golf's three most overrated currently common beliefs ?

[Fairway14]

15 minutes ago, LeftDaddy said:

 

 

Hey everyone, go look at the top 10 (or even top 50) golfers in the world, and tell me how many of those guys are considered short hitters.

How is that relevant to an amateur trying to break 75, or 85, or 95 on his home course ?

Understand that the top 1000 playing professionals in the world all have exceptionally good short games, which means that on poor ball striking days they still shoot 72 or better. 

[Fairway14]

On 7/3/2021 at 7:13 PM, chippa13 said:

Ah, the beautiful internet where someone can take the exception as evidence of the rule.

 

But Mahaffey is not the exception. His length from the tee boxes was (is) common for amateur players.

Edited July 7, 2021 by Fairway14

[Fairway14]

On 7/3/2021 at 7:50 PM, anth said:

Interested to hear why people think putter fittings are overrated?

 

Putter fitting shops sell nonsense rhetoric about stroke path and tell naive customers they need  particular toe hang. Instead, to offer an honest fitting the shops should have an inventory including a wide range of putter head weights, a wide range of putter grip weights, a wide range of putter shaft lengths, These are the putter spec factors which influence a player's address position and stroke.

[anth]

OK I understand the putter fittings at golf shops not being great but I was thinking more along the lines of what they offer at places like Cool Clubs. This seems genuinely helpful:

 

 

[Fairway14]

2 hours ago, anth said:

OK I understand the putter fittings at golf shops not being great but I was thinking more along the lines of what they offer at places like Cool Clubs. This seems genuinely helpful:

 

 

 

This video is typical of the putter fittings done in studios around the world. I believe the value to this type fitting is that the player may consider the process to be a "fun experience". But for actually finding a good putter fit and, or, improving one's putting, this is not a good sense way to do it.

Notice in the video the player's putting posture is much like posture he would use to play a short iron shot, including having his chin up/face tilted up a bit. It is his head/face angle at address that causes his eyes to look outside the target line of the putt. This head/eye position is promoting the faulty outside to inside cut across stroke he makes, which just wipes across the ball at impact rather than making solid-square ball contact.

So the fitter makes the mistake most all fitters seem to do, which is give the customer a longer length putter shaft in the hopes that will get the customer's eyes on the target line instead of outside of it. And the fitter makes things worse by giving the player a head shape matched to his faulty stroke.

 

Here is a video of Nicklaus putting technique . Notice his bent over address posture causes his face/eyes to be parallel to the ground at address, which promotes the eye position of being on the target line or a bit inside the line, which in turn promotes the inside to outside stroke that produces solid ball contact and a good roll of the ball. The fitter could have given the player in the video a shorter length putter and suggested a Nicklaus-like address posture. Or the fitter could have had this (tall) player in the video use significantly more knee bend at address, combined with neck bend to get the face/eyes parallel to the ground. Either way would have eliminated the player's  faulty outside-in cut across stroke .

But fitter's are not teaching pros,  so there is a disconnect. If one wants to improve his putting this comes from technique, and the best way to do that is learn from a PGA teaching pro or instructional videos such as the one below from Jack Nicklaus. If the player wants experience of  being in a fitting studio and looking at his stroke on computer screens, reading data print outs etc... that is fine, and may be a fun way to spend some time, but I doubt it will lead to improved putting.

 

 

Edited July 7, 2021 by Fairway14

[anth]

That’s a great post. But you can apply that same standard to iron fittings, and yet I don’t see people calling them out in this thread as much as putter fittings. Just seems a bit weird to me.

 

I was seriously considering having one of those fittings. But then 2 things happened:

 

1. I read this thread 

 

2. I putted better than I have in a long time last round out

 

LOL

[Fairway14]

5 minutes ago, anth said:

That’s a great post. But you can apply that same standard to iron fittings, and yet I don’t see people calling them out in this thread as much as putter fittings. Just seems a bit weird to me.

