Partial or full approach swings…

[PracticeSwinger]

Another little golden nugget by Lou Stagner of Arccos – with all the hitting it closer or leaving it to a comfortable yardage talk…

 

He went in and looked at each player in the database and compared them to themselves – with proximity, GIR, number of shots to hole out, standard deviation of score – every player that had at least 25 shots in each category in a particular year… 40 to 60 yards range versus 90 to 110 yards in the fairway range : and found out that a whopping 3% of players were better off from further in the fairway… and obviously it seems that everyone that ended up in that 3% was commenting on his post haha

 

I guess it's related to the 'psychology' of it all... proximity from 50yds is 24ft - while from a 100yds it's 35ft... it sure seems like a 50yds shot to 24ft isn't that great while a 35footer from 100yds isn't ideal but it's playable golf... even though 24ft is still closer than 35ft; especially for 3putts avoidance...

[Warrior42111]

It'd be interesting to break it down even further by hole design.

 

Speaking just for myself, if the green is open in front I try to get as close as possible, but if there's any hazard to be carried I really prefer a  3/4 to full swing. specially in FL with a lot of tight lies. Obviously I can't compare to others but it would be interesting to see if perhaps the40 /60 yard shot had the highest variation, with many close shots and many chunk blades as compare to the full shots. 

[North Butte]

36 minutes ago, MtlJayMan said:

Another little golden nugget by Lou Stagner of Arccos – with all the hitting it closer or leaving it to a comfortable yardage talk…

 

He went in and looked at each player in the database and compared them to themselves – with proximity, GIR, number of shots to hole out, standard deviation of score – every player that had at least 25 shots in each category in a particular year… 40 to 60 yards range versus 90 to 110 yards in the fairway range : and found out that a whopping 3% of players were better off from further in the fairway… and obviously it seems that everyone that ended up in that 3% was commenting on his post haha

 

I guess it's related to the 'psychology' of it all... proximity from 50yds is 24ft - while from a 100yds it's 35ft... it sure seems like a 50yds shot to 24ft isn't that great while a 35footer from 100yds isn't ideal but it's playable golf... even though 24ft is still closer than 35ft; especially for 3putts avoidance...

Way back before Arccos and even before ShotLink and Strokes Gained I kept proximity stats for a large number of rounds and showed my teaching pro the facts about my game. I was much better off being 125 yards from the hole than 100 or 75 or 50 yards. I got about 5 minutes into my detailed presentation of my stats results and he cut me off. He said, "Yeah, I've got it. Your wedge game stinks. Let's go fix it".

 

Two one-hour lessons, a few practice sessions and six weeks later I re-started gathering stats. After collecting a good many rounds worth of shots it was clear that I was now much better off being 100 than 125, better off 75 than 100 and better off 50 than 75. I think that trend still obtains in my game today.

 

If you can't get closer to the hole from 50 yards than 100 yards, it ain't because there's anything great about your 100 yard game...

[PracticeSwinger]

11 minutes ago, Warrior42111 said:

It'd be interesting to break it down even further by hole design.

 

Speaking just for myself, if the green is open in front I try to get as close as possible, but if there's any hazard to be carried I really prefer a  3/4 to full swing. specially in FL with a lot of tight lies. Obviously I can't compare to others but it would be interesting to see if perhaps the40 /60 yard shot had the highest variation, with many close shots and many chunk blades as compare to the full shots. 

Of course every hole/shot has to be looked at on it's own... I just find interesting the overall trend, law of large numbers - 3% of golfer are better from further - compared to themselves for once (not to a scratch guy, to a Tour pro - and all of these variables that everyone spits out with SG talks)... and that every metric : proximity, GIR, average score, standard deviation of score was better when closer... it should ring a bell to all of us, get it closer and make sure we're decent from there - we're leaving some on the table if we don't do that

[PracticeSwinger]

13 minutes ago, North Butte said:

Way back before Arccos and even before ShotLink and Strokes Gained I kept proximity stats for a large number of rounds and showed my teaching pro the facts about my game. I was much better off being 125 yards from the hole than 100 or 75 or 50 yards. I got about 5 minutes into my detailed presentation of my stats results and he cut me off. He said, "Yeah, I've got it. Your wedge game stinks. Let's go fix it".

