golf's three most overrated currently common beliefs ?

[Fairway14]

1) distance is highly significant to scoring

2) getting fit for clubs is essential

3) large club heads are more forgiving than small club heads

 

The above are three common perceptions I often hear and, or, read, but find to be misleading and, or, false.

For example, if a player can consistently strike 235 yard straight tee shots he is long enough to shoot under par golf on a 6,800 yard championship course. I understand it is trendy to think that having a 9-iron shot from the rough is better than a 6-iron shot from the middle of the fairway , but on the golf courses I rarely see amateurs playing from the rough or trees all day shoot low scores. I see lots of guys playing from the middle of the fairway shoot low scores.

Regarding "fitting" I believe it's a marketing strategy designed to sell clubs and services more so than anything which will significantly impact a player's shots or scores. Give a player who consistently breaks 75 a club and within a swing or two he will make technique adjustments to produce respectable shots from that club. Higher handicap players have swing technique issues which no club will solve, so if they want to strike better shots the solution is improved swing technique. 

Large club heads, be it driver, fairway woods, irons, or putter are designed to produce better shots from mishits. This is backwards thinking. A good club design is one which promotes consistently solid strikes, and most players will hit more pure-solid strikes with a relatively small club head than they will swinging an over sized head.

 

Please post to this thread thread three common beliefs about golf that you find to be overrated and, or, false.

[Warrior42111]

1. It's better to lay up to a favorite distance or full swing - I think this idea is starting to change with analytics, but it's been shown for both pros and average joes that lower scores are produced by being closer to the green (of course in play).

 

2.  Aim for the middle of the green. - I think more people should aim for their ball flight or the trouble around the green. For example if you have a left pin as a fader and aim at the middle you either middle of the green or a long putt from the right, but if you aimed left side you're either around the pin or the middle with that fade. Same goes for depth. How does the green break is it trouble short or long, ect. I'd rather have a 10-15 yard uphill chip that a 30-40 foot slick downhill putt or a short sided flop needed. That should determine distance going for.

 

3. Use a wedge with more bounce. - I find as a bogey golfer using the wedge for the conditions and lie produces better results.

 

And just because IT is on my work computer and I'm bored...

 

I agree with your number 1. As for number 2 I'm mixed. I'd say in depth fittings sure, but I think anyone who's trying to get more serious should have lengths and lie angles checked. If not they're probably adding on to the compensations they're already doing by having clubs not fit for their body measurements. And 3 is there any data on this? I know for myself anecdotally when trying irons last year between an oversized set and  players improvement iron (kinda in the middle) I had center hit shots right around the same percentage. But on my mishits I tended to lose less distance and have better dispersion. Could have just been me is why. I ask

 

[klebs01]

1 hour ago, Fairway14 said:

1) distance is highly significant to scoring

2) getting fit for clubs is essential

3) large club heads are more forgiving than small club heads

 

The above are three common perceptions I often hear and, or, read, but find to be misleading and, or, false.

For example, if a player can consistently strike 235 yard straight tee shots he is long enough to shoot under par golf on a 6,800 yard championship course. I understand it is trendy to think that having a 9-iron shot from the rough is better than a 6-iron shot from the middle of the fairway , but on the golf courses I rarely see amateurs playing from the rough or trees all day shoot low scores. I see lots of guys playing from the middle of the fairway shoot low scores.

Regarding "fitting" I believe it's a marketing strategy designed to sell clubs and services more so than anything which will significantly impact a player's shots or scores. Give a player who consistently breaks 75 a club and within a swing or two he will make technique adjustments to produce respectable shots from that club. Higher handicap players have swing technique issues which no club will solve, so if they want to strike better shots the solution is improved swing technique. 

Large club heads, be it driver, fairway woods, irons, or putter are designed to produce better shots from mishits. This is backwards thinking. A good club design is one which promotes consistently solid strikes, and most players will hit more pure-solid strikes with a relatively small club head than they will swinging an over sized head.

 

Please post to this thread thread three common beliefs about golf that you find to be overrated and, or, false.

totally disagree with #1. Speed is the most important skill to become a strong player. It allows for many more shots and recovery options. A 235 driver is going to struggle on a 6800 yard course most days and is completely uncompetitive on a 7000-7500 yard course most real tournaments are played at. 
 

