or Connect
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Golf Talk › Relative Importance of the Long Game, Short Game, etc. (Mark Broadie, Strokes Gained, etc.)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Relative Importance of the Long Game, Short Game, etc. (Mark Broadie, Strokes Gained, etc.) - Page 21

post #361 of 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by peteraleman View Post
 

Well here is my input.  I have been playing since 1992, I have always been a low 100's player, I once broke 100 for a 95 and could never repeat it. In the last 4 years I took a break from the game to tend to my business and just started playing about a little over a month ago.  my first round 140, hard course, but horrible score none the less.  I took some lessons and quickly improved back to my old low 100's score.  Well where am I going with this, I quickly improved drastically with my short game, I have 1 to 2 putt average, no more.  My short game inside the 150 is on the money, this is what keeps me in the low 100's.  Recently I changed my 15 year old driver to a newer one, went to the range for a couple of days to adjust to it, first day out with my new driver, 90, second day out 92. I am now getting in the GIR where I never was able to do before.

 

I am sorry, but the long game is so as important as your short game that both sides have valid arguments, if you have a bad long game you will never get near the scratch players, if you have a bad short game, well the out come is close to being the same.  I can only get better with improving my accuracy now, I finally found my long game with nice straight and long tee shots with a descent fairway shot.  Once I am inside the 150, its over for whom ever is with me!

 

Actually they don't.

 

You said you were a low 100's player. Then you took time off. Then you took lessons and improved your short game and was still a low 100's player. 

 

So were did the short game help you? 

 

But, now you got a new driver. You probably gained distance and accuracy on your mishits. Allowing you be in position to hit more greens, and you dropped 8 strokes. 

 

So, your short game saved you ZERO strokes. Just adding a bit of forgiveness to the driver, improved your game by 8 strokes. 

post #362 of 514

you could be the best putter on earth and 1 put every green , but with no long game you would probably be putting for bogey or worse. A so so putter who hits a bunch of greens in reg will beat you every time

post #363 of 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by mvmac View Post
 

Try telling that to Mike Weir ;-)  Guys shooting even par aren't scrambling a lot for pars, they're hitting more greens than they miss.  As Erik said a few posts back, "the odds of failing to get up and down are always gonna be higher than the odds of three-putting after hitting a GIR."  So the difference between breaking 80 and shooting even usually revolves around how good your long game was, tee to green, rather than how solid your short game was.

I am not a particular Mike Weir fan but he did win the 2003 Masters. A feat not accomplished by many and he was the first left handed golfer to win that tournament.  He has 8 PGA wins and that isn't too bad for a fellow 155 pounds and 5'9".  So I'd take his game short or not.  :offtopic:

post #364 of 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckeyeNut View Post
 

The whole argument is BS...............

 

You need to be good enough to keep the ball in play from the tee............get it on or around the greens in reg....and in the cup.   Pretty GDamn simple.  Nobody gets near scratch without short game...........

 

Please read the thread before jumping in. Nobody - nobody - has said the short game is not important or that you can play well (even breaking 80 or whatever) "without short game."

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ghalfaire View Post
 

I am not a particular Mike Weir fan but he did win the 2003 Masters. A feat not accomplished by many and he was the first left handed golfer to win that tournament.  He has 8 PGA wins and that isn't too bad for a fellow 155 pounds and 5'9".  So I'd take his game short or not.  :offtopic:

 

@mvmac's point is that his short game is still as good as ever, yet he's been struggling with the long game and is barely on the Tour.

post #365 of 514

I've read all the posts and think many are approaching this thread from personal experience position and not an objective one.  If I looked at my game today, the short game kills me so my position would be the short game is more important because I'm losing strokes on it.

 

When I first took up the game and couldn't hit the fairway, it was my long game.  For most of us high handicappers, a drive off the fairway costs us at least 1 stroke, most likely 2.  If I miss the fairway and land in thick rough, I'm likely hitting an iron out of it just to get back on the fairway and then depending on the distance I've got at least one or two more shots to reach the green.

 

Some people tend to forget that their long game sets up their short game. 

post #366 of 514

Personal experience -

 

It's tough to one putt for par on a consistent basis, or "save" bogey when you're in the rough or off the green.

 

It's a heckuva lot easier to get on in regulation and 2 putt for par, or have an outside chance for a birdie.

 

Now, to shoot par over 18, yes, you'll need a short game because you're not going to hit every green.

 

But to stay in the 70's, you either need to hit a high % of greens in regulation, or lean on a great short game. But even a great short game can't save you consistently if you're not hitting greens.

post #367 of 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond View Post
 

Personal experience -

 

It's tough to one putt for par on a consistent basis, or "save" bogey when you're in the rough or off the green.

 

It's a heckuva lot easier to get on in regulation and 2 putt for par, or have an outside chance for a birdie.

 

Now, to shoot par over 18, yes, you'll need a short game because you're not going to hit every green.

 

But to stay in the 70's, you either need to hit a high % of greens in regulation, or lean on a great short game. But even a great short game can't save you consistently if you're not hitting greens.

QFT

post #368 of 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by ghalfaire View Post

I am not a particular Mike Weir fan but he did win the 2003 Masters. A feat not accomplished by many and he was the first left handed golfer to win that tournament.  He has 8 PGA wins and that isn't too bad for a fellow 155 pounds and 5'9".  So I'd take his game short or not.  z8_offtopic.gif

Quote:
Originally Posted by iacas View Post



@mvmac
's point is that his short game is still as good as ever, yet he's been struggling with the long game and is barely on the Tour.

