That 30-40 yard pitch…

[doctor220]

On 7/5/2023 at 12:25 PM, umamimami said:

If your face with a lot of these, especially in the high 30s to 40+ range, consider a different approach on the hole. 
 

My short game got a bit better once I Iearned how to hit a 70 yard pitch, a high 60 yarder, and a medium spinny one that I can hit 75-120 yards. My short game really improved once I realized that I would be a fool to not set myself up for those shots. 
I get the heroic feeling of trying to get to the green on a short 5, or on a 4 after a weak tee-shot. But since you’re here on the internet asking for advice I think you’re trying to improve. 
 

Going for it when you’re out of position is a great way to stay out of position. Know the shots you can make and try to get yourself into places you can make them.

 

Consider these two scenarios on a 330 yard par-4. 
 

A) you pull driver because you think you can get it “up there” you end up 45 yards out in the fairway. Your second shot ends up being 20 ft out as you described.

 

B) you go for a long iron or wood or hybrid, all of which you can proficiently hit 210-260. Your second shot is now a spin-able, controllable wedge shot. You can stick those to 10. You might get it to under 10 feet! If you hit a mediocre one then you’re back at the expected result of option A.

 

As an aside: For 30-40 yarders because of a miss. Specifically a miss into the rough.
 

The rough is the tough and if it’s a 30 yarder because you missed the green this is a different story and one that’ll involve going out onto your course and dropping balls in rough and figuring out what works. This is what pros do during practice rounds.

 

Overall: if you’re frequently finding yourself at uncomfortable distances in the fairway - you gotta rewind to your prior shot and plan the approach better. 
 

 

I heard a tale about a golf pro who was asked “What do you do when you’re faced with a 50 yard pitch?” 
 

the reply: “Fire my caddie.”

Players of all skill levels hit the ball closer from 30-40 yards than 100. This is just plain wrong and bad course management to do as you suggest. 
 

your bad shots from 30-40 yards will be significantly better than your bad shots from 100-125 as you describe in your scenarios. An average shot from 30-40 will often be as good or better than a pretty good one from the second range. 
 

 

 

[Shilgy]

On 7/5/2023 at 7:54 AM, SNIPERBBB said:

I would have to say keeping your speed up on this shot is imperative. When I see fellow players, and occasionally myself, when I mess this shot up is because I got lazy and didn't put any speed into the swing. 

Agree…and will add this usually happens, at least to me, when the body stops rotating on the through swing.

[dubbelbogey]

If somebody is truly better at full shots than half shots (as measured by proximity) they are pretty much the outlier. And a pretty extreme outlier at that. Yes, there are some of you rare birds out there, but not really that many. And certainly not enough around which to base a general approach to the game. (Some folks are better chipping left hand low, but it's not something that should generally be promoted.)

 

https://mailchi.mp/loustagnergolf.com/lou-stagners-newsletter-issue-11

 

Summed up, it basically says that less than 7% of players are actually better with those full shots than half shots.

 

The old adage of laying up to a full club needs to stop being perpetuated. (As an aside, I like a lot about Golf Sidekick's YT channel, but he's just plain wrong on this one.)

 

As an alternative to making a big ordeal about learning how to hit these shots better (or at least as a way to augment a more formal approach) - make a game out of it. Spend 50% of your range balls hitting to randomly picked short targets. For me, this is most often just a golf ball I see lying out on the range. Or a clump of grass or dirt. If your range is nice enough to have official short targets, even better. (Mine has some big horse troughs that make a nice satisfying sound when you hit them.) You might be surprised how fun this sort of practice can be. (And I think it actually provides benefit to full swings, too.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[doctor220]

On 7/8/2023 at 5:46 AM, SNIPERBBB said:

You can't estimate how far away the ball is from the hole because of roll out? Proximity to hole is how far away the ball is from the hole after it quits moving. Has nothing to do with landing spots. 

Just a total troll. 

[PracticeSwinger]

20 hours ago, dubbelbogey said:

If somebody is truly better at full shots than half shots (as measured by proximity) they are pretty much the outlier. And a pretty extreme outlier at that. Yes, there are some of you rare birds out there, but not really that many. And certainly not enough around which to base a general approach to the game. (Some folks are better chipping left hand low, but it's not something that should generally be promoted.)