I’m half with you on fitting. Not sure it matter much for poor golfer. Absolutely makes a difference to good golfers, but I end up having to do some trial and error fitting because I don’t like stock specs. Most clubs are way to long, especially drivers. Frustrating that fitters don’t have things like an xstiff 1/2” short 7-wood shaft in their fitting cart. 🤣

 

#3 is situational. In some circumstances shovels help. In other small clubs. A lot is marketing though. 

[Abh159]

1. Keep your head down - Unless you're just starting out, I've always found this advice to be ridiculous.
2. Distance always leads to lower scores - Sure hitting bombs can be a big advantage, but lower scores are the result of excellent wedge play and short game.
3. New is always better - Find the best equipment for your game, and don't upgrade unless its necessary. "Breakthrough technology" is a marketing term that OEMs use to sell clubs/balls. In reality, this year's new (insert club) isn't really all that different from last year's.

[Medson]

“Golf is fun.”

[DFS PFD]

1 hour ago, Medson said:

“Golf is fun.”

It can't get any worse *with 9 holes to play*

[betarhoalphadelta]

4 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

1) distance is highly significant to scoring

2) getting fit for clubs is essential

3) large club heads are more forgiving than small club heads

 

 

Disagree with #1. You talk about tee shot distance. But distance also makes a big difference on approach shots / par 3's. Obviously being in the fairway is an advantage, but let's say two players are both in the fairway at the same distance to pin and one player is hitting 7i while the other is hitting 9i into the green. You would expect that the player who can hit 9i into that green is going to score better than the player hitting 7i. I typically play a short course and one of my regular playing partners is a lot older than me, but similar cap. so I can take 5i off the tee and be in the same location as his driver. But then I'm hitting a partial SW into the green while he's hitting full mid-short iron. Distance helps.

 

Disagree somewhat with #2. I'm an outlier in that fitting IS essential for me. I'm 6'5" with a 39.5-40" WTF, so I'm WAY out of OTR territory. But even then, in my last fitting once we got the length/etc sorted, I went through 8-9 different shafts. Some were just flat wrong while others were merely good, and only a few made it to the "final round" stage. You can either buy clubs which work for your swing or clubs which you fight constantly. I believe nearly everyone--of every handicap--can benefit from a fitting. If you're a complete novice and you're taking lessons, maybe your swing will change drastically. But for everyone who has played for a while, a fitting is a great thing. 

 

Disagree with #3. Larger club heads are more forgiving on distance than smaller club heads. Now, it's possible that the less forgiving smaller club heads will cause you to improve your game faster by punishing mishits, but the larger club heads are definitely more forgiving. 

[STL_Baller]

1.  Blades will make you a better player.  For some maybe but for most no.  I prefer blades but they do bring the long/short miss into play where modern players irons lessen that miss.

 

2.  18 holes in 3 hours or less.  Sorry not for me.  It's my time....and in most cases in my area its 4 hours plus depending on the day and playing partners.  My best 18 hole round this year (walking with no traffic, and playing well) is 3.5 hours.  I'm rushed everywhere else in my life, I won't rush in my chance to decompress and enjoy the day.

 

3.  The distance debate.....for me distance doesn't matter.  In past seasons I've played rounds where I averaged over 300 off the tee with driver, got my tail handed to me by my playing partner who maybe hit 250.  He showed me that being nails from 150 and in was the key.  Wedges and putting too.  Being deadly accurate with those will save you more strokes than any 300+ yard drive.

 

[Loki]

A guy with a 4 HC can win a LPGA tour event.

[Hawkeye77]

 

8 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

1) distance is highly significant to scoring

2) getting fit for clubs is essential

3) large club heads are more forgiving than small club heads

 

The above are three common perceptions I often hear and, or, read, but find to be misleading and, or, false.

For example, if a player can consistently strike 235 yard straight tee shots he is long enough to shoot under par golf on a 6,800 yard championship course. I understand it is trendy to think that having a 9-iron shot from the rough is better than a 6-iron shot from the middle of the fairway , but on the golf courses I rarely see amateurs playing from the rough or trees all day shoot low scores. I see lots of guys playing from the middle of the fairway shoot low scores.

Regarding "fitting" I believe it's a marketing strategy designed to sell clubs and services more so than anything which will significantly impact a player's shots or scores. Give a player who consistently breaks 75 a club and within a swing or two he will make technique adjustments to produce respectable shots from that club. Higher handicap players have swing technique issues which no club will solve, so if they want to strike better shots the solution is improved swing technique. 