 

Two one-hour lessons, a few practice sessions and six weeks later I re-started gathering stats. After collecting a good many rounds worth of shots it was clear that I was now much better off being 100 than 125, better off 75 than 100 and better off 50 than 75. I think that trend still obtains in my game today.

 

If you can't get closer to the hole from 50 yards than 100 yards, it ain't because there's anything great about your 100 yard game...

Love it... especially the last phrase - but I'm sure some would still argue with that...

[North Butte]

13 minutes ago, MtlJayMan said:

Love it... especially the last phrase - but I'm sure some would still argue with that...

I met a guy years ago who back in the day (70's, 80's) was a pretty successful local amateur. Won a lot of tournaments, best player in his club, etc. I was kind of picking his brain about strategy and preparation and practice stuff and this topic came up.

 

He said way back before it became common knowledge he had figured out for his own game that laying up to 90 yards on Par 5's was just wasting strokes. But he resisted for years doing anything about it because the conventional wisdom at the time was good players always laid up to their favorite wedge yardage if they weren't sure they could reach the green in two.

 

Once he decided to do something about it, within a year he went from Par 5's being where he lost strokes against the big hitters to Par 5's being one of his strengths. But it took a lot of practice on his <90 yard wedge game, which he'd never really worked on much before that time. 

 

It was an interesting story and I tend to take it at face value. I'm sure some people figured this stuff out on their own circa 1980 or whatever. I mean heck, even Ray Floyd way before ShotLink was preaching the value of the 40-yard wedge game. But some people still resist that. Probably because they have no self-efficacy or belief in their ability to get really good at those shots. 

[PracticeSwinger]

7 minutes ago, North Butte said:

I met a guy years ago who back in the day (70's, 80's) was a pretty successful local amateur. Won a lot of tournaments, best player in his club, etc. I was kind of picking his brain about strategy and preparation and practice stuff and this topic came up.

 

He said way back before it became common knowledge he had figured out for his own game that laying up to 90 yards on Par 5's was just wasting strokes. But he resisted for years doing anything about it because the conventional wisdom at the time was good players always laid up to their favorite wedge yardage if they weren't sure they could reach the green in two.

 

Once he decided to do something about it, within a year he went from Par 5's being where he lost strokes against the big hitters to Par 5's being one of his strengths. But it took a lot of practice on his <90 yard wedge game, which he'd never really worked on much before that time. 

 

It was an interesting story and I tend to take it at face value. I'm sure some people figured this stuff out on their own circa 1980 or whatever. I mean heck, even Ray Floyd way before ShotLink was preaching the value of the 40-yard wedge game. But some people still resist that. Probably because they have no self-efficacy or belief in their ability to get really good at those shots. 

Great insight... and I haven't been playing that long but always wonderd why people believe they can't get really good at 50yds shot... athletically it's the same motion, more controlled... it should eliminate/lessen some of the 'tough' variables of the full swing : long arm backswing, poor wrist action, low point control, others... 

 

I elude to it but I'm sure 'perception' of how good they are when closer is skewing this up... they get to 45yds and run one 20 feet by and intuitively think they're bad at it / expectations... while an awesome drive on a Par4 that leaves them 110yds in, get it to 30 feet - and it's a good hole, par should be made (and it was a good hole, approach shot)... so these two types of results are sweking it; and when faced with that choice (Par5 usually) they fall into the false premise... but still, in the long run, you score better when you're closer

[North Butte]

2 minutes ago, MtlJayMan said:

I elude to it but I'm sure 'perception' of how good they are when closer is skewing this up... they get to 45yds and run one 20 feet by and intuitively think they're bad at it / expectations... while an awesome drive on a Par4 that leaves them 110yds in, get it to 30 feet - and it's a good hole, par should be made (and it was a good hole, approach shot)... so these two types of results are sweking it; and when faced with that choice (Par5 usually) they fall into the false premise... but still, in the long run, you score better when you're closer

Well they do say golf in 99% mental and the rest is all in our head...