 

https://mailchi.mp/loustagnergolf.com/lou-stagners-newsletter-issue-11

 

Summed up, it basically says that less than 7% of players are actually better with those full shots than half shots.

 

The old adage of laying up to a full club needs to stop being perpetuated. (As an aside, I like a lot about Golf Sidekick's YT channel, but he's just plain wrong on this one.)

 

As an alternative to making a big ordeal about learning how to hit these shots better (or at least as a way to augment a more formal approach) - make a game out of it. Spend 50% of your range balls hitting to randomly picked short targets. For me, this is most often just a golf ball I see lying out on the range. Or a clump of grass or dirt. If your range is nice enough to have official short targets, even better. (Mine has some big horse troughs that make a nice satisfying sound when you hit them.) You might be surprised how fun this sort of practice can be. (And I think it actually provides benefit to full swings, too.)

 

If someone tells you they're better at 100-110 yds than they are at 30-40 yds, it speaks more of their short game deficiencies rather than their great wedge approach.

 

Spent one complete practice session last week doing just that, picking random holes (in the chip/pitch/bunker practice area) from short range and dropping balls left and right for different lies, kind of shot required. All of them with my 58* high bounce wedge, pleseantly surprised with the overall results when assessing the shot : the way the grass was mowed, upslope/downslope, landing spot, hop and stop or release, using the bounce, length of backswing + followthrouh... maybe there's no magic trick but rather getting comfortable with repetitions... 

[Nard_S]

4 minutes ago, Varry_Hardon said:

pleseantly surprised with the overall results when assessing the shot : the way the grass was mowed, upslope/downslope, landing spot, hop and stop or release, using the bounce, length of backswing + followthrouh...

Assessing what the lie gives is a big deal. Yesterday I tried a fairway pitch on ball in the rough, big mistake. Looked like I could sweep it out in that fashion, was a fail. An arsenal of shot types resolves much of the odd distance play.

[glk]

7 minutes ago, Varry_Hardon said:

 

If someone tells you they're better at 100-110 yds than they are at 30-40 yds, it speaks more of their short game deficiencies rather than their great wedge approach.

 

Spent one complete practice session last week doing just that, picking random holes (in the chip/pitch/bunker practice area) from short range and dropping balls left and right for different lies, kind of shot required. All of them with my 58* high bounce wedge, pleseantly surprised with the overall results when assessing the shot : the way the grass was mowed, upslope/downslope, landing spot, hop and stop or release, using the bounce, length of backswing + followthrouh... maybe there's no magic trick but rather getting comfortable with repetitions... 

I like to take 3 balls out to the practice pitching/chipping green and vary the distance etc and mix up the ball pattern - one high, one low, one stock - go from just off the fringe to out to 30 yards.   Basically ask myself three questions relative to my stock shot given the lie - how fast will it come out?, how high or low?, how much spin? (props to Ridyard)   So based on that assessment one can determine how to play it - stock but with more speed or less or if an adjustment in stance, ball position, swing arc, handle position, etc.   As noted, takes repetitions and practicing a stock motion gets a baseline.

[Louis_Posture]

For the US Open notice how many of the women were laying up to 85 yards at par 5 holes such as 2, 14 , and 18 ?

Remember when Zach Johnson won the Masters by hitting 80 to 110 yard 3rd shots to each of the par 5 greens ?

[stryper]

28 minutes ago, Louis_Posture said:

For the US Open notice how many of the women were laying up to 85 yards at par 5 holes such as 2, 14 , and 18 ?

Remember when Zach Johnson won the Masters by hitting 80 to 110 yard 3rd shots to each of the par 5 greens ?

Outliers? 🤷🏻‍♂️

[Sean124]

1 hour ago, Louis_Posture said:

For the US Open notice how many of the women were laying up to 85 yards at par 5 holes such as 2, 14 , and 18 ?

Not the woman who won.

 

[GungHoGolf]

All things being equal, there is no “no man’s land” from 20-85 yards or so. Statistically speaking, closer is better with similar lies across all handicaps. 

