on...

 

Take two "archers" that are equal in every respect EXCEPT equipment. One has carefully selected, optimized, fitted clubs, while the other doesn't. And THAT is the real question: Can I play my best without the best equipment?

 

 

shooting good scores is up to the player. it's the player that makes the club ALWAYS. not the club that makes the player. go get all the optimized equipment, and i still believe it has minimal impact on improving the scoring of a player. it's up to the player to improve his mechanics and mental game to achieve a consistent result.

 

say someone is a 20 handicap. they go get custom fit and are optimized for every club in their bag. how much does that drop their handicap? down to a 19, 18 absolute MAX. Say said player then takes lessons and improves their mechanics. said optimized clubs are no longer optimized for new mechanics. and Mechanics, technique, and mental game is what drops Handicaps.

[Ghostwedge]

Couple times a year iʻll throw an old PowerBilt persimmon driver in the bag and hit it a few times on the range. Younger guyʻs hear the "thwack" and get curious, I let them hit it, (43 in stiff steel) most canʻt hit it. If my former mini-tour buddie is there heʻll crank one out there 270-80 with it. Itʻs both the archer and the arrow. But the archer has the final say.

[williefo]

I've always enjoyed the concept of the archer/arrow as it applies to golf. And I don't want to quibble with the OP.

 

Still, the analogy has always seemed a little off to me. Seems to me that if the golfer is the archer, the BALL the arrow, and the club is the BOW--the tool used to fire the arrow. So why do we refer to the club as the arrow?

[Striker Ace]

42. The answer is 42.

[playa]

... "good" players today rarely slice or hook a ball off the golf course. Sure it can happen but it is rare. With persimmon woods and balata balls "good" players sliced and hooked balls off the course all the time. And by "good" player I mean anyone with an index of 8.5 or lower. ;)

I played in those days and it wasn't that difficult to hit it straight. Just use a two piece top flite instead of balatas ?

[mahonie]

... "good" players today rarely slice or hook a ball off the golf course. Sure it can happen but it is rare. With persimmon woods and balata balls "good" players sliced and hooked balls off the course all the time. And by "good" player I mean anyone with an index of 8.5 or lower. ;)

I played in those days and it wasn't that difficult to hit it straight. Just use a two piece top flite instead of balatas ?

 

Now you’re opening the bifurcation discussion ;-)

[bluedot]

Depends on what the bar is for the archer's arrow.

 

There are NO clubs that will make a player with limited ability who doesn't practice a good player. And likewise, a really gifted player can adapt reasonably to almost anything.

 

But none of that, of course, is the point. The point is that, all other things equal, you need to take advantage of every opportunity to play your best. That means practice. That means solid fundamentals. That means good equipment. And so on...

 

Take two "archers" that are equal in every respect EXCEPT equipment. One has carefully selected, optimized, fitted clubs, while the other doesn't. And THAT is the real question: Can I play my best without the best equipment?

 

 

shooting good scores is up to the player. it's the player that makes the club ALWAYS. not the club that makes the player. go get all the optimized equipment, and i still believe it has minimal impact on improving the scoring of a player. it's up to the player to improve his mechanics and mental game to achieve a consistent result.

 

say someone is a 20 handicap. they go get custom fit and are optimized for every club in their bag. how much does that drop their handicap? down to a 19, 18 absolute MAX. Say said player then takes lessons and improves their mechanics. said optimized clubs are no longer optimized for new mechanics. and Mechanics, technique, and mental game is what drops Handicaps.

 

I think you missed the point of my post.

 

I said up front that equipment can't make a bad player good, and that a good player can shoot good scores with bad equipment. That isn't a question now, never has been, and never will be. It's a Geico commercial: Everybody knows that!

And not only does everybody know that, but they also know that it isn't an "either-or" situation; players don't have to choose between practice or lessons or fitness vs. good equipment; they can do ALL of those things. Where to assign the benefits to score is subjective and almost certainly varies from player to player. An absolute like "archer or arrow" is dopey.

