"Play it forward" is the wrong

[Garland Bayley]

Ok I will take a stab at it Pat.

Garland, the point Pat  and others are trying to make is that if you tee it forward considerably (ie more than at your course) then you will hit closer to greens (note I did not use the GIR term.)

You will hit closer to greens even if you tee it forward only a little as at my course. My points are that 1) the number of golfers that are playing more that 1000 yards beyond their "capabilities" are few so we are talking about moving up a tee, or at most two, 2) you, Pat, and other low handicappers are not authorities on what is fun for them, and 3) you vastly over estimate the effect of teeing it forward as witness by AG's estimate of 2 more GIR to my estimate of .2 GIR, when the calculated value turned out to be .288.

If you hit closer to greens then you will make lower numbers.

At no point have I said otherwise.

If you make lower numbers then you will potentially make more birdies, pars, bogeys, or even double bogeys than you would otherwise have made.

I like that you chose to use the word potentially. Hedging your bets? You will make more birdies and pars. No bogey golfer wants to make more double bogeys. My point is that it will be insignificantly more birdies and pars. If GIR directly correlates to birdies and pars, then it will be insignificantly more birdies and pars. Assuming a linear relationship, the calculation resulting in .288 would lead to one more GIR in a round if you move forward 700 or more yards. That might lead to another par per round, but probably would add a very small percentage of birdies per round.

I agree this will not likely help you in match play.

It is a fact for 99.9% of golfers (I am placing you in the 0.1%) that if they have a shorter club with more loft there will be less dispersion on the shot. Thus, they may be able to use a putter for the next stroke. If that is the case then handicaps will go down. To the majority of golfers this is something desirable.

You neglect course and slope rating in this statement. On average the USGA has worked it out that handicaps will stay the same if you move forward. Clearly the distance challenged will have their handicaps go down. Others, probably the directionally challenged, will have their handicaps go up by moving forward. This may be why some think there is a sandbagging effect exhibited by my handicap. I play a short course, because it is 2.5 miles from home and is affordable. When playing Kalen, I always let him choose the tees. He always chose to play back, which certainly made no sense after witnessing that I was longer off the tee than him in our first outing. It only made sense because he is considerably younger than me.


Correct me if I am wrong here, but I believe that you don't actually care if your handicap goes down?

I care about becoming a better golfer. That is restricted by the amount of time I can spend on it. Therefore, my handicap is what it is until I retire and have more time for golf. Furthermore, you all operate on the mistaken assumption that my handicap would go down if I were to move forward. As I wrote earlier, I have played the ladies tees a few times at my club. I was surprised about how little it helped my score. Moving forward may actually push my handicap up.
 

[Patrick_Mucci]

Joe Leenheer,

I don't understand what you say when you state that you play tee markers that aren't rated.

What club establishes markers but doesn't rate them ?

Or, are you saying that you play from a complex combination of markers from different courses/tee markers

Most courses that have "junior" or "family" tees don't have them rated, probably because it's more cost and hassle than its worth (since the vast majority of people playing those tees are not going to have a handicap anyways.)

Philip,

I understand, but, Joe didn't indicate that he was playing from Junior/Family tees, hence, my interest.

[Nigel Islam]

Others, probably the directionally challenged, will have their handicaps go up by moving forward.

 

[Patrick_Mucci]

"P.S.  Why would a 22 handicap be so quick to accept a match with a 16 handicap without shots ?"

That's easy.

Because it was an estimated handicap.

What do you mean, "estimated handicap" ?
A handicap index is finite, and so is the slope rating, hence, why should anything be estimated ?
And, whose handicap was "estimated", yours or Kalen's ?

People remember their good performances, and often think of them as standard. That's why people tell you to never trust people when they tell how far they drive the ball. The give you their best results, not their average. Besides, he had earned himself a derogatory nickname based on his incompetence at a previous Kings Putter.

Understood, but, what does that have to do with his handicap index and the slope rating of the course ?

So with a 13.3 differential from a hot round at the end of the season this year (which means I'm dishing out money to friends all winter while the handicaps are frozen), by Kalen's methodology I was really a 13 handicap quickly accepting at match with a 16 handicap without shots.

The picture is becoming clearer.

Your handicap index at the time of the match was 13.3.
Kalen's handicap index at the time of the match equated to a 16 handicap on the course to be played.
You masqueraded as a 22 handicap (don't know the equivalent index) and consented to a match with a 16 handicap with no shots given and no shots taken.

I completely understand the situation.

Kalen, where ever you are, you're a moron.

Garland, I'll leave it to JakaB to supply the superlatives.