 

 

 

Consider that very , very few players take putting lessons. Also chipping, pitching lessons are rare. Amateur players like to swing long clubs because they find that to be more fun that the short game shots. So, in the world of fittings amateur players gravitate towards getting fit for long clubs more so than short clubs.

Regardless, for all golf shots from tee thru the green technique improvement is what leads to better shots and lower scores. But learning/practicing technique is work which most people don't have the time or will to do. Conversely, getting fit for clubs is an experience lots of people find to be fun, so doing that is more popular than taking lessons.

[RCGA]

Most overrated: using an indoor GC Quad simulator to review clubs. At least do it outside and add a shot tracer. 

 

Watching someone hit into a net is so boring. 

 

[JohnnyCashForever]

On 7/1/2021 at 10:19 PM, Hawkeye77 said:

 

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

3Ws?  Probably, for the excellent player who dreams of winning or has won any pro event/top-flight club championship (maybe 1% of all golfers on a generous day or 99% of WRXers since Day 1).

 

But for the average player who plays on an average course maybe once or twice a month, which are 80% of all golfers, I think Fairway14 is speaking truth.  For the other 19% (me included), IMO, ego, self-awareness, and wallet size dictate the perceived truth of 1, 2, and 3. 

[JohnnyCashForever]

1. Expensive equals better.

2. "You've got a good swing."

3.  The USGA gives a hoot about protecting the concept of amateur status.

[JohnnyCashForever]

1 hour ago, Fairway14 said:

 

If one wants to improve his putting this comes from technique, and the best way to do that is learn from a PGA teaching pro or instructional videos such as the one below from Jack Nicklaus. If the player wants experience of  being in a fitting studio and looking at his stroke on computer screens, reading data print outs etc... that is fine, and may be a fun way to spend some time, but I doubt it will lead to improved putting.

 

+10.  Fairway14 is on a roll.

 

[Ferguson]

1. BOA system shoes look and function better 

2. As a normal righty, if you slice it, aim more left

3. Caddyshack is about golf, only* 

 

 

 

 

*Lessons learned about golf and life: 

1. Don't be intimidated by distractions (when everyone was telling Noonan miss....Danny stood in there and made the putt) 

2. Don't take yourself too seriously (So what? So let's dance)

3. Be the ball (see your future, be your future and make your future)

4. Don't measure yourself against other golfers (use height)

5. Believe in Cinderella stories (always keep a lofty personal goal) 

[milesgiles]

On 7/1/2021 at 6:33 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.

 

 

one is nonsense. Very strong correlation between handicap and distance. Comparing a straight dobbler to a wild long hitter isnt a valid comparison.

 

two.. for most golfers most of the time id say getting fitted isnt worth much. Outliers in ss, height etc yes it matters

 

three.. doubtful. we swing harder with a 460 because we know the penalty for a mishit isnt as much as a traditional club

[BHI 99]

This thread is a whole lotta crazy...

[klebs01]

9 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

 

But Mahaffey is not the exception. His length from the tee boxes was (is) common for amateur players.

Mahaffey is absolutely the exception. US Am qualifying is going on right now all over the country. It’s free to go watch. You should head out to one in your area and see how many of the players are hitting their drives 230. 
 

Sure, a person can bunt it around from the forward tees on an easy course and shoot par. However, that’s not the way to get good at golf. Distance (280+ drives) is basically a prerequisite to play at a decent level today. 

[klebs01]

Here is a comparison of approach distances for my old club that was just under 6800 yards. Not a perfect analysis, but there are 4 par 4s that the 230 hitter couldn't reach in regulation. there is no way that hitting it 230 on a 6800 yard course is the way to go.  

[BHI 99]

Does the 230 guy have a short game or is everything 3 Jack City? 

 

I love golf analysis....

[dlygrisse]

1.  keep your head down, worst advice ever.  

2.  You need to walk through the shot and finish going left to make a good swing.  Jack and Hogan both let their momentum almost take them backwards on a full drive. 