 

What I said, I'll say again: Take two players that are absolutely equal in ability, work habits, and everything else, and give one high quality equipment and the other lesser equipment, and the first guy has an edge. And in competitive golf, we're ALL looking for an edge. Good equipment, like fitness, or practice, or lessons, is an edge.

 

I'll even accept your shoot-from-the-hip assessment of a 10% index drop from equipment alone, even though there's NO data for such a number. I won and lost a lot of tournaments and a lot of money over the years by just a shot or two, and will continue to do so as long as I'm fortunate enough to play competitively. So if good equipment can get me a stroke, then I'm all in.

 

One final note:

The whole handicap index thing is a misunderstood straw man anyway. Your index is a reflection of your GOOD days, and on THOSE days, your equipment might matter the least. You could easily reduce your AVERAGE score by several shots and not see your index go down AT ALL; that's the math of the system, and the higher the index, the more true that becomes, since lower indexes typically have a smaller range of scores. So taking your hypothetical 20 index who gets good equipment and drops his index to 18 (which, btw, is a significant improvement in itself!) his AVERAGE score might have come down by as much as 5 shots. If an average score reduction like that doesn't matter to you, that's fine, but it does to an awful lot of players.

[pinestreetgolf]

I said up front that equipment can't make a bad player good, and that a good player can shoot good scores with bad equipment. That isn't a question now, never has been, and never will be. It's a Geico commercial: Everybody knows that!

 

It seems to me that there is quite a bit of debate about how to be good at golf. Different players do it different ways. The long putter made some (relatively) bad players a whole, whole lot better.

 

Your other points (that I didn't quote) are spot-freaking-on. Its not arrow or indian. There are a ton of factors. Your point about the handicap system is also well taken, and an astute one that nobody else made. My State Am is four days. I'm probably going under par on one or two of them. Whether I shoot an 80 or a 74 on the bad one determines where I place, and many, many players care about their worst rounds quite a bit and equipment can help with that. So if a player is trying to maximize best rounds (to lower cap) they will approach everything differently than someone trying to minimize bad rounds (for whatever other reason).

 

For example, I game a Nike SQ Lucky 13* driver. I'm not very good with anything else unless I can miss by a *ton* (I've tried). The 13* goes about 250. Dan Drake convinced me in some correspondance we were having to just try two drivers in a tournament and cut the 4 iron (go 3,5-PW). I instantly got way better. Was that equipment "making me better" ? Or was that the indian doing something smart because a much smarter indian suggested it?

 

Its just too blurry. I agree with all of your post except I think there *are* magic beans, for some players, in some clubs. I've learned I can hit almost any wedge, but any driver over 43.5" is tough. A guy at my range is the opposite - plays D1 golf, put any driver in his hand and he'll crush it but he uses a PM Grind around the green and even then he struggles. Take that PM Grind away and its blade city.

 

Its an interesting topic, but ultimately I think the question isn't answerable because golf is so unique to the individual.

[rawdog]

I said up front that equipment can't make a bad player good, and that a good player can shoot good scores with bad equipment. That isn't a question now, never has been, and never will be. It's a Geico commercial: Everybody knows that!

 

It seems to me that there is quite a bit of debate about how to be good at golf. Different players do it different ways. The long putter made some (relatively) bad players a whole, whole lot better.

 

Your other points (that I didn't quote) are spot-freaking-on. Its not arrow or indian. There are a ton of factors. Your point about the handicap system is also well taken, and an astute one that nobody else made. My State Am is four days. I'm probably going under par on one or two of them. Whether I shoot an 80 or a 74 on the bad one determines where I place, and many, many players care about their worst rounds quite a bit and equipment can help with that. So if a player is trying to maximize best rounds (to lower cap) they will approach everything differently than someone trying to minimize bad rounds (for whatever other reason).

 

For example, I game a Nike SQ Lucky 13* driver. I'm not very good with anything else unless I can miss by a *ton* (I've tried). The 13* goes about 250. Dan Drake convinced me in some correspondance we were having to just try two drivers in a tournament and cut the 4 iron (go 3,5-PW). I instantly got way better. Was that equipment "making me better" ? Or was that the indian doing something smart because a much smarter indian suggested it?

