[A.G._Crockett]

But I will say this... I'm actually probably WORSE from 100 yards than I am from 135-180.  I tend to chunk wedges.  I never chunk a 7 iron or whatever.  And I spray both.  

I butchered easy wedges into #1, 5, 9 and 10.  I hit one good one -- into #14.  That's fairly typical.  

I know that you know that this makes you one of the smallest subsets in all the world of golf.

[Mike McGuire]

You will make many, many more birdies from an average of 21 feet vs. from an average of 31.5 feet.
 

Dave Pelz has collected tons of data on this. The difference between 21 ft and 31.5 is not that great (your not going to make either one very often)

The key is to get the ball to 10 ft or less where you have a reasonable chance to make it.

If you can't consistantly get your 100 Y shot to 10 ft or less you should not take the risk .

[Tom Huckaby]

I wonder how small of a subset that is....

Because in recent years I have become EXACTLY the same as Shivas.  That is, I hit more greens from 150 than I do from 80-110.  I too chunk wedges, and in an effort to combat that often blade them as well.  None of that happens with a full-swing 7 or 8iron from 150.  It's not a fun way to play this game, lemme tell ya.

 

Interestingly, one man has helped me overcome this sad state... he's a certain often-combative on here, but pussy-cat in person Notre Damer... jeez 5 minutes of advice and he had me hitting pure pitches and wedges.  The task now is ingraining that into my game, and sadly lack of practice time means continued inconsistency.  But at least I know now what to work on.

TH

[Brian Noser]

I am not a technical player but. I use the Dave Pelz method for 110 and in. I get made fun of cause on a set of wedges I have I actually have stickers with the yardages for 3 different swings on them. It works great. If you have problems with the wedges you should try this method.

[Tom Huckaby]

Brian - that Pelz stuff does get a little too mechanical for me, a player who took lessons about 30 years ago and has never thought much about swing mechanics since.  But the Pelz method was more or less what the great Golden Domer advised me about - that is never getting the hands above waste-high for the short ones, lenghtening out to 3/4 and full as the shots get longer.

It's funny though what a large amount of bad shots does to one's psyche.  That is once you have a history of these, it's EXCEEDINGLY difficult to regain confidence and consistency.

Especially when one never practices, due to life realities.

The answer?  Lowered expectations and heightened sense of humor.  I believe both shivas and I excel at this.

 

[Mike Benham]

... I would not hit driver on #16 or 18 ...

Speaking of 18, how is the width of the fairway on the right, post flooding?

[Tom Huckaby]

Good question re 18 - my thoughts before were based on how it used to be - could be a different assessment if the fairway turns differently.

TH

[David Ober]

You will make many, many more birdies from an average of 21 feet vs. from an average of 31.5 feet.
 

Dave Pelz has collected tons of data on this. The difference between 21 ft and 31.5 is not that great (your not going to make either one very often)

The key is to get the ball to 10 ft or less where you have a reasonable chance to make it.

If you can't consistantly get your 100 Y shot to 10 ft or less you should not take the risk .

You're right about the 21 vs. 31 feet issue, but that's not what I was getting at. Think about it this way: If you average 21 feet, then that means you are going to have lots of 10 footers and lots of 30 footers. You are going to make a significant amount of those 10 footers.

If you average 31 feet, then you are going to have a bunch of 15 footers and a bunch of 45 footers.

You are going to make many more 10 footers than you are 15 footers. THAT'S where the difference is, IMHO.

[David Ober]

Still, though, I would challenge you to start keeping track of where you birdies come from. Simply mark down and track each birdie you make and the distance from the pin you were on your approach and then look at the data after 40 or 50 rounds and see what's what.

You willing to do that?  

You're looking for 4-5 years worth of data?

4-5 YEARS?! Heck, that's 4-5 MONTHS for me!!!  

[Bill_McBride]

Shivas, you had a 2-putt birdie on #2 at Rustic Canyon?    That hole is what, 430 yards?  