 

But of course there are some good reasons to lay up further out to full wedge distance, occasionally: heavy rough with a narrowed fairway closer to the green, bunkers protecting the front, or a front or tucked pin that requires a higher spin shot or steeper descent angle to get it close are three examples. 

[umamimami]

In a game where less than a few out of a hundred shoot scratch and even less are pro, one might think the outliers are on to something… 

 

You get to be the best by specializing in something, shoreing up your deficiencies and trying to play to your strengths. I think a lot of the folks here are trying to get better at everything when you might be better served by mastering a few things, playing for them, then slowly over time expanding your repertoire. 
 

Just like how modern pros stick to one shot shape. They’ve recognized it’s better to kick a** at one thing and if the hole/course doesn’t suit it then maybe it’s just not your hole/week. 
 

Check out Hovland’s latest video range session with Golf Digest. He readily admits that he won where he did because the course suited his game. 

He doesn’t spend his time trying to add a draw into his library, he spends his time honing his fade and improving his other skills so that he can overcome the dogleg left with the second shot. 
 

If you had 7 hours a week to golf/practice and you spent an 30 minutes each on a different club and shot shape you’d be nowhere. Spend 2 hours on chips and putts, 1 your driver, 1 on your 5 iron and 3 at a local pitch and putt and I guarantee you’ll improve far more. 

[Louis_Posture]

24 minutes ago, GungHoGolf said:

 

 

But of course there are some good reasons to lay up further out to full wedge distance

The primary reason for laying up to a comfortable yardage (for most players that is approximately 80 to 100 yards) is because its a "stock shot" that does not require much practice and, or thought.

From the tee box or par 5 lay up shots Tour pros target a specific yardage, usually a stock wedge shot, because they know that shot will be relatively easy for them to execute.

 

Here is a quote from David Toms about how he closed out his 2001 PGA Championship victory with a lay up shot to 84 yards:

 

All week, Toms had said he would not be embarrassed to lay up on 18 and avoid the daunting water hazard guarding the front of the green. With a maiden major title on the line, he and his caddie discussed their options.

“We’re like, ‘What’s the best way to make four?’, because that’s what I had to do,” Toms recalled. “Said, ‘Well, we need to lay up, and not only do we need to lay up, we need to play up to a good yardage.

“We don’t want a half wedge in there and we don’t want too long of a shot.’ I had a full 60-degree sand wedge in. It couldn’t have been any better as far as the way I laid it up in a good spot.”

[Louis_Posture]

31 minutes ago, umamimami said:

 

Just like how modern pros stick to one shot shape. They’ve recognized it’s better to kick a** at one thing and if the hole/course doesn’t suit it then maybe it’s just not your hole/week. 
 

 

Not just "modern pros". Tour pros sticking to a stock shot has been done for more than 50 years. Lee Trevino used to talk about skipping the Masters because he knew that his relatively low trajectory fade shot did not play well at Augusta. Mark Calcavechia had Ping set up his iron sets 5* flat because he never wanted to miss a shot left (or even strike a draw shot). Rather than attempt a right-to-left shot Jack Nicklaus used to aim at a bunker or water hazard knowing with confidence that his stock fade would bring the ball back to his intended target.

Some fans seem to think that Tour pros are routinely moving the ball different directions according to hole shapes or hole locations, but the reality is that men and women are working their way around the course playing their stock shots.

[SNIPERBBB]

14 minutes ago, Louis_Posture said:

The primary reason for laying up to a comfortable yardage (for most players that is approximately 80 to 100 yards) is because its a "stock shot" that does not require much practice and, or thought.

From the tee box or par 5 lay up shots Tour pros target a specific yardage, usually a stock wedge shot, because they know that shot will be relatively easy for them to execute.

 

Here is a quote from David Toms about how he closed out his 2001 PGA Championship victory with a lay up shot to 84 yards:

 

All week, Toms had said he would not be embarrassed to lay up on 18 and avoid the daunting water hazard guarding the front of the green. With a maiden major title on the line, he and his caddie discussed their options.

“We’re like, ‘What’s the best way to make four?’, because that’s what I had to do,” Toms recalled. “Said, ‘Well, we need to lay up, and not only do we need to lay up, we need to play up to a good yardage.