[me05501]

I wonder whether a full swing masks iffy fundamentals that get exposed when an amateur goes to take something off a shot. Just a theory. 

 

More than likely it comes down to us not practicing less-than-full shots nearly enough to be comfortable with them.

 

Most of the time when I'm practicing I'm paying for balls by the bucket. Hitting partial shots somehow feels like wasting a limited number of available shots. Obviously improvement is the goal, not getting the most perceived value from a bucket of ratty range balls. 

 

This winter I've joined a Trackman facility where I'll be able to practice whatever I want. Seems like a great time to dial in some partial wedge distances. 

Edited November 18, 2022 by me05501

[North Butte]

The best wedge player I've ever actually played golf with was a pre-teen and teenager during the years when I was first taking up the game. That was in the 1990's and I don't think anyone had ever clued him in about laying up to full wedge distances. He was truly astounding in the number of shots he could get within 10 feet of the hole from 80, 90, 100 yards. But when he was able to get within 40 yards he used what looked like the exact same type of swing and it was uncanny. He was inside 10 feet almost every time and stone dead to the hole quite often.

 

Back then I'd read or hear that advice about laying up to full wedge yardages and shake my head because I'd seen that kid hit so many wedge shots from any distance you'd like to name and I'm not sure he every took anything close to a "full swing" on any of them. Not that I'd ever imagine being as good as someone who grew up with a golf club in his hand (I was in my 30's the first time I ever touched a golf club) but I could certainly imagine his carefree attitude toward all that course management conventional wisdom. No matter where he was on the course he was just matter of factly trying to get his next shot into the hole and if not he'd get it as close as he could. He was cocky but why not be cocky? It's better than trying to sneak up on the darned hole. 

[North Butte]

4 minutes ago, me05501 said:

I wonder whether a full swing masks iffy fundamentals that get exposed when an amateur goes to take something off a shot. Just a theory. 

 

More than likely it comes down to us not practicing less-than-full shots nearly enough to be comfortable with them.

 

Most of the time when I'm practicing I'm paying for balls by the bucket. Hitting partial shots somehow feels like wasting a limited number of available shots. Obviously improvement is the goal, not getting the most perceived value from a bucket of ratty range balls. 

 

This winter I've joined a Trackman facility where I'll be able to practice whatever I want. Seems like a great time to dial in some partial wedge distances. 

I think if you took a random double-digit handicapper and had him practice as many 40, 50, 60 yard wedge shots as he'd ever practiced full swing shots, he'd likely discover at some point the partial wedges are, if anything, easier to hit well than full swings. But it's kind of its own technique, at least the way I understand it.

 

So if you practice drivers and mid irons and short irons and full wedges that's all the same fundamentals and there's a lot of overlap. Practicing a zillion 6-irons probably helps your driver swing and your 100-yard wedge swing too. But the partial wedge stuff is like putting. Developing a great putting stroke is good but it won't make you a better iron player. 

[me05501]

9 minutes ago, North Butte said:

I think if you took a random double-digit handicapper and had him practice as many 40, 50, 60 yard wedge shots as he'd ever practiced full swing shots, he'd likely discover at some point the partial wedges are, if anything, easier to hit well than full swings. But it's kind of its own technique, at least the way I understand it.

 

So if you practice drivers and mid irons and short irons and full wedges that's all the same fundamentals and there's a lot of overlap. Practicing a zillion 6-irons probably helps your driver swing and your 100-yard wedge swing too. But the partial wedge stuff is like putting. Developing a great putting stroke is good but it won't make you a better iron player. 