Large club heads, be it driver, fairway woods, irons, or putter are designed to produce better shots from mishits. This is backwards thinking. A good club design is one which promotes consistently solid strikes, and most players will hit more pure-solid strikes with a relatively small club head than they will swinging an over sized head.

 

Please post to this thread thread three common beliefs about golf that you find to be overrated and, or, false.

Hmmm .  .  .  wrong, wrong and in general, wrong.

[phizzy30]

1. Distance isn't the end all to scoring, but having a 8 iron or less into the green significantly increases your chances of closer proximity from the hole rather than let's say a 6 iron or higher.  There are exceptions such as being in really long rough or having a tree in the way.

2. Fittings absolutely help golfers especially those with good/repeatable swings.  A proper fitting will maximize good strikes and lessen the severity of mis hits.  It also gives the golfer a good idea of what types of shafts and heads would fit in terms of profile.

3. It's debatable. 

Edited July 2, 2021 by phizzy30

[Ferguson]

1. With enough hard work, ONE can make it on the PGA tour

2. Three golf towels make the game better 

3. If ONE waits long enough, ONE will be selected for tickets to the Augusta Masters 

 

 

[BHI 99]

1. Bombers win.

2. Anything older the 5 years is obsolete. 

3. Headcovers are really worth $100. 

[Jtgavigan]

18 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

1) distance is highly significant to scoring

2) getting fit for clubs is essential

3) large club heads are more forgiving than small club heads

 

The above are three common perceptions I often hear and, or, read, but find to be misleading and, or, false.

For example, if a player can consistently strike 235 yard straight tee shots he is long enough to shoot under par golf on a 6,800 yard championship course. I understand it is trendy to think that having a 9-iron shot from the rough is better than a 6-iron shot from the middle of the fairway , but on the golf courses I rarely see amateurs playing from the rough or trees all day shoot low scores. I see lots of guys playing from the middle of the fairway shoot low scores.

Regarding "fitting" I believe it's a marketing strategy designed to sell clubs and services more so than anything which will significantly impact a player's shots or scores. Give a player who consistently breaks 75 a club and within a swing or two he will make technique adjustments to produce respectable shots from that club. Higher handicap players have swing technique issues which no club will solve, so if they want to strike better shots the solution is improved swing technique. 

Large club heads, be it driver, fairway woods, irons, or putter are designed to produce better shots from mishits. This is backwards thinking. A good club design is one which promotes consistently solid strikes, and most players will hit more pure-solid strikes with a relatively small club head than they will swinging an over sized head.

 

Please post to this thread thread three common beliefs about golf that you find to be overrated and, or, false.

#1 wrong, especially with better players. If you can keep the ball in play and hit it a long way, absolutely an advantage. I am still a pretty long hitter at 50 years young (265-280 driver carry at sea level), but I play with several guys who regularly hit it 30 to 50 yards past me and straight. They have a massive advantage, period. I watched one of them hit driver-7 iron to a 540 yard par 5. I hit driver-3 wood after a 300 yard drive (back pin) on the same hole. 

 

Now, if you try to get longer and you start getting crooked, your argument stands. But give me 20 yards more at the same dispersion and yes, on average, I will score better. 

 

#2 I just built a 3 wood with the wrong shaft and I chose not to tip it, trying to play it between S and X (Aldila NV next gen 75)in a 3 wood. No amount of swing technique changes could make that work. It was 15 to 30 yards short, especially into the wind as it launched too high and spun too much. All of my irons are 2° flat in the lie angle because I am short (5'8"). I absolutely cannot consistently make off the shelf irons work for me. I also like D4 to D6 swingweights. It just helps me. The day is coming when I am too old and weak for that, but for now, it works. So, properly fit clubs give you the best chance to consistently hit good shots. It isnt a magic pill, for sure, but it can definitely make a difference long term.

 

#3 depends on the MOI and how the club is weighted. A large head with a poor design can suck. A compact head can be forgiving. My Maltby TS-1 irons are quite forgiving for their size. MPF is 701+ and a lot of game improvement heads of the past (and now for that matter) don't score that high.

 

I get where you are coming from and for SOME golfers, your arguments can be true. However, in general,  I don't think they hold water. 

[BHI 99]

Junkies worry more about 9-10 drives a round than the 36 putts they need to make. No to mention everything in between. 

 

Its fine. They also spend their paychecks buying all the new stuff only to sell it for 1/2 price when it doesn’t “work”. 

 

Everyone gets a trophy. 