 

Its just too blurry. I agree with all of your post except I think there *are* magic beans, for some players, in some clubs. I've learned I can hit almost any wedge, but any driver over 43.5" is tough. A guy at my range is the opposite - plays D1 golf, put any driver in his hand and he'll crush it but he uses a PM Grind around the green and even then he struggles. Take that PM Grind away and its blade city.

 

Its an interesting topic, but ultimately I think the question isn't answerable because golf is so unique to the individual.

 

I understand what you are saying here, but those players may be bad "conventional" putters. But, part of being a "good player" is finding the right equipment and technique for you, no? So I'd argue these are good players who were just using the wrong equipment.

 

Side note, can you elaborate on the two driver strategy? (If it doesn't derail the thread)

[sigmapete1]

Certainly the archer is more important...but there has to be a minimum level of quality in the arrow as well in order for the player's skills to translate to results.

[wrmiller]

... "good" players today rarely slice or hook a ball off the golf course. Sure it can happen but it is rare. With persimmon woods and balata balls "good" players sliced and hooked balls off the course all the time. And by "good" player I mean anyone with an index of 8.5 or lower. ;)

I played in those days and it wasn't that difficult to hit it straight. Just use a two piece top flite instead of balatas ��

 

Ah yes, the old Top Rocks. Like hitting a rock compared to a balata ball, but at least it didn't spin off the planet if you mishit it. :)

 

What I was trying to say earlier was that 'back then', it took more skill/a better swing to post a good score than it does with today's equipment. And a lot of practice. Today, a mis-hit will still land you in trouble, but in the case of a mis-hit driver at least it won't be two fairways to the right. It still takes skill and practice to be a good golfer, even with today's equipment. But maybe not as much as with the old stuff of yesterday. It doesn't make the 'old school' archer better than today's. Maybe 'different' is a better way to put it.

 

I too have taken my persimmons to the range, and have let others hit them. Most can't hit them very well, if at all. Some can. I can still get it out to about 250 with a perfect strike, but those are getting rarer and rarer.

 

I will be the first to admit that I enjoy today's more modern equipment. It compensates for my aging body and allows me to play to a level that I couldn't achieve with my older gear. But that's me. YMMV.

[bluedot]

I said up front that equipment can't make a bad player good, and that a good player can shoot good scores with bad equipment. That isn't a question now, never has been, and never will be. It's a Geico commercial: Everybody knows that!

 

It seems to me that there is quite a bit of debate about how to be good at golf. Different players do it different ways. The long putter made some (relatively) bad players a whole, whole lot better.

 

Your other points (that I didn't quote) are spot-freaking-on. Its not arrow or indian. There are a ton of factors. Your point about the handicap system is also well taken, and an astute one that nobody else made. My State Am is four days. I'm probably going under par on one or two of them. Whether I shoot an 80 or a 74 on the bad one determines where I place, and many, many players care about their worst rounds quite a bit and equipment can help with that. So if a player is trying to maximize best rounds (to lower cap) they will approach everything differently than someone trying to minimize bad rounds (for whatever other reason).

 

For example, I game a Nike SQ Lucky 13* driver. I'm not very good with anything else unless I can miss by a *ton* (I've tried). The 13* goes about 250. Dan Drake convinced me in some correspondance we were having to just try two drivers in a tournament and cut the 4 iron (go 3,5-PW). I instantly got way better. Was that equipment "making me better" ? Or was that the indian doing something smart because a much smarter indian suggested it?

 

Its just too blurry. I agree with all of your post except I think there *are* magic beans, for some players, in some clubs. I've learned I can hit almost any wedge, but any driver over 43.5" is tough. A guy at my range is the opposite - plays D1 golf, put any driver in his hand and he'll crush it but he uses a PM Grind around the green and even then he struggles. Take that PM Grind away and its blade city.

 

Its an interesting topic, but ultimately I think the question isn't answerable because golf is so unique to the individual.

