What's more important: Club or Yardage?

[Jason Thurman]

In our discussions of the distance the ball flies, or the ultra-firm conditions of The Open, I'm wondering if anyone has any data on this:

What is the bigger determinant of a player's accuracy on a shot - the club they hit, or the yardage they're covering? In other words, is a player generally equally accurate on all 8 iron shots, regardless of the expected distance (which may vary based on wind or course conditions)? Or is a player generally equally accurate on all 200 yard shots, regardless of the club used (which may vary for the same reason)?

Is there actually an advantage in accuracy to being able to hit a 210 yard 7 iron? Or is it all about bragging rights, and really only as accurate as a 4 iron hit by another player of equal overall skill but lesser distance?

[Jason Topp]

Jason:

While the data is a bit old, Dave Pelz describes a study in his Short Game Bible where he determined that on full swings PGA Tour players' ballstriking ability could be measured by the distance they missed their target expressed as a percentage of the distance of the shot.  He found that the average error rate was pretty consistent for all full swing shots and then jumped for short game shots because the player no longer was able to use a full swing.

So - at least for PGA Tour pros playing an aerial game his study suggests distance is far more important than the club used. 

I am not sure how that study would apply at the Open with firm conditions and wind. 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jason,

The shorter the club, the easier it is to control.

By shorter, I mean shaft length.

[Joe Hancock]

I would imagine trajectory and spin rate off the clubface would enter the discussion as well.

Joe

[Jason Connor]

This is just trigonometry, right?

The golf swing is a swing of angles -- if you miss by leaving the clubface 2 degrees open on a 150 yard shot, you'd be twice as far right as if you did the same on a 75 yard shot.

You'd be 5.2 yards right from 150, 2.6 yards right from 75 (assuming the same swing).

Then as Joe said spin would have an effect too.

[Jason Thurman]

Jason,

The shorter the club, the easier it is to control.

By shorter, I mean shaft length.

Sure. But on the flip side, a club swung with more force is harder to control.

That applies to the spin rates as well. The loft of an 8 iron makes it harder to generate sidespin than on, say, a 5 iron. But at the same time, an 8 iron swung at 99 mph might have the potential to generate more sidespin than a 5 iron swung at 87 mph.

I'm surprised there's no hard data on this since the Pelz study, which I've also read.

[Jason Topp]

Jason,

The shorter the club, the easier it is to control.

By shorter, I mean shaft length.

Makes logical sense but Pelz data would suggest otherwise for PGA Tour players.

[Doug Siebert]

This is just trigonometry, right?

The golf swing is a swing of angles -- if you miss by leaving the clubface 2 degrees open on a 150 yard shot, you'd be twice as far right as if you did the same on a 75 yard shot.

You'd be 5.2 yards right from 150, 2.6 yards right from 75 (assuming the same swing).

Then as Joe said spin would have an effect too.

Unless your swing path 2 degrees right to match your 2 degree open face, hitting the ball with an open face will impart sidespin onto the ball.  As has been pointed out, a more lofted club (or one hit with a higher swing speed) will have more backspin, and that counteracts the sidespin to some extent.  There is also the question of how long the ball is in the air.  If you hit a low trajectory shot that isn't in the air as long it won't spin sideways as much as the same club hit with a very high trajectory.

There are a lot of variables, and I suspect it may be different now with newer balls and more use of cavity back irons by the pros.  Certainly it would be different for modern drivers versus the ones they were using in the 80s.

[Brent Hutto]

In any case it is an empirical question that can only be answered by observing Tour players in action (i.e. Shotlink), not by theorizing from first principles.

[Doug Siebert]

I believe Pelz acquired his data by measuring tour players, not by observation.  Maybe he wasn't quite as accurate as shotlink, but as you say the data is out there for anyone who wished to determine this.

I guess the problem with measuring on course results rather than measuring under test conditions is that players will sometimes aim away from the flag, at least a little bit, when the pin is tucked.  You'd want to acquire your results by checking only shots from the fairway to pins that in the middle of the green where you would expect they'd be going straight at the flag.  Kind of like how they only measure driving distance on holes where players are likely to hit a driver (though that's kind of hard to determine these days when some tour players can hit two fairway woods to reach a 600 yard hole)

[Patrick_Mucci]

In any case it is an empirical question that can only be answered by observing Tour players in action (i.e. Shotlink), not by theorizing from first principles.

Brent,

I don't need shotlink to tell me that PGA Tour players, and most other golfers, are more accurate with a 9-iron than a 4-iron.

The shorter the club, the greater the accuracy.

[Brent Hutto]

Yes Pat, I know that you need no evidence for anything once your mind is made up.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Yes Pat, I know that you need no evidence for anything once your mind is made up.

Brent,

I made my mind up that the sun rises in the East and sets in the West.

I don't need any statistics to confirm same.

Ditto, accuracy with a shorter club versus a longer club.

I guess "common sense" isn't so common anymore.