You ARE da man!  

[Tom Huckaby]

shivas - I think you're right about this applying to every golfer - the amount of risk involved and exact distances just  change a bit due to individual particulars.  For example, the last time my Dad hit a ball 200 yards off the tee was probably in the 80s.  For him, 150 is a 3wood, or would be if he hit such things - he hits his trusty 4iron anywhere from 300-100 into every green.  That is not a typo.

For him, a risk is worth it to get to 100, because that means it's his trusty 7iron, which he hits from 1-100 yards off the green.  That too is not a typo.

Obviously he's as weird as they come.  But the point is it's tough to make this TOO general, or at least too tied to the exact distances.

But what I really want to know is if that's a typo re you reaching #2.  Because weirdly enough although it is 430 yards, I am ready to believe it.... tail wind, rock hard ground....

Still I'd feel better if you meant #3.

 

[Brian Noser]

Huck I was going to say the same thing then I thought about it!! I have been in the bunker in front of the green before, who knows with as short as they mow it he could have putted from 50 yards as bad as his wedge game is

[Tom Huckaby]

My thoughts exactly re the putt... nowhere was it stated that the first one occurred on the putting surface.

 

[Tom Huckaby]

Whew.  The funny thing is how ready to believe it I was.

 

Hell, you can reach #3 with an iron given the right wind - your issue there is HOLDING the green.

TH

[Tom Huckaby]

 
Funny how the ball gets to odd places.

So the other two-putt birdie was #1?

TH

[Tom Huckaby]

I thought somewhere on that other thread you said you had two two-putt birdies.  Oh well, never mind.

Very cool you got to play, in any case.

TH

[Mike Benham]

Shivas quote "... probably half my birdies are 2 putt birdies.  They were at RC.  I birdied 2 and 12.  Laughably misread a few other good chances, but I expected that."    

[Tom Huckaby]

Interesting how we all seem to have mis-read that - I too read that as meaning both birdies at RC were done via the two-putt - but I get it now.

So still no comments about any bets nor overall impressions or comparisons?  You diplomat....

 

[Mike Benham]

I didn't misread it, you are still recovering from too many cervesas ...

[Tom Huckaby]

Well recounted re the bets.

Now be a man and evaluate the course.

 

[Sean_A]

Guys, I really don't think that this boils down to the particulars of a person's individual golf game.  What I'm talking about is a general rule applicable to damn near everybody:  there is no point in taking big driver/tee ball risk when the difference between the driver and the safe play is 100 yards vs. 150.   There's about a 50-60-70 yard difference for me between a driver and a 2-3 iron.  

With rare exceptions, there is almost always a reason to hit driver when the difference is 275 vs. 215 or 250 vs. 190.  There is probably a reason to hit driver when the difference is 220 vs 160 or 170 vs 110 or whatever.  Those are differences worth taking risks for because the incremental likelyhood of shaving a stroke is there.  

And with rare exceptions, there is almost never a reason to try to get 50 yards closer than 150 because from 150 you oughta make par and aren't much less likely to make birdie, and you're doing so with negligible tee ball risk.  

Personally, the only guys who I think should be violating this general rule is guys who are super straight arrows off the tee who hit 80% fairways and are also borderline deadly with a wedge.  If you're anything less than that, the incremental 50-60 yards that you get with the driver on a short 365 yard par 4 aren't worth it when you can hit a far more riskless 210-220-230 yard shot or whatever off the tee.

The bottom line is this:

if I can (a) take a whack at the par 5's when it makes sense and (b) get the ball to 150 in the fairway on every golf hole I play (big IF, but if nonetheless) I will shoot par or better every time.  Period.  End of story.  My sense is that that's true for a lot of decent players.