3.  Trying to hold a flat left wrist and hold the lag.  Look at Hogan a couple of frames past impact.  

 

Hogan and Nicklaus pretty much violated all of these, Jack was a bit of a goat humper as well.  

[Fairway14]

25 minutes ago, BHI 99 said:

Does the 230 guy have a short game or is everything 3 Jack City? 

 

I love golf analysis....

 

Yes, any short distance accurate player who shoots under par golf has an excellent green side short game. He also understands the fine point nuances of golf and makes good club selection decisions, chooses smart lines of play, consistently leaves his ball in places from which the next shot will be relatively easy.

 

[nsxguy]

10 hours ago, Fairway14 said:

 

Again, in "theory" distance is an advantage. But (again), players using a power technique to swing typically suffer from accuracy problems. This is is essentially why long drive competitors are only long drive specialists, not competitive golfers.

As for players being more accurate with shorter clubs than longer clubs, that depends on the player's scoring average (handicap index).

I don't know of any truly fine player (for example an honest 0 handicap) who does not produce consistently more accurate shots swinging a 6-iron than a 10 handicap player does swinging an 8-iron.

And a legitimate 0 handicap player is more consistently accurate swinging a 4-hybrid club than an 18 handicap is swinging a 9-iron.

I suggest you take some time out on the golf courses and watch good players shooting 72 or better scores, It might surprise you how few of them rely on producing long distance  shots. Accurate tee shots, accurate iron shots leaving the ball in good positions, soft touch for green side shots, striking solid putts etc.... are all way ahead of long distance shots as contributing factors to consistently low scoring.

 

1) Nothing theoretical at all about distance being an advantage. You want to discuss accuracy ? Fine. Start another thread. j/k

 

2) No, it has nothing to do with a player's scoring average. ALL players are more accurate from closer in.

 

3) 0 'cap hitting 6 more accurately than a 10 hitting an 8 ??

Another example of your "apples and oranges" approach to debate. You're moving the goalposts, as usual. See # 2 right above.

 

4) I've spent plenty of time on the golf course watching reall good players.

 

But maybe you should spend a little time re(?)-reading the Rules of the forum, specifically "3.1 No “running the site”. Have balance and don’t over-post in one day. High maintenance users can be asked to slow and or not post. Don’t  deluge the forums and overwhelm threads."

 

Now I don't know exactly what that means but,,,,,,,,

 

[Fairway14]

1 hour ago, milesgiles said:

 

 

one is nonsense. Very strong correlation between handicap and distance. Comparing a straight dobbler to a wild long hitter isnt a valid comparison.

 

 

I played in a 46 player field skins game Monday and the low score for the day was by a 57 year old teaching pro who rarely hits a tee shot longer than 240 yards, including roll. He does not hit par 5 greens in two shots, he plays 7-iron from 150 yards etc... His handicap index is 1 and Monday he shot 68 to lead the field. A player who shot 72 is 72 years old and a 2 handicap index. He is retired from career working as a club pro at several places as well as playing (and winning) lots of regional and State pro events. This player hits few drives longer than 230 yards.

These guys just understand how to play golf properly. They don't leave their golf balls out of position. They don't throw away shots.

More than a dozen players Monday were especially long hitters averaging 270 or longer and this group  had handicaps ranging from +1 to 8.

There is little to no correlation between driver distance and handicap index, at least not out on the golf courses.  I read and hear about how golf is a "distance game" from golf industry employees trying to sell goods and services. And too many amateurs buy the rhetoric because they want to believe their preference to try and power the golf ball around the course is a good strategy. But on the golf courses the long wild hitters typically finish well back of the accurate shot makers. PGA Tour level golf is different because every player in a tournament field has the short game skills to consistently recover from out of position lies, but that's not the case for amateur swing out of their shoes wild hitters.

[BHI 99]

They only thing left to sell in golf is distance and style. I reckon I have the old skool attitude that it’s “me vs. the course” but times change and it’s everyone against the internet with something to prove to people they don’t even know. 