“We don’t want a half wedge in there and we don’t want too long of a shot.’ I had a full 60-degree sand wedge in. It couldn’t have been any better as far as the way I laid it up in a good spot.”

You're ignoring the part about why he was laying up...if you got a pond in front of the green, you don't want a shot that requires you to be less aggressive to hit it close because if you flub it, you're wet. Dropping back more let's you make a more aggressive swing that has better margin of error for not getting wet...as long as there's not also water in the back in case you skull it lol. 

[Louis_Posture]

10 minutes ago, SNIPERBBB said:

You're ignoring the part about why he was laying up...if you got a pond in front of the green, you don't want a shot that requires you to be less aggressive to hit it close because if you flub it, you're wet. Dropping back more let's you make a more aggressive swing that has better margin of error for not getting wet...as long as there's not also water in the back in case you skull it lol. 

He laid up to 84 yards because that was his stock 60* swing. He was not thinking about "flubbing a wedge" and, or, "hitting a wedge into the water"..... he was thinking about which yardage would give him the best chance to make par.

In the quotation I provided Toms said to his caddie " we don't want a half wedge in there". This is the way Tour pros think. Consider that Toms struck stock 60* club 84 yard wedge shots at the range everyday; he struck the same shot every time he laid up to that yardage, week after week, year after year.

[SNIPERBBB]

35 minutes ago, Louis_Posture said:

He laid up to 84 yards because that was his stock 60* swing. He was not thinking about "flubbing a wedge" and, or, "hitting a wedge into the water"..... he was thinking about which yardage would give him the best chance to make par.

In the quotation I provided Toms said to his caddie " we don't want a half wedge in there". This is the way Tour pros think. Consider that Toms struck stock 60* club 84 yard wedge shots at the range everyday; he struck the same shot every time he laid up to that yardage, week after week, year after year.

How do you know they werent? Why didn't he want a half wedge there? The rest of the article talks about Toms almost having an anxiety attack on the back 9 and trying to hit a lil delicate shot is the worst shot to try to hit when the nerves and the adrenaline is acting up. Especially when that hole is all carry to get onto the green. An aggressive swing is a lot easier to make than a "controlled" one here. He was forced to layup to the yardage he did hit. Really didnt have an option because he was having to salvage par and no worse than bogey. Any other shot he would of had to hit for his layup brought the water into play more.

Edited July 11, 2023 by SNIPERBBB

[iacas]

3 hours ago, Louis_Posture said:

For the US Open notice how many of the women were laying up to 85 yards at par 5 holes such as 2, 14 , and 18 ?

Remember when Zach Johnson won the Masters by hitting 80 to 110 yard 3rd shots to each of the par 5 greens ?

 

Plenty didn't lay up to 85 yards. Many hit it closer, including the woman who won.

 

Zach wasn't long enough to reach many of the par fives, and he had an outlier week with the wedge game and putter. And even still, that strategy may have still cost him shots. He could have won by more, potentially, had he gone for some of the par fives in two. Run that week back with his average wedge game… and he'd have finished just outside the top ten, IIRC.

 

1 hour ago, umamimami said:

In a game where less than a few out of a hundred shoot scratch and even less are pro, one might think the outliers are on to something…

 

The outlier — the PGA Tour players — are increasingly learning the value of getting closer to the hole rather than laying back to a full yardage or a "yardage they like."

 

1 hour ago, umamimami said:

If you had 7 hours a week to golf/practice and you spent an 30 minutes each on a different club and shot shape you’d be nowhere. Spend 2 hours on chips and putts, 1 your driver, 1 on your 5 iron and 3 at a local pitch and putt and I guarantee you’ll improve far more. 

 

Not a big fan of that ratio, no.

 

1 hour ago, Louis_Posture said:

The primary reason for laying up to a comfortable yardage (for most players that is approximately 80 to 100 yards) is because its a "stock shot" that does not require much practice and, or thought.

 

And the point I and others are making is that even without practicing it much… players hit it closer from 50 yards, on average, than an 85-yard "stock" shot.

 

Also, it doesn't take very long to figure out your yardages with full, 3/4 and 1/2 wedge swings. Can do it in one practice session and write 'em down.