But we don't shoot par every time we play.  Why?  Because we're not at 150 in the fairway on every hole we play.  Now, of course there are a variety of reasons for this, but at least for me, culprit numero uno is taking myself out of the hole from the tee.  So why should I do that to myself if and when I play for score?  Answer:  I shoudn't.  And neither should anybody else, unless they're Cal Peete times Fred Funk.

Shivas

In the top paragraph you want to apply the "rule" to "damn near everybody", but later you refer to "decent" players being able to hit greens from 150 yards just as well as from 100 yards.  To me, this sounds like a wide gap between "decent" and "damn near..."

Also, isn't the whole point of all this technology in golf to hit the ball further so one can be closer to the hole for the next shot?  If 100 out or 150 yards out is inconsequential, why are people (including the very best players) buying the new gear?

Ciao

Sean

[Tom Huckaby]

I"m on a board call right now, but suffice it to say, I told Lynn that RC is a dynamite golf course for $50 or whatever it was, and I don't see how anyone could not see it that way...you just don't get greens like that for fifty bucks.  

Well hell everyone says that - very diplomatic.  Hell I firmly believe with no hesitation it's the best bang for the buck course in our state, and it's not even very close.  Yes I include PG Muni in that assessment.

I just recall getting torn a new one at one point for saying that exact thing - that is, why was I throwing in the cost factor and not just touting its overall greatness regardless of cost?  Why was I limiting it so?

It's your turn on the hot seat, my friend.

 

[Tom Huckaby]

It's funny to me how far some people do hit the ball.  Those are real distances for shivas without a doubt.  But mine go like this.

His 150 - "half 8 iron/smooth 9 distance - is my 125.

His 250 - "where you'd hit a 1 iron or 4 wood" - is my 215 or so - that is if I had a 1iron or 4wood - for me 2iron hybrid can be trusted up to 205, 3wood up to 225.

His 100 - "full lob wedge distance" - is 75 for me.  I swear I can't hit an LW farther than that, and in fact never try - the ball just goes up and not out if I take a hard pass as it.  53* SW for me is good for 90 or so, that's it.

In any case I do continue to concur that it's not worth significant risk to get to where one can have an LW or SW as opposed to 8/9 iron, whereas it is to get it to where one can have a mid-iron as opposed to a wood.  

TH

[Sean_A]

Shivas

I think you are thinking like a low capper and trying to apply a rule for everybody.  I don't think this is a reasonable expectation because as Mr. Hutto states, a 20 capper can hit any club anywhere and is much more likely to do so than a 5 capper.  I can understand your theory when there is trouble ahead, but for 20 cappers there is trouble ahead for every shot.  

My approach for anybody (assuming they are presently in a good position) is to try and use a club that you are comfortable/confident with (and this can change daily).  Second, try and measure the distance to trouble and not bring that trouble into play unless unless you are good enough to take advantage and be appropriately rewarded.  

I spose this is akin to how does one play in matchplay?  Do you play the course or the man?  Many swear that playing the course is the only way to go.  Others (probably more gambling types) suggest that you play the man.  Of course, there can be no steadfast rule.  I think we definitely agree on one thing: It is essential to know the "rules" before one can decide if they should be broken.  

Ciao

Sean

[Scott Cannon]

And with rare exceptions, there is almost never a reason to try to get 50 yards closer than 150 because from 150 you oughta make par and aren't much less likely to make birdie, and you're doing so with negligible tee ball risk.  

Sure there is...it's called the Miss Packman syndrome.
My wife and I would eat at a burger joint a few years back that had a Miss Packman. You remember the game right? You would eat the dots, and some of the dots were bigger, and if you eat those, you could eat the pursuing ghosts for extra points .
Anyway my wife would eat the big dots with no ghosts in sight. I would say"wait until there are more ghost around you, then you can eat them for points". She never would, but would clear 3 or more screens on her first try.
I on the other-hand would go to a corner that had a big dot, wait for all the pursuing ghost to surround me, the eat the big dot. then I would have them all there to eat and score the most points.
I never got past the first screen...ever.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()