[Frankensteins Monster]

1. Nicklaus is a good course designer.

2. The putter is the most important club in the bag.

3. The USGA is a non-profit entity.

[RobotDoctor]

6 hours ago, Ferguson said:

1. With enough hard work, ONE can make it on the PGA tour

2. Three golf towels make the game better 

3. If ONE waits long enough, ONE will be selected for tickets to the Augusta Masters 

 

 

 

I can agree with #1 and #2 but #3 turned out true for me.  My 2020 tickets will finally be used in 2022 (after reapplying for 2022 per procedure).

[trilerian]

6 hours ago, Ferguson said:

1. With enough hard work, ONE can make it on the PGA tour

2. Three golf towels make the game better 

3. If ONE waits long enough, ONE will be selected for tickets to the Augusta Masters 

 

 

 

I don't understand why the hate for multiple towels.  I have two attached to my bag, one for my clubs and the other to wipe the sweat off my arms, face, and head.  I don't really want to wipe my face with a towel I just wiped the goose crap off my clubs with...

[RobotDoctor]

16 minutes ago, trilerian said:

 

I don't understand why the hate for multiple towels.  I have two attached to my bag, one for my clubs and the other to wipe the sweat off my arms, face, and head.  I don't really want to wipe my face with a towel I just wiped the goose crap off my clubs with...

 

True! 

I generally carry two towels, a full sized towel to clean my clubs and a smaller one to take to the greens for my golf ball.  I only use one side of the large towel for cleaning clubs and the other if I have to wipe sweat off my face.  Now I can see the need for a third.

[PJE]

1. Play blades because your game will "grow" into them. 

It won't. Play blades if you like them and you don't mind disappointing results on marginal strikes.

2. Expensive clubs are better than less expensive clubs. 

Of course, people should and do play what they prefer but cost does not equate to performance. Component clubs of the same category will perform just as well as the top of the line OEM club. 

For example, I own a couple of Scotty Cameron putters but a Newport is not any better, performance wise, than an Anser. It's essentially the same club. While on this rant, I also laugh about how putters, which are pieces of metal, are so "soft" feeling. Since we are limited to three things, I won't also rant about German Stainless Steel. 

3. The USGA is relevant to the game of golf.  

Other than having the US Open, no one really cares about their championships. 

"Growing the game"; give me a break. You can only grow the game so much when good golf balls cost $50/dozen, drivers are at $500 etc.

Their primary purpose is setting the rules, particularly on equipment. But they only do this via the consent of the governed, primarily, the OEMs and the PGA Tour. Ping sued them in the late '80s. The USGA blinked and settled. The viability of their status as a "ruling body" was on really shaky ground. The settlement happened before there was really big money on Tour and big money to be made by OEMs.  The Tour and OEMs don't want the USGA upsetting the apple cart regarding distance which is why the USGA can't do anything about it. 

And finally, the USGA, as an organization, is a bunch of fan boys who belong to old money clubs. Nine out of ten golfers can't or don't want to relate and from what I've seen nine out of ten people don't actually play by the rules. 

[rooski]

1.) Aftermarket putter shafts make a difference

 

It will probably get me blackballed by a few people on here, but I can't help but laugh when people talk about spending $300-400 on a putter shaft. It's your money so spend it how you want but I'm still going to giggle lightly from my computer chair

[Pepperturbo]

What's read in threads like this are more bias driven, than fact. 

[Fairway14]

13 minutes ago, Pepperturbo said:

What's read in threads like this are more bias driven, than fact. 

 

I don't believe there are many factual truths pertaining to golf  equipment , course strategy, swing technique etc... Some companies and people in the business of selling golf products or services try to proclaim facts, and trot out irrelevant compiled data to support supposed facts etc..., but really it's just opinions. 

[RainShadow]

4 hours ago, Frankensteins Monster said:

1. Nicklaus is a good course designer.

2. The putter is the most important club in the bag.

3. The USGA is a non-profit entity.

Concur. Generally overrated. I've only played one of his courses that I thought was a good design and "Fair". The rest, and most I've seen on TV, are not. Muirfield Village is about the only one I've seen on TV that isn't too tricked out/

[BHI 99]

IIRC Jack likes lots of mounds, looks more like grass covered packing bubbles. 

[Pepperturbo]

32 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

I don't believe there are many factual truths pertaining to golf  equipment , course strategy, swing technique etc... Some companies and people in the business of selling golf products or services try to proclaim facts, and trot out irrelevant compiled data to support supposed facts etc..., but really it's just opinions. 