 

Oh, make NO mistake about it; I know to a certainty that there are "magic beans" in golf equipment! I've seen it in fittings, and I've seen it on the course, especially as I age. Cases in point from a hard worker and a stats freak (me!):

 

1. The driver I use currently got me 3 mph of swing speed over what I had been using for 3 years, which translates to about 8 yards of carry and overall distance. The driver I had been using, in turn, had gotten me a similar gain by virtue of reduced spin rates. I was swinging at around 96 mph when I was 58; I'm only around 92 tops now, so getting yards back has helped me stay competitive by hitting the ball as far now as I was 10 years ago.

 

2. I used Arccos for most of the first half of 2017, and discovered that I was actually hitting my 4 hybrid not only as far, but MUCH more consistently than I was my 7W; I'd been fooled by the higher trajectory of the 7W. So my layup club on par 5s became the 4 hybrid, and I got better GIR stats.

 

3. Similarly, I found that I could hit a 2 hybrid farther and straighter than a 5 wood; made that change, too.

 

4. I went to Recoil shafts vs stock graphite and improved my accuracy. (BTW, there was a 12% reduction in my index in the first month after I made that change; no additional practice or lessons or anything else; just better equipment.)

 

I'm ALWAYS looking for an edge. I can only hit so many practice balls, and I work with (or have worked with) some REALLY good teaching pros. I stretch every morning, work out two or three times a week, and so on. I ain't getting younger, and my swing ain't getting faster or better. So I'll keep looking for better arrows and magic beans; they're out there.

[rawdog]

I said up front that equipment can't make a bad player good, and that a good player can shoot good scores with bad equipment. That isn't a question now, never has been, and never will be. It's a Geico commercial: Everybody knows that!

 

It seems to me that there is quite a bit of debate about how to be good at golf. Different players do it different ways. The long putter made some (relatively) bad players a whole, whole lot better.

 

Your other points (that I didn't quote) are spot-freaking-on. Its not arrow or indian. There are a ton of factors. Your point about the handicap system is also well taken, and an astute one that nobody else made. My State Am is four days. I'm probably going under par on one or two of them. Whether I shoot an 80 or a 74 on the bad one determines where I place, and many, many players care about their worst rounds quite a bit and equipment can help with that. So if a player is trying to maximize best rounds (to lower cap) they will approach everything differently than someone trying to minimize bad rounds (for whatever other reason).

 

For example, I game a Nike SQ Lucky 13* driver. I'm not very good with anything else unless I can miss by a *ton* (I've tried). The 13* goes about 250. Dan Drake convinced me in some correspondance we were having to just try two drivers in a tournament and cut the 4 iron (go 3,5-PW). I instantly got way better. Was that equipment "making me better" ? Or was that the indian doing something smart because a much smarter indian suggested it?

 

Its just too blurry. I agree with all of your post except I think there *are* magic beans, for some players, in some clubs. I've learned I can hit almost any wedge, but any driver over 43.5" is tough. A guy at my range is the opposite - plays D1 golf, put any driver in his hand and he'll crush it but he uses a PM Grind around the green and even then he struggles. Take that PM Grind away and its blade city.

 

Its an interesting topic, but ultimately I think the question isn't answerable because golf is so unique to the individual.

 

Oh, make NO mistake about it; I know to a certainty that there are "magic beans" in golf equipment! I've seen it in fittings, and I've seen it on the course, especially as I age. Cases in point from a hard worker and a stats freak (me!):

 

1. The driver I use currently got me 3 mph of swing speed over what I had been using for 3 years, which translates to about 8 yards of carry and overall distance. The driver I had been using, in turn, had gotten me a similar gain by virtue of reduced spin rates. I was swinging at around 96 mph when I was 58; I'm only around 92 tops now, so getting yards back has helped me stay competitive by hitting the ball as far now as I was 10 years ago.

 

2. I used Arccos for most of the first half of 2017, and discovered that I was actually hitting my 4 hybrid not only as far, but MUCH more consistently than I was my 7W; I'd been fooled by the higher trajectory of the 7W. So my layup club on par 5s became the 4 hybrid, and I got better GIR stats.