 

As others have also said, there are occasional times to lay back to a full yardage (more spin, etc. can be helpful occasionally, significant trouble at ~30 yards could push you back to 80 or something, etc.), but in general, closer is better.

 

1 hour ago, Louis_Posture said:

Here is a quote from David Toms about how he closed out his 2001 PGA Championship victory with a lay up shot to 84 yards:

 

We've learned since then.

[Louis_Posture]

15 minutes ago, SNIPERBBB said:

How do you know they werent? Why didn't he want a half wedge there? The rest of the article talks about Toms almost having an anxiety attack on the back 9 and trying to hit a lil delicate shot is the worst shot to try to hit when the nerves and the adrenaline is acting up. Especially when that hole is all carry to get onto the green. An aggressive swing is a lot easier to make than a "controlled" one here. He was forced to layup to the yardage he did hit. Really didnt have an option because he was having to salvage par and no worse than bogey. Any other shot he would of had to hit for his layup brought the water into play more.

 

What you've written about anxiety, aggressive swing being easier than a controlled swing etc... is true, for every round of golf.

On that 18th hole Toms had the option of laying up to a range of about 55 yards to 110 yards. He chose to target 84 yards because that was his stock, standard 60* wedge shot; the one he plays and practices most often. His strategy was basic, traditional good sense golf.

Zach Johnson lay up on every par 5 and played those holes -11 for the week en route to winning the 2007 Masters. He said that laying up to comfortable wedge yardages is a stress free, good sense, easy way to play golf.

[DaveGoodrich]

Stats say closer is better, under almost all conditions, for all handicap levels.  If folks don't think they will hit it closer from 40 than 100, first if all, they are probably wrong.  But if they are right, then they should be able to drop a few strokes by working on 40 yarders.   

 

On par 5s, the only time I'm laying back is to avoid hazards, not to lay up to a specific yardage.  

 

 

[vman]

Lie is the most important aspect as it dictates what you can and can't do. Green complex as in pin location, ground conditions and topography comes next along with weather conditions. Then we've got trajectory/spin, landing spot, roll which are all related to the previous points. Technique and skill acquisition takes time and experience and for better players competitive practise is always a sharpener. Watch Steve Stricker if you want a simple and effective technique.

[SNIPERBBB]

9 hours ago, Louis_Posture said:

 

What you've written about anxiety, aggressive swing being easier than a controlled swing etc... is true, for every round of golf.

On that 18th hole Toms had the option of laying up to a range of about 55 yards to 110 yards. He chose to target 84 yards because that was his stock, standard 60* wedge shot; the one he plays and practices most often. His strategy was basic, traditional good sense golf.

Zach Johnson lay up on every par 5 and played those holes -11 for the week en route to winning the 2007 Masters. He said that laying up to comfortable wedge yardages is a stress free, good sense, easy way to play golf.

He was also hitting his second from the rough so if he wanted to hit the ball into half wedge range he risks dunking the ball into the pond if his layup shot jumps on him.

 

Also, the first rule of laying up is...lay up. Dont even give yourself the slightest chance of going into a hazard.

Edited July 11, 2023 by SNIPERBBB

[North Butte]

It frustrates me, as a golfer fairly immersed in the analytics side of the game, to see so many absolute statements along the lines of "No matter what you think, stats say [sic] you will hit the ball closer to the hole from 40 yards than from 80 yards". 

 

There are millions of golfers who are in very bad trouble any time they're faced with a 40-yard pitch shot over a bunker. They don't know a reliable technique for hitting that shot, they never have seriously practiced it and even if they knew how to do it, they are so freaked out by it they will just stab, flip or lunge at the ball instead of making a normal stroke. 

 

For those folks, until they address their crippling anxiety and lack of proficiency they are absolutely better off being 80 or 100 yards out. Not that they'll necessarily be particularly good from 80 yards. But they have a chance to actually get the club on the ball and hit it up in the air in the general direction of the hole most of the time. 

 

What the "stats" do "say" (or to put it more usefully, one general conclusion we can draw from researching into golf analytics) is that for players with solid ability to play the required shots from both 40 and 80 yards, on average the shots played from 40 yards will end up much closer to the hole. The key phrases are "on average" and "general conclusion". Not every single golfer, not ever single shot, context does matter. 