Okay, that's where we differ.  There may be some truth to what you say, but it's limited and NOT a worthy philosophy that helps anyone in golf.  For example, someone posts a question; I am a beginner, what's it take to be scratch?  Most people pile on with negative feedback, based on what they know or maybe couldn't do themselves, so nobody else can. 

 

Outside the effects of social media, I don't see life around me as opinion, and I dislike the excessive use of anecdotal when its purpose is to discount experience. 

 

Truths come to us in various forms.  Over my years, and encounters, most people need to hold on to truths.  In other words, life brings healthy experience, or theory, guessing, opinion and no experience. 

Edited July 2, 2021 by Pepperturbo

[BlackDiamondPar5]

On 7/1/2021 at 1:33 PM, Fairway14 said:

1) distance is highly significant to scoring

2) getting fit for clubs is essential

3) large club heads are more forgiving than small club heads

 

The above are three common perceptions I often hear and, or, read, but find to be misleading and, or, false.

For example, if a player can consistently strike 235 yard straight tee shots he is long enough to shoot under par golf on a 6,800 yard championship course. I understand it is trendy to think that having a 9-iron shot from the rough is better than a 6-iron shot from the middle of the fairway , but on the golf courses I rarely see amateurs playing from the rough or trees all day shoot low scores. I see lots of guys playing from the middle of the fairway shoot low scores.

Regarding "fitting" I believe it's a marketing strategy designed to sell clubs and services more so than anything which will significantly impact a player's shots or scores. Give a player who consistently breaks 75 a club and within a swing or two he will make technique adjustments to produce respectable shots from that club. Higher handicap players have swing technique issues which no club will solve, so if they want to strike better shots the solution is improved swing technique. 

Large club heads, be it driver, fairway woods, irons, or putter are designed to produce better shots from mishits. This is backwards thinking. A good club design is one which promotes consistently solid strikes, and most players will hit more pure-solid strikes with a relatively small club head than they will swinging an over sized head.

 

Please post to this thread thread three common beliefs about golf that you find to be overrated and, or, false.

 

#2--- While I'm the first guy to call 99% of club manufactures claims absolute BS, I do believe there is merit to getting properly fit for clubs. At least the basics including; lie angle, shaft stiffness and length.  Also have your skills match the head; cavity back vs blade etc. But anyone saying your 10 yr old properly fitted irons are somehow inferior to today's iron, they are full of BS.

 

#3--- I think it's pretty well know a generally larger face is more forgiving than smaller face.  It's akin to broadside of a barn vs a small target.      

[Mcgeeno]

OP is kinda wrong on all 3 of these IMO.

 

1) Length carries through the bag. If you can bomb it that likely means you could be hitting a 7 iron when someone else is hitting a wood or long iron. Length matters (thats what she said).

2) I don't really care about fittings. The majority of players can't break 100 so it likely wouldnt matter much. A good player matching his action to clubs or putters or wedges is smart though.

3) Bigger clubs have higher MOI. Bigger clubs are newer and have better materials and hotter faces. They are lighter, faster and absolutely more forgiving. If tiny little 200CC drivers worked really well I would have seen one being used on TV or in a state amateur by now.

[BHI 99]

Fit goes further than fashion....

[doobz]

I actually think the biggest one is the exact opposite of OP's #1. Distance is highly correlated with scoring the data bores this out over and over again. The most common fallacy I see people state is that for some reason if you bomb it you can't have a good short game. On balance, hitting it farther and having less club into greens is always better. The data shows that at the highest level of golf it actually doesn't even matter if it's farther and in the rough. 

So the 3 I'll go with are: 
 

1. The key to getting better is practicing your short game. This is maybe true for the low single digit cappers. The vast majority of amateurs would improve the most quickly if they became better off the tee. I've had many poor rounds saved by a hot putter, but putting is high variance. If you sit back and think about your very best rounds I guarantee they were all your best ball striking days.
 

2. This one is a bit abstract, but there is a thought that a draw is a good players ball flight. I think to be a great ball striker you do have to learn to draw/hook the ball at some point but I would trade my draw for a soft fade all day and many of the best players in the world almost exclusively fade the ball.

 

3. Here's a controversial one: Augusta is the best course played on tour. The Masters may be the most prestigious major but I can think of at least 3-5 and maybe more better actual golf courses that are played on tour, probably more if you count some of the ones that rotate the other majors. I'll take it one step farther and say it's not even a top 3 MacKenzie design. 😮 

Edited July 3, 2021 by doobz