[Garland Bayley]

Ok I will take a stab at it Pat.

Others, probably the directionally challenged, will have their handicaps go up by moving forward.

 

Which part of the USGA handicap system is set up so that on average the handicap will stay the same no matter what tees you play from didn't you understand? That means that half of the people will have their handicap index (if calculated to several decimal places) go down by moving forward, and half will have it go up by moving forward (which of course means you might have to calculate the index to several decimal digits to find the exact median of all the indexes to determine the two halves). So if the distance challenged are the prototypical players that will have their index go down, then logically it would be the directionally challenged that would end up in the half having their index go up.

[Nigel Islam]

Ok I will take a stab at it Pat.

Others, probably the directionally challenged, will have their handicaps go up by moving forward.

 

Which part of the USGA handicap system is set up so that on average the handicap will stay the same no matter what tees you play from didn't you understand? That means that half of the people will have their handicap index (if calculated to several decimal places) go down by moving forward, and half will have it go up by moving forward (which of course means you might have to calculate the index to several decimal digits to find the exact median of all the indexes to determine the two halves). So if the distance challenged are the prototypical players that will have their index go down, then logically it would be the directionally challenged that would end up in the half having their index go up.

Garland,  half the people will have their handicap go up and half will have them go down whether they move tees or not. The numbers are finite unless you are "estimating" your handicap. They don't stay exactly the same if you keep playing.

[Garland Bayley]

Patrick,

I stated early on that Kalen estimated (presumably he made one up) his handicap to go to his first Kings Putter. Mine has always been a handicap from the USGA system, administered by my club, recording my tournament scores as required, etc.

[Garland Bayley]

Yes Nigel, handicap numbers move.

The point is that if you take Brent for an example, if he set up two handicap accounts, and posted scores from back tees to one account, and posted scores from front tees to the other account, the first account would calculate a higher index for him than the one calculated for him on the second account. This is because he is distance challenged. I believe he posted words indicating this would be the result earlier in the thread.

The USGA system is set up so that the most average of all players could do this and have the indexes calculated by the two accounts to be virtually the same.

Therefore, there must be players that would have the opposite effect from what Brent would see. My hypothesis is that directionally challenged players would dominate this second group of players.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Ok I will take a stab at it Pat.

Garland, the point Pat  and others are trying to make is that if you tee it forward considerably (ie more than at your course) then you will hit closer to greens (note I did not use the GIR term.)

You will hit closer to greens even if you tee it forward only a little as at my course. My points are that

1) the number of golfers that are playing more that 1000 yards beyond their "capabilities" are few so we are talking about moving up a tee, or at most two,
 

That's your distorted perameter.
No one quantified moving forward in 1,000 yard increments.
Others, including myself, explained to you that moving up 25-30 yards a hole translates to 450 to 540 yards, and that's significant for any level of golfer.

2) you, Pat, and other low handicappers are not authorities on what is fun for them, and
 

Just because I've achieved a low handicap doesn't preclude me from knowing what's fun for higher handicaps.
And, I can tell you, unequivically, that making more pars and birdies is fun, for every golfer.


3) you vastly over estimate the effect of teeing it forward as witness by AG's estimate of 2 more GIR to my estimate of .2 GIR, when the calculated value turned out to be .288.

Your estimate is a joke, absent an iota of common sense.
In fact, it's a moronic assertion.

Did either the USGA or me, suggest or indicate that the "slogan" was intended to apply ONLY to your course ?
The "slogans" are generic in form

If you hit closer to greens then you will make lower numbers.

At no point have I said otherwise.

If you make lower numbers then you will potentially make more birdies, pars, bogeys, or even double bogeys than you would otherwise have made.

I like that you chose to use the word potentially. Hedging your bets? You will make more birdies and pars. No bogey golfer wants to make more double bogeys. My point is that it will be insignificantly more birdies and pars. If GIR directly correlates to birdies and pars, then it will be insignificantly more birdies and pars. Assuming a linear relationship, the calculation resulting in .288 would lead to one more GIR in a round if you move forward 700 or more yards. That might lead to another par per round, but probably would add a very small percentage of birdies per round.

Your .288 is absurd and should be discarded as not remotely close to reality.
Conversely, if I move back the same 700 yards, you're stating that I'll only suffer a loss of .288 in GIR, which is beyond moronic.
Oh, that's right, you've gone from being a "supreme" moron on this issue to the most "exalted" moron.

I agree this will not likely help you in match play.

It is a fact for 99.9% of golfers (I am placing you in the 0.1%) that if they have a shorter club with more loft there will be less dispersion on the shot. Thus, they may be able to use a putter for the next stroke. If that is the case then handicaps will go down. To the majority of golfers this is something desirable.