 

3. Similarly, I found that I could hit a 2 hybrid farther and straighter than a 5 wood; made that change, too.

 

4. I went to Recoil shafts vs stock graphite and improved my accuracy. (BTW, there was a 12% reduction in my index in the first month after I made that change; no additional practice or lessons or anything else; just better equipment.)

 

I'm ALWAYS looking for an edge. I can only hit so many practice balls, and I work with (or have worked with) some REALLY good teaching pros. I stretch every morning, work out two or three times a week, and so on. I ain't getting younger, and my swing ain't getting faster or better. So I'll keep looking for better arrows and magic beans; they're out there.

 

Loving all this analysis. Tangible proof that it's not all the Archer.

[gioguy21]

through years of fitting people - there are countless metaphors that you could use to describe the relationship to the tools we use and the talents of the golfer.

 

in my opinion, i always told people it was more of a connection between a car and a driver on a race track.

 

- the car has to be able to run, drive straight, stop and turn the right way

- the driver, depending on skill will be able to drive that car faster or easier around the track; the better the driver, the harder it is to set the lowest lap time

- they have to work together (car and driver) to get the best performance out of each - but even a poor driver can get around the track

[bobcat]

If you are going to use archery analogies, at least be more accurate about it!... :scenic:

 

Archer = The Player, and his Swing

 

Arrow = The Ball he uses

 

Bow = Whatever Club the Player selects for the shot

 

 

Face it...Most Golfwrx'ers think buying 'new bows' every season is the key to improving their game, even though it seldom does... :swoon: .

 

Perhaps most Golfwrx'ers would prefer leaving out the 'Bow' because it rhymes with 'Ho'...

 

 

Ho-No-Mo... :hi:

 

 

 

:golfer:

[pinestreetgolf]

Side note, can you elaborate on the two driver strategy? (If it doesn't derail the thread)

 

Yeah, I think it is somewhat on-topic in terms of how arrows can make a big difference depending on the archer.

 

I learned to play with a Nike SQ Lucky 13*. I had it for a long time. I have a unique swing with it (I guess) where I tee it up in front of my left foot (like two inches), drop my right shoulder through impact, and hit a high cut. I developed this swing before I had any lessons or anything. But its short (13*). Then I read Broadie and ditched it, bouncing around on a bunch of different drivers that i can whale but for whatever reason have trouble keeping in play under pressure.

 

It came to a head last year when I got out of the gate with a 68 day 1 at an event and a smooth 85 day 2 with four balls OB. My strokes gained driving was atrocious. I hit it a long way, but I hit it into trouble constantly. Mr. Drake suggested that I wouldn't miss a mid iron much but being able to use one on tight holes and one on par 5s / boom it holes would be advantageous. He was right. So instead of choosing to be short and accurate or long and everywhere, I could be both and just not have a 4 iron (which I do not miss). Went to 5* apart hybrids up to my 5 iron and 2 wedges.

 

It made me instantly a much more dangerous player. The 13* carries a ton, so when its wet or windy I can use it to my advantage (and vice versa) but when a hole is wide open I can hit the boomstick to try to get there when the risk is worth the reward.

 

The obviously question is why not a 13* stretch or 3 wood. I can't elevate a tour green 75x off the deck, but off the tee its perfect.

 

Basically, I was losing almost *Six* strokes to a tour player off the tee. Eliminating having to try to thread tight holes dropped it to about one and a half, which i can obviously live with.

 

If a player knows where he is weak (For me it was driving penalty shots and accuracy down the stretch), arrows sure can help sure it up IMO. Now, yes, maybe I should just get better with the driver, and I'm trying. But that little Nike combined with a knock-down with my j40s is a GIR machine alot of times.

 

IMO, IMO, IMO.

 

Edit -

 

It has the added advantage that every ball I hit off a tee has a tour green 75x and every ball i hit off the ground has a s300. I got a 14* hybrid old enough to use a .355 s300. I even use different grips on each (tee and ground) to train my brain which i'm hitting even more.