 

 

[Krt22]

We should rename this thread "What is your favorite anecdotal evidence to refute data and statistics"

[BHI 99]

Or 

 

“90% of statistics don’t apply to 90% of golfers” 

[Nard_S]

Of the five best golfers I played with. Only one could reach 280. The rest shot mid seventies with not more than 225 in the arsenal playing on a 5600 yard track. They won't win club championship but the reliance on strokes gained stats has warped an awful lot of attitudes.

 

I hit it plenty far, wish I was as complete a golfer as those short knockers.

[Fairway14]

2 minutes ago, BHI 99 said:

Or 

 

“90% of statistics don’t apply to 90% of golfers” 

 

Is the data/statistics guys refer to the  strokes gained stuff from Tour events ?

If so, those have zero correlation to an amateur trying to break 80, 90, 100. For example, a Tour pro can manage an out of position tee shot by using his iron and wedge skills to make par. But for the amateur game, out of position tee shots typically lead to bogey or worse. Another misleading strokes gained stat is that going for par 5's in two produce consistently lower scoring. While Tour pros have the skills to manage out of position balls within 30 yards of par 5 greens (such as long bunker shots, short side leaves within the rough ,  severely sloped lies etc...) amateur players struggle with those awkward green side shots and would leave their 3rd shot closer to the hole more often by playing it from the middle of the fairway.

Broadie (the inventor of strokes gained) is a hacker who knows numbers, not golf, The message his "findings" deliver definitely harms the game, which is a shame.

[klebs01]

10 minutes ago, Fairway14 said:

 

Is the data/statistics guys refer to the  strokes gained stuff from Tour events ?

If so, those have zero correlation to an amateur trying to break 80, 90, 100. For example, a Tour pro can manage an out of position tee shot by using his iron and wedge skills to make par. But for the amateur game, out of position tee shots typically lead to bogey or worse. Another misleading strokes gained stat is that going for par 5's in two produce consistently lower scoring. While Tour pros have the skills to manage out of position balls within 30 yards of par 5 greens (such as long bunker shots, short side leaves within the rough ,  severely sloped lies etc...) amateur players struggle with those awkward green side shots and would leave their 3rd shot closer to the hole more often by playing it from the middle of the fairway.

Broadie (the inventor of strokes gained) is a hacker who knows numbers, not golf, The message his "findings" deliver definitely harms the game, which is a shame.

this is completely false. The higher the handicap the more important it is to be closer to the hole. They don’t have the skills to consistently hit full wedges. 

[klebs01]

21 minutes ago, Nard_S said:

Of the five best golfers I played with. Only one could reach 280. The rest shot mid seventies with not more than 225 in the arsenal playing on a 5600 yard track. They won't win club championship but the reliance on strokes gained stats has warped an awful lot of attitudes.

 

I hit it plenty far, wish I was as complete a golfer as those short knockers.

The five best players I’ve played with all hit it over 280. Regularly shoot high 60s low 70s on 6800-7400 yard courses. A person hitting it 225 is not going to be doing that when they take 3 shots to get home on par 4s. 
 

Not sure what short hitters on a pitch and putt has to do with recommending golf strategy for player trying to get better. Shooting mid 70s on a 5600 yard course will make those golfers about 10 handicaps. That’s not really good golf. 

[MattM97]

ITT, people who don't like to be told they're wrong. 

[Nard_S]

19 minutes ago, klebs01 said:

Shooting mid 70s on a 5600 yard course will make those golfers about 10 handicaps. That’s not really good golf. 

Lol, yeah no. 133 slope when greens were municipal 7-8. They now run at 10 in early am. Late afternoon, dry and windy, off the charts fast. Under 80 on that course is good playing. Back tees are 6300, course has share of difficult holes including 440 par 4, 230 par 3. Don't know the greens you will not shoot par. 

 

Besides who actually plays a 6500 yard track? Not sure but might be 50 miles for me to find one that long