You neglect course and slope rating in this statement.


Both are irrelevant.

A shorter club inherently translates to a tighter shot dispersion pattern, ergo, more birdie/par opportunities.



On average the USGA has worked it out that handicaps will stay the same if you move forward.

That's NOT true, and akin to your claim that there's no such thing as a 50 handicap.


Clearly the distance challenged will have their handicaps go down.

Everybody benefits from shorter distance.

If you think not, let's have a contest.
Get the best PGA Tour Pros in the world and have them hit from 200 yards, and I'll hit from 50 yards and we'll see who has more shots on the green and closer to the hole.



Others, probably the directionally challenged, will have their handicaps go up by moving forward.

Absolutely NOT.
That's one of the dumbest most moronic comments I've ever read on this site.
That you would contend that as you get closer to the hole, you get more INACCURATE, almost defies the existance of any evidence of intelligence,


This may be why some think there is a sandbagging effect exhibited by my handicap.

Ohhh,  it wouldn't be because you're a 13.3 handicap index, claiming to be a 22, would it ?



I play a short course, because it is 2.5 miles from home and is affordable.

What has that got to do with being a 13.3 handicap index on that course and masquerading as a 22 handicap ?


When playing Kalen, I always let him choose the tees. [/color]

That's really kind of you, especially when you're a 13.3 index masquerading as a 22.


He always chose to play back, which certainly made no sense after witnessing that I was longer off the tee than him in our first outing.
It only made sense because he is considerably younger than me.

Let's see, you're longer than he is, have a lower handicap index/handicap than he does, play off the longer tees and graciously agree to play him even.

I have to ask, has Kalen taken an IQ test lately ?


Correct me if I am wrong here, but I believe that you don't actually care if your handicap goes down?

I care about becoming a better golfer.

AHA, then you do care about scoring and making more birdies and pars.
I knew that you'd finally admit so, directly or indirectly.


That is restricted by the amount of time I can spend on it. Therefore, my handicap is what it is until I retire and have more time for golf.

Agreed, it's a 13.3 index, not a 20.0 index, hence, as a 13.3 index, you're better than a bogey golfer.
You're not a bogey or worse golfer as you pretended to be before revealing your handicap index.


Furthermore, you all operate on the mistaken assumption that my handicap would go down if I were to move forward. As I wrote earlier, I have played the ladies tees a few times at my club. I was surprised about how little it helped my score. Moving forward may actually push my handicap up.

That's because you're a moron without any concept of course management.

You see, I knew that with interogation and time that everything would reveal itself, and it has.
Need I say more ?
 

[Garland Bayley]

Patrick,

Either you are pulling my leg, or you are significantly logically, and mathematically challenged, which is not to say you aren't a genius in some other area. Certainly on the golf course you are a genius at playing compared to me.

And, of course your reading comprehension seems to be deficient this morning at least.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Patrick,

Either you are pulling my leg, or you are significantly logically, and mathematically challenged, which is not to say you aren't a genius in some other area. Certainly on the golf course you are a genius at playing compared to me.

And, of course your reading comprehension seems to be deficient this morning at least.

OR, I could be an idiot-savant, or better named, a moron-savant

[Garland Bayley]

Others, probably the directionally challenged, will have their handicaps go up by moving forward.

 

Nigel,

First off, please excuse me for writing handicap sometimes when I mean handicap index.

He is another way off looking at it. If you read the USGA Tee it Forward recommendations and do the calculations you will find that their recommendations would have you hitting wedge or less on 1/2 the par 4s. Now we all know that high handicappers are hopelessly incompetent with 1/2 wedge shots. So if they move back a tee to where they are hitting full 9, PW, and GW on those holes they may actually score the same, maybe even better. Calculating their handicap index from a longer distance with the same scores would cause their index to go down by moving back, and vice versa up by going forward.

[Garland Bayley]

Others, probably the directionally challenged, will have their handicaps go up by moving forward.

 

Here's another example Nigel. The directionally challenged player hits a drive from the back tee to a location where he can't hit the green with his 4 iron. He walks forward to the forward tee, hits a similar drive, but now he can't hit the green with his eight iron either. Both balls get laid up near the green and he gets bogey from each tee. Scoring the same from the back tees as the forward tees results in a lower handicap index.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Others, probably the directionally challenged, will have their handicaps go up by moving forward.

 

Here's another example Nigel.
The directionally challenged player hits a drive from the back tee to a location where he can't hit the green with his 4 iron.
He walks forward to the forward tee, hits a similar drive, but now he can't hit the green with his eight iron either.