[buckeyefl]

For me it's the Archer 100 times out of a 100. Curious to hear others opinions on the topic.

 

Any opinion other than the fact you posted is a flawed opinion.

[Huey222]

 

Face it...Most Golfwrx'ers think buying 'new bows' every season is the key to improving their game, even though it seldom does... :swoon: .

 

 

XX flex, Low launch, Low spin bows :rofl:

 

Not enough mention about course management, though. I've got a buddy I play with pretty often and he's always trying out new sticks, and he hits it a country mile. However, laying up is not in his dictionary. While he's a mile ahead after the tee shot, I still win plenty of skins.

[rawdog]

Side note, can you elaborate on the two driver strategy? (If it doesn't derail the thread)

 

Yeah, I think it is somewhat on-topic in terms of how arrows can make a big difference depending on the archer.

 

I learned to play with a Nike SQ Lucky 13*. I had it for a long time. I have a unique swing with it (I guess) where I tee it up in front of my left foot (like two inches), drop my right shoulder through impact, and hit a high cut. I developed this swing before I had any lessons or anything. But its short (13*). Then I read Broadie and ditched it, bouncing around on a bunch of different drivers that i can whale but for whatever reason have trouble keeping in play under pressure.

 

It came to a head last year when I got out of the gate with a 68 day 1 at an event and a smooth 85 day 2 with four balls OB. My strokes gained driving was atrocious. I hit it a long way, but I hit it into trouble constantly. Mr. Drake suggested that I wouldn't miss a mid iron much but being able to use one on tight holes and one on par 5s / boom it holes would be advantageous. He was right. So instead of choosing to be short and accurate or long and everywhere, I could be both and just not have a 4 iron (which I do not miss). Went to 5* apart hybrids up to my 5 iron and 2 wedges.

 

It made me instantly a much more dangerous player. The 13* carries a ton, so when its wet or windy I can use it to my advantage (and vice versa) but when a hole is wide open I can hit the boomstick to try to get there when the risk is worth the reward.

 

The obviously question is why not a 13* stretch or 3 wood. I can't elevate a tour green 75x off the deck, but off the tee its perfect.

 

Basically, I was losing almost *Six* strokes to a tour player off the tee. Eliminating having to try to thread tight holes dropped it to about one and a half, which i can obviously live with.

 

If a player knows where he is weak (For me it was driving penalty shots and accuracy down the stretch), arrows sure can help sure it up IMO. Now, yes, maybe I should just get better with the driver, and I'm trying. But that little Nike combined with a knock-down with my j40s is a GIR machine alot of times.

 

IMO, IMO, IMO.

 

Edit -

 

It has the added advantage that every ball I hit off a tee has a tour green 75x and every ball i hit off the ground has a s300. I got a 14* hybrid old enough to use a .355 s300. I even use different grips on each (tee and ground) to train my brain which i'm hitting even more.

 

Thanks for the explanation. I can't remember, do you try and shape your tee shots?

 

For me, I feel like I have two different clubs by virtue of two different shots/setups. I think you do something similar? I have my "distance" setup which could result in a two way miss, then I have my "cut" setup that loses 15 yards but it's shades of how far right I want to work it. It's great to setup left edge of a treeline and know it's stop somewhere in the clear.

[Bigmean]

The good thing about Age old questions is that they have have age old verified answers. Archer.

 

The longer version is that some arrows may give you 3mph more speed it 1 yards tighter dispersion more distance or whatever but while all those are beat to death here none of them translate to score despite what you argue. Let’s say you birdie off a 7 iron. By the same arrow rationale, every time You use a pw-8 iron You should at least birdie or par. Why then can you bogey off a pw coming off a birdie with a 7 when no one would argue with fact a pw offers a greater advantage over a 7 iron in terms of getting it close and scoring? I understand in time it is percentages, but that gets really muddled and the simple and complicated Answer is archer.

[tets]

Both! But more archer than arrow