 

But I am comfortable saying that a near superstitious belief in the benefit of hitting wedges from one of two or three specific "number" distances is simply wishful thinking. If a decent player (Tour player down to maybe an avid 15hcp amateur) believes he is

 

a) capable of hitting a 180 yard layup such that he's guaranteed a 86-88 yard wedge shot from a "good number" and

 

b) better off being between 86-88 than being some distance between 30-50 yards  

 

Then the only way that can be true is if his belief becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. It is certainly possible for even a Tour player to psych himself into thinking he's far better than he really is from exactly 87 yards and far worse than he really is from 30-50 yards. If you believe anything strongly enough for long enough, the belief has a way of coming true. 

[PracticeSwinger]

52 minutes ago, North Butte said:

It frustrates me, as a golfer fairly immersed in the analytics side of the game, to see so many absolute statements along the lines of "No matter what you think, stats say [sic] you will hit the ball closer to the hole from 40 yards than from 80 yards". 

 

There are millions of golfers who are in very bad trouble any time they're faced with a 40-yard pitch shot over a bunker. They don't know a reliable technique for hitting that shot, they never have seriously practiced it and even if they knew how to do it, they are so freaked out by it they will just stab, flip or lunge at the ball instead of making a normal stroke. 

 

For those folks, until they address their crippling anxiety and lack of proficiency they are absolutely better off being 80 or 100 yards out. Not that they'll necessarily be particularly good from 80 yards. But they have a chance to actually get the club on the ball and hit it up in the air in the general direction of the hole most of the time. 

 

What the "stats" do "say" (or to put it more usefully, one general conclusion we can draw from researching into golf analytics) is that for players with solid ability to play the required shots from both 40 and 80 yards, on average the shots played from 40 yards will end up much closer to the hole. The key phrases are "on average" and "general conclusion". Not every single golfer, not ever single shot, context does matter. 

 

But I am comfortable saying that a near superstitious belief in the benefit of hitting wedges from one of two or three specific "number" distances is simply wishful thinking. If a decent player (Tour player down to maybe an avid 15hcp amateur) believes he is

 

a) capable of hitting a 180 yard layup such that he's guaranteed a 86-88 yard wedge shot from a "good number" and

 

b) better off being between 86-88 than being some distance between 30-50 yards  

 

Then the only way that can be true is if his belief becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. It is certainly possible for even a Tour player to psych himself into thinking he's far better than he really is from exactly 87 yards and far worse than he really is from 30-50 yards. If you believe anything strongly enough for long enough, the belief has a way of coming true. 

Valid points and as an avid comsumer of analytics, I get what you are saying about guys shoving numbers down the throat as their only argument. Of couse, we're talking about the long run, on average this or that is better - law of large numbers and any particular shot has to be adressed on it's own, not only every shot, but the complete variables for that golfer, on that day.

 

The counter argument would be that I've (and we've) all seen many players that justify their laying up by saying they're better from 90 yards, a stock number - only to chunk it, skull it, drop it in the green side bunker... and then sometime be faced with a 30 yards shot... more often than they end up 12 feet from the hole. If they'd be a tad more avid of analytics also, they'd assess their own game objectively and not only based on the one shot they had on the boys trip where they pinned one to 4 feet from 98 to shut the guys up.

 

As noted above, if Tiger Woods missed 1 out of every 5 green when he was in the fairway from 100 yds (that stat in itself says a lot) - don't expect me to believe that Steve from accounting is better laying up on average. 

[SNIPERBBB]

1 hour ago, North Butte said:

It frustrates me, as a golfer fairly immersed in the analytics side of the game, to see so many absolute statements along the lines of "No matter what you think, stats say [sic] you will hit the ball closer to the hole from 40 yards than from 80 yards". 

 

There are millions of golfers who are in very bad trouble any time they're faced with a 40-yard pitch shot over a bunker. They don't know a reliable technique for hitting that shot, they never have seriously practiced it and even if they knew how to do it, they are so freaked out by it they will just stab, flip or lunge at the ball instead of making a normal stroke. 