Yes I was referring to Weir's situation the last few years, he's one of the worst ball strikers on tour but his short game is really solid, one of the best pitchers in the world.

The poster I was replying to said you forget bad drives if you get it up and down. I disagree, if you're struggling with your tee ball then you're nervous as hell on every tee because you don't know whether you're going to get the toe hook or the high push. Obviously I'm not talking about the golfer who is hitting it well and just hits one bad drive.
post #369 of 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Desmond View Post
 

Personal experience -

 

It's tough to one putt for par on a consistent basis, or "save" bogey when you're in the rough or off the green.

 

It's a heckuva lot easier to get on in regulation and 2 putt for par, or have an outside chance for a birdie.

 

Now, to shoot par over 18, yes, you'll need a short game because you're not going to hit every green.

 

But to stay in the 70's, you either need to hit a high % of greens in regulation, or lean on a great short game. But even a great short game can't save you consistently if you're not hitting greens.

Thats been my experience as well. I didnt get to single didget hdcp by practicing putting...although it is important. My iron play mid to long range and even 8-pw I eventually became pretty efficient and hitting greens on a regular basis and thus my scores started dropping.

post #370 of 514

There is an extremely high correlation between scoring stats and HC.  Whether it be GIR, Putting stats, and scrambling stats.

 

 

Then on the other extreme, you can take guys like Phil or Tiger who cant hit the broad side of a bard from the tee and hit 4/14 fairways....and card a 69.  LOL....yea, that long game really important!!  Being straight certainly helps, but it certainly isn't the most important stat by a long stretch.

post #371 of 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckeyeNut View Post
 

There is an extremely high correlation between scoring stats and HC.  Whether it be GIR, Putting stats, and scrambling stats.

 

 

Then on the other extreme, you can take guys like Phil or Tiger who cant hit the broad side of a bard from the tee and hit 4/14 fairways....and card a 69.  LOL....yea, that long game really important!!  Being straight certainly helps, but it certainly isn't the most important stat by a long stretch.

The "long game" has been defined in this thread as full shots. Not just tee shots. By that definition both Tiger and Phil have terrific long games, albeit usually recovery shots.

 

If we were only including tee shots in the long game I would agree with you, as long as a player had everything else they could score very well (but would STILL score better if they were hitting more fairways and being closer to the green for their second shots).

post #372 of 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS256 View Post
 

The "long game" has been defined in this thread as full shots. Not just tee shots. By that definition both Tiger and Phil have terrific long games, albeit usually recovery shots.

 

Agree, you can't win as much as they have and not give yourself plenty of birdie chances.  They are both great ball strikers.  I disagree they are usually hitting the green as a "recovery" shot, they aren't Fred Funk off the tee but they also aren't hitting every shot from the tees.

post #373 of 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by mvmac View Post
 

 

Agree, you can't win as much as they have and not give yourself plenty of birdie chances.  They are both great ball strikers.  I disagree they are usually hitting the green as a "recovery" shot, they aren't Fred Funk off the tee but they also aren't hitting every shot from the tees.

Maybe "usually" isn't technically the right word except in hillbilly talk. I'm not sure what the definition of recovery shot is anyway but to me it's anything not in the fairway with the stipulation that all recovery shots are not equal. In fact some under my definition are easy (but not as easy as the fairway).

post #374 of 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckeyeNut View Post
 

Then on the other extreme, you can take guys like Phil or Tiger who cant hit the broad side of a bard from the tee and hit 4/14 fairways....and card a 69.  LOL....yea, that long game really important!!  Being straight certainly helps, but it certainly isn't the most important stat by a long stretch.

 

http://thesandtrap.com/t/58816/65-25-10-practice-ratios-where-to-devote-your-practice-time/180#post_793236

 

Plus, Tiger was #1 in Total Driving for a good chunk of the year, and finished even 2013 at 17th.

post #375 of 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS256 View Post
 

Maybe "usually" isn't technically the right word except in hillbilly talk. I'm not sure what the definition of recovery shot is anyway but to me it's anything not in the fairway with the stipulation that all recovery shots are not equal. In fact some under my definition are easy (but not as easy as the fairway).

 

No problem, I would have a different image of a recovery shot, from out of the trees, out of a fairway bunker, etc.

post #376 of 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by MS256 View Post
 

The "long game" has been defined in this thread as full shots. Not just tee shots.

OK....I won't argue.

 

 

I define the long game as from the tee......  The approach is the scoring game.  I suppose if I am going for a par5 in 2....the long game still applies, but not iron play.

post #377 of 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by BuckeyeNut View Post
 

OK....I won't argue.

 

 

I define the long game as from the tee......  The approach is the scoring game.  I suppose if I am going for a par5 in 2....the long game still applies, but not iron play.

Seems to me like the easy definition is simply that "long game" applies to any full swing shots, and "short game" is everything else.  For me, that changeover occurs right around the 100 yard mark.

 

If you miss the green from 160 with an 8 iron, you wouldn't fault your "short game" for that one, would you?

post #378 of 514

Long game is definitely 200yds plus....

 

Intermediate game is down to 150.......short game is under 150...just throwing that out there......not to be confused with scrambling.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Golf Talk
TheSandTrap.com › Golf Forum › The Clubhouse › Golf Talk › Relative Importance of the Long Game, Short Game, etc. (Mark Broadie, Strokes Gained, etc.)