Why NOT ?

He's got a far better chance of hitting the green with his 8-iron than he does with his 4-iron.
So, why can't he hit the green with his 8-iron, certainly distance is NOT an impediment.

This is a contrived statement with a predetermined outcome that only you have created.
It's not indicative of real life situations and is merely a figment of your delusional mind.

Both balls get laid up near the green and he gets bogey from each tee.

No they don't.
He hits the green with his 8-iron, he hit's it in the woods with his 4-iron.

Scoring the same from the back tees as the forward tees results in a lower handicap index.

But, they don't score the same, the score from the back tee is inherently higher.
Only a "supreme" moron would insist otherwise

[Patrick_Mucci]

Others, probably the directionally challenged, will have their handicaps go up by moving forward.

 

Nigel,

First off, please excuse me for writing handicap sometimes when I mean handicap index.

He is another way off looking at it. If you read the USGA Tee it Forward recommendations and do the calculations you will find that their recommendations would have you hitting wedge or less on 1/2 the par 4s.

Now we all know that high handicappers are hopelessly incompetent with 1/2 wedge shots.

That's NOT true.
That's your delusional statement, made to predispose the conclusion.
The closer a golfer is to the green, the easier it is to hit the green.
Distance is the inherent factor, not your distorted perception of the game and game of others.


So if they move back a tee to where they are hitting full 9, PW, and GW on those holes they may actually score the same, maybe even better.
So, it's your position that golfers will be more accurate with 9-irons, pitching wedges and gap wedges than they'd be from a distance where they might hit half a wedge ?  ?  ?  

Most golfers I know, who are at the half wedge distance, take out their sand or lob wedge and hit the green.

I'll take ten golfers, each armed with a sand or lob wedge and put them against ten golfers with the same handicap, who are hitting 9-irons, hitting 100 balls each and bet you all day long on the outcome.   The shorter shot guys will win every time.

I've now figured out why you stink at golf.
Your brain doesn't function on the golf course.

Calculating their handicap index from a longer distance with the same scores would cause their index to go down by moving back, and vice versa up by going forward.

But, they're not going to make the same scores.
Yours is a conclusion that ONLY a Supreme moron would make.

[Garland Bayley]

Just a quick search on the internet show what everyone but Patrick knows.

    "How to Hit the Seven Scariest Shots in Golf"

"How to Hit the Seven Scariest Shots in Golf
Jim Flick, GOLF MAGAZINE TOP 100 TEACHER,and Dr. Dick Coop, golf magazine mental game consultant | Published: Friday, December 01, 2006 | 09:47:00 AM |"


"Fear is everywhere in golf. Whether your bugaboo is the first tee, the pond on No. 6, or those short putts you know you should make, there's not a golfer on earth who doesn't feel your pain. It's tough to pull the trigger when you don't know what's going to happen -- or worse, when you do know, and it isn't pretty."

"First, understand that preparation is the best security blanket. When facing a shot that gives you the willies, you'd better have a technique you trust in your back pocket. And even if you do, you need a method of shooing away those demons that are sure to pop up. It's part physical, part mental, which is why we're both talking to you in the same article."

"Here is our take on golf's seven scariest shots. Some are scary for being just plain hard, like the pitch over a bunker; others are tough due to the setting, such as that daunting first tee shot. We've divided up our advice accordingly -- heavy on swing tips for the tough shots, heavy on the mental for the brainteasers. So read on, and fear not."

    1. Approach over water
    2. Pitch Over a Deep Bunker
   3. Dreaded Half-Wedge
    4. First tee shot
    5. Long bunker shot
    6. Downhill four-footer
    7. Next Shot After a Shank

...
Dreaded Half-Wedge

TOP PHOTO
Stand tall to give your arms room to swing.
Flick: Why do amateurs hit the green from this range -- 40 to 60 yards -- only one in three times? Because after swinging full-out, they suddenly have to slow everything down, which is hard to do. The trick is to match your body turn to the slower speed and shorter arc of the club.

Your body and arms need freedom of motion to mesh. At address, bend from the hips and stand a little taller than normal, with a slight knee flex and your weight on the balls of your feet, giving your arms plenty of room to swing (photo). Think of it as a long, flowing pitch rather than a half shot. The key is developing a feel for the appropriate swing length.

Coop: For most golfers, half-wedge territory is rife with bad memories. To combat them, you need some successes in your mental library, and that comes from learning good technique (see Jim's advice) and seeing it work in practice. On the course, since you probably struggle with finding the right swing speed, use my Goldilocks Method. Take practice swings and assess each one: Is it too fast, too slow, or just right? When you make one that's just right, step up to the ball and go.