 

There are very few universal truths that apply to all the possible shots in the game, but one of them seems to be "accelerate through the ball." That one's true from the putter all the way back to the driver.

 

Seems like people who struggle with pitching, chipping and greenside bunkers are often decelerating through impact. 

[North Butte]

1 minute ago, me05501 said:

 

There are very few universal truths that apply to all the possible shots in the game, but one of them seems to be "accelerate through the ball." That one's true from the putter all the way back to the driver.

 

Seems like people who struggle with pitching, chipping and greenside bunkers are often decelerating through impact. 

That's true, a little deccel with a driver will probably lead to a low pull or pull-cut. The same deccel on a 40-yard shot with a SW leads to a 39-yard shot with a SW. 

[PracticeSwinger]

20 minutes ago, me05501 said:

I wonder whether a full swing masks iffy fundamentals that get exposed when an amateur goes to take something off a shot. Just a theory. 

 

More than likely it comes down to us not practicing less-than-full shots nearly enough to be comfortable with them.

 

Most of the time when I'm practicing I'm paying for balls by the bucket. Hitting partial shots somehow feels like wasting a limited number of available shots. Obviously improvement is the goal, not getting the most perceived value from a bucket of ratty range balls. 

 

This winter I've joined a Trackman facility where I'll be able to practice whatever I want. Seems like a great time to dial in some partial wedge distances. 

I can dig that a bit... compensations on full swings that can't happen/develop on partial shot... but still, isn't that a bizarre way for them to look at golf haha - I prefer leaving it to 110yds so I have time for my big EE to occur!

 

And I'm sure most of it, as you mention is related to practicing those partial wedge distances and feeling like it's a waste of time/money... but still, if I give you a bucket of 100 balls today, draw a circle of 20ft around a flag at 100yds on the range - or offer you to draw the same circle around a flag in the short range practice area, 40 yards away, and you get 20$ for each ball that ends up inside the cricle... you'd pick the latter (I think)

[bortass]

I buy into this. I want to be as close as possible. My odds of success go up if I have a wedge in my hand. Part of this is my stock wedge shot is a partial swing, roughly a half swing. I use it to warm up on the range and while I don't have much variation ALA Pelz clock system, it works well for me. That covers the 70 - 100 yard range. I recently found a 60* wedge I forgot I had and added it to the bag for the 60 - 70 yard band and it's results have been promising but it's only been two weeks.

 

Without looking at data, I would think that I do better with my partial wedge that pitching. Part of it is a pitch shot is likely going to be more finesse and I have been know to drop those in bunkers more often when I come up short. What I have available from Arccos though seems to support what he found.

 

Here's my SW stats for all shots with it over the last 50 rounds, 106 shots. It does include a handful of outliers where I may have used my SW from 250+ yards to get out of the rough. Prior to the reintroduction of the 60*, I used SW for almost all shots under 80 yards. The exceptions are when I have chipped with an iron or putter.

 

Arccos defines approach as par 3 tee shots and all other shots over 50 yards except for par 4/5 tee shots.

 

 

 

My GIR percentage does change slightly based on distance.  70 - 90 yards which is my partial wedge swing has about 50% GIR. 30 - 55 yards which is a pretty standard pitch swing for me is 53%. Guess I need to work on that, lol. 

 

So my stats line up with the findings. i'm not one of those special people that should lay up.

Edited November 18, 2022 by bortass

[me05501]

1 minute ago, MtlJayMan said:

I can dig that a bit... compensations on full swings that can't happen/develop on partial shot... but still, isn't that a bizarre way for them to look at golf haha - I prefer leaving it to 110yds so I have time for my big EE to occur!

