My mistake. I had been working with the USGA Slope guide, where they measured the 2/3 probability of hitting a target, where as users of the stat system measure 99% probability in width, equating to 60-64 yards at 300, or 20+%, plus or minus.
Not a mistake, just a different way of looking at it. For scoring purposes, we have to consider closer to 90%+ of the shots hit, not only about 2/3, particularly when the outer 1/3 result in many more strokes.
Now your rejoinder to that was that even on what most would consider a highly strategic hole like the first at RMGC Composite, there is no statistical advantage to angles shown in play in the Presidents Cup.
I have, several times, called out the first hole at RMGC in the Presidents Cup as an example of a rare time when the angle did matter.
These are the most elite golfers imaginable. Nothing like average golfers on average courses that represent the vast majority of the millions of shots referenced above.
The problem with that is that the data is consistent from 15 handicappers to Tour players. Angles often matter LESS to Tour players as they're more point-to-point than even the 15s.
So, what would be most convincing to me is if we could be shown the statistics of the millions of shots of the whole spectrum of golfers only on holes that are clearly built to the strategic style.
We have that kind of data. And on several occasions, I'm given examples… like the ninth at Pine Needles one time. And each time, they fail to show anywhere near as much strategy as people think.
And yet, because I'm a low-ball, low-spin player (rolling ball) at this point in my life, even on the low caliber of courses I tend to play, I come across one or two shots a round that could really be considered strategic and I greatly enjoy playing them, even when I'm not really able to always take advantage, which is what I referring to in the item below.
I've always said that the angles don't matter… unless the ball is rolling. It's still largely a generalization, but it's a VERY wide, deep generalization.
I would love to see this for a course like Pacific Dunes. On #6, I'd have to imagine that a tee shot played down the right side of the fairway would yield a significant advantage over a shot down the left. That hole is probably a true outlier and an extreme example of angles actually mattering.
Nobody's said that angles NEVER matter. Edoardo in fact pointed out that you need a LOT of width and firmer conditions for them to matter. The 6th at Pacific Dunes may be one of the exceptions.
100% spot on, particularly the point that lumping all courses together is both a quantitative and logical error.
No, as I can look at thousands of times players play one specific hole.
Erik inevitably will tell us that angles do matter for shots on the ground, certain wind conditions, and the like. In other words, the exceptions swallow the rule, but the rule is the rule because the data is the data, except when it is not.
No, the exceptions remain rare.
I believe Erik acknowledges that angles very rarely do matter in high-level golf. And that they matter more, although still very little, the more the ball runs (due to turf or type of golfer).
Correct.
The question remains: is there any advantage to be had, on occasion, from *accidentally* finding oneself on one side of the fairway instead of the other?
I disagree that it's a good question.
Dustin Johnson was once asked why he decided to go after a tucked flag on the 17th (71st) hole of an event. He stuffed it to two feet and tapped in for birdie, winning by two eventually.
His answer: "I pulled it." He wasn't aiming there. He stuffed it "accidentally."
Two bits to this:
- The reward is often very small.
- The risk more than outweighs it.
If there is a hole where there's a benefit, just delight in the times your dispersion played at the "proper" place puts a ball just beside the penalty area or bunker leaving a great angle that'll gain you a fraction of a shot.
But it's not something you can plan to do often. It's an accident. An outlier. Toward the fringe of your dispersion.
Which means that, for me, an average golfer, angles *do* matter, and can lead to me shooting lower scores, even if I got to the better approach angle *accidentally*.
Yeah, the thing is… the data doesn't really support this. At all.
If your shot pattern with a 7I is as wide and deep as you say it is, the bunker you don't always carry is irrelevant - if it's short right and you're in the left side of the fairway, you're still gonna come up short right pretty often. It may be a slightly better angle for the second shot, but again… you still don't aim at the left side of the fairway.
I've never denied that angles can matter a little for the shot… the problem comes in trying for those angles, not just accepting when your dispersion and variability put you there.
And in the millions of rounds we (Lou, me, etc.) have at our disposal… there are a LOT of "average golfers." They still don't matter much at all.
But, and this is the essence of it all: IF those ideal approach angles that matter and that can lower my scores are accessed accidentally, then they also must matter and serve as potential stroke savers if accessed intentionally.
Oy. We aren't past this, ten years after ESC, LSW, etc.? No. The small reward (if there is one, and there often isn't even when golfers swear there should be - an approach shot angle into a green is often a matter of a few degrees, and not nearly enough to matter much) is very seldom worth the much higher risk of trying to *intentionally* hit there. That's almost the whole point behind "angles don't matter."
Dustin Johnson "pulled it." Had he pulled it another eight feed, he'd have had to work his butt off to make par. He wasn't aiming there. He wasn't intentionally trying to hit it to two feet.
Not sure how relevant this is - but Hal Sutton recently did a Golf.Com interview.
I don't give anecdata much weight.
Crazy to see this thread up to 15 pages 
Of course angles matter especially on any well designed golf course from the time one tees off until they hole their putt.
You seem to have read none of them.
I caught a few moments of the final round of the PGA Tour event today. The competitor hit a nice drive to the left side of the fairway. The commentator remarked: "He's set himself up with a good angle to the pin."
Many of them still think putting is the most important part of golf, or that the ball starts in the direction of the path.