Read more: http://www.golf.com/instruction/how-hit-seven-scariest-shots-golf#ixzz2pwZY5LNE


"Almost every mid- to high-handicap player (and some low handicap ones) I encounter have trouble with their short pitches"
Score golf, the wedge guy

[Brian Stewart]

I don't really have a dog in this fight but the half-wedge thing is a myth for the high index player.  Just because it is a "scary" shot to in that article doesn't make it true that high index players won't hit more greens when they are closer and won't score better.  What is a half wedge shot for a high index player playing forward anyway?  30 yards?  If that is the case then the high index player should be looking at other options (an example where a better player could help them as a caddie).

Anyway, the reason that a half wedge shot is scary is that it is hard to hit to a stock distance like a full shot but the better player you are (to a certain point) the more this applies.  The half wedge shot is really only scary to people in 7-12 type range (or 5-15 or 8-16 or whatever) and even they will always do much better over time being closer to the green.  The data supports this as fact.  The next time I see an 18+ index with a better chance of hitting the green with a full wedge than something closer will be the first time I have ever seen such a thing.

There are several other points in this thread that I believe are completely false but this one I had to call out.  The idea that most of the strokes of the 18+ index aren't lost around the green is crazy.  The more often they are closer to begin with the more birdies and pars they will make.  I would love to see any real data that supports otherwise.  Feel free to look at all of the data Pelz has compiled on regular players which will support what I am saying.

I'm not saying that there aren't people with yips or whatever that cannot play greenside but they are very much the exception rather than the rule and the idea that being closer won't yield better scores for the vast majority of people is simply not true.

[Keith Grande]

I try to avoid articles that provide mental poison. The terms used, scariest, dreaded etc. do nothing to help the psyche of any golfer, pro, low handicap or high handicap. Maybe one reason handicaps haven't changed much over the years.

You can learn a lot about your game from how you hit wedge shots.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Garland,

What everybody but you understands is that the purpose of the article is to sell magazines.
This is what you offer as third party evidence ?  ?  ?

NONE of my high handicap friends are afraid of the "dreaded" half wedge.

They hit their Lob and Sand wedge less fearful than they hit their longer clubs because they know that they don't have to hit it hard.
There's NO distance requirement as there is with other clubs.

The "dreaded" half wedge is a myth.

[Rob Curtiss]

Does it really matter what tee box you use as long as you play FAST.

golfers need to speed up their routines..they are not professionals. stop taking so long looking for lost balls..

I have played with guys that are scratch and a player that shot over a 100 in the same round..

nobody got mad because all players played quickly

[Garland Bayley]

Brian,

I'll put you down as another needing work on reading comprehension. You seemed to have missed the whole point of the discussion.

Half wedge problems are not a myth to me. They are very real.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Brian,

I'll put you down as another needing work on reading comprehension. You seemed to have missed the whole point of the discussion.

Half wedge problems are not a myth to me. They are very real.

That's just another reason why you need me guiding you around the golf course 

[Nigel Islam]

Garland,

Staying in the Pacific NW, would you be more likely to shoot 101 from the black tees at Pacific Dunes or 97 from the green tees?

[A.G._Crockett]

Garland,
If you could, point me to the post where I made an estimate of 2 more GIR from moving up; I don't believe I ever made an estimate on that here or anywhere else.  It would be an idiotic thing to say because it would depend way too much on the particular golfer and the particular course.  Could be wrong, of course; I've been an idiot before and will be again, I'm sure.  But if I didn't write that, I'd appreciate a more or less accurate retelling of my stuff.  Doesn't seem a lot to ask.

I only reacted to your patently absurd "statistic" that a .8 difference in the course rating would result in a .2 increase in GIR for a bogey golfer.  I will admit that I find it completely looney to believe that moving up 20 to 30 yds. per hole as you say you have would result in only ONE additional GIR every FIVE ROUNDS, but that wasn't the point anyway.  

The point was that the course rating difference between two sets of tees tells us what a scratch golfer should be expected to average, not you.  In fact, on your particular course, which is very short even from the tips, a bogey golfer such as yourself might actually benefit much, much more than the scratch golfer by moving up since the scratch golfer might already be shooting the lights out from the tips.  When the scratch moves up, things may change less than for someone who struggles with distance to begin with.

Which is the point of TIF to begin with...

[Nigel Islam]

AG,
   You don't actually have to hit more greens either. If you get close enough to putt from the fairway you might eliminate the dreaded half wedge shot