 

And I'm sure most of it, as you mention is related to practicing those partial wedge distances and feeling like it's a waste of time/money... but still, if I give you a bucket of 100 balls today, draw a circle of 20ft around a flag at 100yds on the range - or offer you to draw the same circle around a flag in the short range practice area, 40 yards away, and you get 20$ for each ball that ends up inside the cricle... you'd pick the latter (I think)

 

Oh for sure, no question. 

 

You would probably not believe some of the driving ranges where I practice. I'm not sure practicing wedges with 40-year old Molitor balls is going to teach me much!

[North Butte]

26 minutes ago, me05501 said:

 

Oh for sure, no question. 

 

You would probably not believe some of the driving ranges where I practice. I'm not sure practicing wedges with 40-year old Molitor balls is going to teach me much!

My teaching pro buddy did his own little "study" using a rangefinder and a bunch of flags at various distances. He found that in the 50-90 yard range at least, dialing in his distances with range balls worked out just about the same as using the real balls he usually played with. I think they were brand-new range balls but still, he was surprised at how little it mattered if you practiced those shots with range balls. 

 

Now that was for practicing distances, not necessarily hitting a trajectory "window" or creating spin. But still...

[scooterhd2]

This should be 100% common golf knowledge by now, but theres still some jackal in every group I play with hitting 7 iron on the second shot on a par 5 to try to get to 100 yards. I get passing on a fairway wood if you are worried about contact, but pick a club that you can safely hit and advance as far as possible. Get the 5 iron to 80 or the hybrid to 60. Results will be much better. 

[bladehunter]

Back pin , I want be close as possible.  Front pin , eh. It depends on the day.  Sometimes It’s an off day and I’d just rather have a lazy full swing that covers the front edge , and wherever it is , it is. Last thing you want to do is hit it to 40 yards then leave that short and fail to get up and down.  That’s a mental Grenade. 

[Poor Mans Ty Webb]

2 hours ago, me05501 said:

This winter I've joined a Trackman facility where I'll be able to practice whatever I want. Seems like a great time to dial in some partial wedge distances. 

 

My absolute favorite thing to do on a Trackman (aside from chasing ball speed with the driver, of course!) is to set up their "practice range" feature and take different clubs at the same target.  Start at 70 yards, then 120, then 140, and so on....Trying to back-foot-and-hood a PW out to 160+ yards can be just as much fun as trying to hit little 5 iron cut-flops to 70 yards, and that kind of practice can do wonders for one's approach play.

 

Of course, I could absolutely do this at a conventional range, as well, but the Trackman gives such better feedback than me out on the range trying to eyeball from 150+ yards away how close I think a range ball hit a strip of ground that in no way resembles an actual green, other than the fact that both are technically earth...

[scooterhd2]

35 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Back pin , I want be close as possible.  Front pin , eh. It depends on the day.  Sometimes It’s an off day and I’d just rather have a lazy full swing that covers the front edge , and wherever it is , it is. Last thing you want to do is hit it to 40 yards then leave that short and fail to get up and down.  That’s a mental Grenade. 

 

Thats absolutely going to happen. You will leave a 40 yarder short on occasion. The question is if I hit 100 balls from 40 yards and 100 balls from 95 yards, which one gives better average hole proximity, and if I played them all out which group has the lower average score?

[bladehunter]

3 minutes ago, scooterhd2 said:

 

Thats absolutely going to happen. You will leave a 40 yarder short on occasion. The question is if I hit 100 balls from 40 yards and 100 balls from 95 yards, which one gives better average hole proximity, and if I played them all out which group has the lower average score?