 

For those folks, until they address their crippling anxiety and lack of proficiency they are absolutely better off being 80 or 100 yards out. Not that they'll necessarily be particularly good from 80 yards. But they have a chance to actually get the club on the ball and hit it up in the air in the general direction of the hole most of the time. 

 

What the "stats" do "say" (or to put it more usefully, one general conclusion we can draw from researching into golf analytics) is that for players with solid ability to play the required shots from both 40 and 80 yards, on average the shots played from 40 yards will end up much closer to the hole. The key phrases are "on average" and "general conclusion". Not every single golfer, not ever single shot, context does matter. 

 

But I am comfortable saying that a near superstitious belief in the benefit of hitting wedges from one of two or three specific "number" distances is simply wishful thinking. If a decent player (Tour player down to maybe an avid 15hcp amateur) believes he is

 

a) capable of hitting a 180 yard layup such that he's guaranteed a 86-88 yard wedge shot from a "good number" and

 

b) better off being between 86-88 than being some distance between 30-50 yards  

 

Then the only way that can be true is if his belief becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. It is certainly possible for even a Tour player to psych himself into thinking he's far better than he really is from exactly 87 yards and far worse than he really is from 30-50 yards. If you believe anything strongly enough for long enough, the belief has a way of coming true. 

 

 

Analytics should be taken like the Pirates Code...its more of a guideline than an actual rule. You have to look to at each situation individually and make your decisions accordingly. 

[ShortGolfer]

When I played my first season my stock shot was 37 yard high fade with my 54* SW.   That, combined with course management, allowed me to play enjoyable rounds with a limited skill set.

 

 

[North Butte]

To my mind, the most useful purpose of analytics for a non-elite golfer is not to inform course management. It's to identify areas which are costing a disproportionate number of strokes. In this case, there's no logical reason you should (on average) be farther from the hole on 40-yard shots than 80-yard shots.

 

If you keep stats on your own game and find that to be the case, the takeaway isn't (try to avoid being 40 yards from the hole). The implication is, make that 40-yard shot a priority in practice and/or lessons.

[Righty to Lefty]

Use the bounce...ALWAYS... on EVERY partial wedge shot where there will be turf interaction. Expose as much as needed for a given shot but always used the bounce.  The other thing that I found to be paramount is using extremely light grip pressure so to further insure that the club won't dig and also allowing more speed to be used while still reducing the amount of ball speed created.  Hitting from extremely wet turf will quickly teach this lesson.  The other day I was hitting from super wet turf  from 85 yards out with a 52 degree wedge and even had the bounce engaged but I took a foot long divot because my grip pressure was too high. I was analyzing what happened because of course my practice swings didn't make a divot.  I then reduced my grip pressure to a 1 or 2 out of 10 and hit the shot over again and knocked it to 10 feet and barely scuffed the turf. Bounce is your friend in all situations on partial wedge shots and so it is very important to understand it and use it to your advantage.  Hitting 30 to 40 yards wedge shots are no different you just have to play with how much your open the face prior to taking your grip and note how far it goes in relation to how far you feel it should go just like learning your distance control with your putter. 

 

 

Edited July 11, 2023 by Righty to Lefty

[MichaelGFox]

wedging for me only made sense when i use a different swing. feels like im kissing my right knee to me left through contact. makes it easier to shallow out and use the bounce and lanches low with spin. its also hard to swing hard but soft thats a feel you only get by wedging smoothers on the range til the cows come home. answers are in the dirt and with your local pga pro

[PracticeSwinger]

2 hours ago, North Butte said:

To my mind, the most useful purpose of analytics for a non-elite golfer is not to inform course management. It's to identify areas which are costing a disproportionate number of strokes. In this case, there's no logical reason you should (on average) be farther from the hole on 40-yard shots than 80-yard shots.

 

If you keep stats on your own game and find that to be the case, the takeaway isn't (try to avoid being 40 yards from the hole). The implication is, make that 40-yard shot a priority in practice and/or lessons.

Agree 100% - and that's why the biggest takeaway I get from tracking my SG values is to 'flip it upside down', i.e. finding my own 'expected number of shots to hole out from distance+lie combo'... says a lot, objectively, about weakenesses