Person dependent I’d say.  The average only works if you play to have that shot often.  Otherwise it’s 1-1 comparison.  
 

i personally practice that shot. But I know it tends to come out hot due to 58 degrees being my highest lofted wedge.  I could adjust to 64 and up the accuracy.    That’s why my opinion for me is that. I can hit it 4/5 yards deep from 80 yards , or 4/5 yards deep from 40.  I’m never going to leave the 80 yard shot short unless I lay sod over the lob (58) wedge. And that’s really rare. It’s literally my favorite club.  
 

im very neutral on this. I don’t fear the 40 yard flip. But it is a harder shot minus more loft.  And I specifically said 40 the parting line is 50 yards.  You can execute 50-55 with pretty tight accuracy.  At 40 it becomes less than shaft parallel to the ground backswing and a must for perfect contact. This is just harder to time up if including the needed full release.  It’s not a shortgame  shot. It’s a 1/3 to 3/8 full shot.  Not the same. 

[North Butte]

45 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Last thing you want to do is hit it to 40 yards then leave that short and fail to get up and down.  That’s a mental Grenade. 

Not telling you anything you don't know but letting that situation affect the rest of your round is a mental game problem, not a course management or wedge swing problem. 

 

That said, a great deal of conventional (but incorrect) wisdom about scoring and/or course management in golf is based on avoidance of "mental grenades" more than optimizing your long-term scoring. In serious competition, freeing yourself from fear of "mental grenades" is a necessary precondition toward making optimum risk/reward calculations. 

 

Bob Rotella talked about this in one of his books, back before sports psychology became all about procrastination, rituals and superstitious "routines". 

[scooterhd2]

8 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Person dependent I’d say.  The average only works if you play to have that shot often.  Otherwise it’s 1-1 comparison.  

 

You only get to play 1 shot, so its never a 1-1 comparison. Its always, what shot is the better shot? And the answer is based on a database of previous shots. If we could take every 40 yard shot you ever hit and every 80 yard shot you ever hit and compare the hole proximity, you'd have you answer as to which shot would be better. Agreed?

 

That is more or less the analysis that Lou Stagner did, and 97% of people are better with the 40 yard shot. Might you be in the 3%? Perhaps, I mean some people have to be. But that is far from the norm. 

[Pepperturbo]

4 hours ago, MtlJayMan said:

Another little golden nugget by Lou Stagner of Arccos – with all the hitting it closer or leaving it to a comfortable yardage talk…

 

He went in and looked at each player in the database and compared them to themselves – with proximity, GIR, number of shots to hole out, standard deviation of score – every player that had at least 25 shots in each category in a particular year… 40 to 60 yards range versus 90 to 110 yards in the fairway range : and found out that a whopping 3% of players were better off from further in the fairway… and obviously it seems that everyone that ended up in that 3% was commenting on his post haha

 

I guess it's related to the 'psychology' of it all... proximity from 50yds is 24ft - while from a 100yds it's 35ft... it sure seems like a 50yds shot to 24ft isn't that great while a 35footer from 100yds isn't ideal but it's playable golf... even though 24ft is still closer than 35ft; especially for 3putts avoidance...

Interesting, not surprising.  From my reading, here, gapping, wedges and full swings are often lumped together in thread.  Seldom do people come forth talking about wanting 1/2 to 3/4 shots or chase creativity. 

 

I agree - 24ft is NOT good, while 35ft is acceptable.  Not sure 3% of ??, tells the real story.  I think in the scheme of things it's a lot higher percentage.  Based on my experience; most golfers don't have the self-control and or skill to layup to optimum 100+/-yds; they come up short or long of it, necessitating varied swings lengths they don't have.

 

Personally, shorter the better for this feel player.  Under 60yds, I am licking my chops. 

[bladehunter]

14 minutes ago, North Butte said:

Not telling you anything you don't know but letting that situation affect the rest of your round is a mental game problem, not a course management or wedge swing problem. 

 

That said, a great deal of conventional (but incorrect) wisdom about scoring and/or course management in golf is based on avoidance of "mental grenades" more than optimizing your long-term scoring. In serious competition, freeing yourself from fear of "mental grenades" is a necessary precondition toward making optimum risk/reward calculations. 

 

Bob Rotella talked about this in one of his books, back before sports psychology became all about procrastination, rituals and superstitious "routines". 

I suppose.  Lol.  But that’s assuming I’m thinking “ mental grenade “ during a round.  I don’t.  To a flaw.  I’m Uber aggressive as I said elsewhere.  I have to actively say “ ok.  Worse case for shot A vs worst case for shot B. And then decide.  That’s not the same thing.  If we only play for best case. We’d never hit less than driver , and we’d alwasy hunt pins.  There has to be some calc for management 

[PracticeSwinger]

5 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Person dependent I’d say.  The average only works if you play to have that shot often.  Otherwise it’s 1-1 comparison.  
 

i personally practice that shot. But I know it tends to come out hot due to 58 degrees being my highest lofted wedge.  I could adjust to 64 and up the accuracy.    That’s why my opinion for me is that. I can hit it 4/5 yards deep from 80 yards , or 4/5 yards deep from 40.  I’m never going to leave the 80 yard shot short unless I lay sod over the lob (58) wedge. And that’s really rare. It’s literally my favorite club.  
 

im very neutral on this. I don’t fear the 40 yard flip. But it is a harder shot minus more loft.  And I specifically said 40 the parting line is 50 yards.  You can execute 50-55 with pretty tight accuracy.  At 40 it becomes less than shaft parallel to the ground backswing and a must for perfect contact. This is just harder to time up if including the needed full release.  It’s not a shortgame  shot. It’s a 1/3 to 3/8 full shot.  Not the same. 

If I recall correctly, you are/were a member of Decade - if so, wouldn't that type of breakdown : number of shots to hole out from 40yds and the same from 100yds be available data?

 

And generally speaking, I usually don't want to be snide when opening these type of threads - rather trying to bring factual info to some of golf old beliefs, that might help guys in their journey to get better at golf... the fact that 3% of the players were better from 90-110 in the fairway than from 40-60 all types of lies is saying a lot... compared to the number of people commenting on 'well, I'm this type of guy' 'that sort of player' that usually try to justify their beliefs with instinct - just trying to open dialogue into : well you might be playing suboptimally when you go at it that way (considering the numbers of people here that try to chop down a shot here and there)... and, on the 'mental' aspect - every shot should be played in isolation for the better expected outcome, accepting the result and moving to the next shot, rinse and repeat, shot in isolation for better expected outcome...

[bladehunter]

2 minutes ago, scooterhd2 said:

 

You only get to play 1 shot, so its never a 1-1 comparison. Its always, what shot is the better shot? And the answer is based on a database of previous shots. If we could take every 40 yard shot you ever hit and every 80 yard shot you ever hit and compare the hole proximity, you'd have you answer as to which shot would be better. Agreed?

 

That is more or less the analysis that Lou Stagner did, and 97% of people are better with the 40 yard shot. Might you be in the 3%? Perhaps, I mean some people have to be. But that is far from the norm. 

Sure the first part.   But my analysis and yours won’t likely overlap.  I can give you a Gir stat for me that will draw eye rolls. It’s 83.6% for the year.  And proximity for me 75-100 is 2 feet closer on the button than my 25-75 yard number. 
 

and I’m not even disagreeing with you in total. I could absolutely install a 64 degree wedge , practice a month and make the 25-75 number inside the 75-100 number.  I can.  But why?   At the sacrifice of what ?  Most likely a 110-125 club or a 200-215 club.  Both I hit well.  

[MonteScheinblum]

There are four issues at work here.

 

1.  Human beings don’t like changing their beliefs.  No matter how many statistical and empirical data someone is shown, they will argue drive for show putt for dough to the death.

 

2. Closer is better is just common sense.  
 

3.  The 3% are absolutely those that have swing issues that destroy their partial shot pattern.  Long backswing, too inside going back, too much weight shift, etc.

 

4.  People love to use outliers to prove their points.  

 

 

Edited November 18, 2022 by MonteScheinblum

[Krt22]

In before the anecdotes!