Jump to content
Mr Puddle

Driving for Show, Putting for Dough, or Is It?

149 posts / 8383 viewsLast Reply

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, trainsmokegolf said:

It's not clear cut.  I find golfers who are more diligent about working on their short game,  end up winning more matches and placing better. I think it breaks down to mental game,  "golf is 90 percent mental". When people are making their short putts,  it allieves their anxieties more than slightly improved ball striking.

I think the idea of amateur golfers, who work more on their short games, score better than those who don't, is some what viable. The reason being that alot of amateus tee, and approach games are pretty similar. The difference in their better/worse play revolves around a better short, scoring game.

Most amatures don't spend enough time on their longer club games. Practicing their short game is both easier, and cheaper, usually being free. 

Don't misunderstand my opinion. I do believe one can save more strokes with their tee/approach games, but only if they apply their practices correctly in those two areas. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Want to hide this ad? Register for free today!

1 minute ago, Patch said:

The reason being that alot of amateus tee, and approach games are pretty similar. The difference in their better/worse play revolves around a better short, scoring game

Similarly bad, yes.  Short game makes a difference amongst your peers, but won't take you to the next level of play; ballstriking is the difference between the "tiers" of playing ability.  I have a good short game, probably better than many scratch golfers I know.  However, they consistently strike the ball better than I do, e.g., hit longer tee balls and in play, hit more greens and closer, at a higher rate than I do.  As such, they don't have the need for the short game like I do.  The short game is like an insurance policy--better to not need it.  Hit a long drive in play, hit the green or nGIR, roll it in or to tap-in range and move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

29 minutes ago, Patch said:

I think the idea of amateur golfers, who work more on their short games, score better than those who don't, is some what viable. The reason being that alot of amateus tee, and approach games are pretty similar. The difference in their better/worse play revolves around a better short, scoring game.

Most amatures don't spend enough time on their longer club games. Practicing their short game is both easier, and cheaper, usually being free. 

Don't misunderstand my opinion. I do believe one can save more strokes with their tee/approach games, but only if they apply their practices correctly in those two areas. 

 

 

But then there's the amateur who pounds away on the range... then walks right by the chipping area and practice green to their car in the parking lot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Zekez said:

But is it?  He didn't address my question that it seems like driving is more important than approach shots because of the potential for penalties on the tee shot...for league golfers

It's still approach shots.

2 hours ago, shanksalot said:

If this premise is "set in stone" how much data was used to make it so? There are some 50-60 million golfers in the world and unless data from at least half that many is used I don't see how anyone can say it is set in stone.

Far and away more than enough to render it accurate. Requiring 30 million golfers in the data set is just a way of deflecting.

2 hours ago, shanksalot said:

These is not enough info to support this premise is "set in stone." 

You don't seem to be aware of what the data is, but you know enough to declare it not "set in stone"? A phrase only @lastings used after @edomingox used first in the negative?

2 hours ago, trainsmokegolf said:

It's not clear cut.

It's pretty clear cut.

2 hours ago, trainsmokegolf said:

I find golfers who are more diligent about working on their short game

We're not talking about individuals or ridiculously small sample sizes.

2 hours ago, trainsmokegolf said:

I think it breaks down to mental game,  "golf is 90 percent mental".

Oh boy.

1 hour ago, ncates00 said:

Research strokes gained data.  It makes sense.  Go read LSW too.  

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Ball strikers win tournaments.

To be clearer on that last part: the hot putters that week of the "on" ball strikers that week win events. Ball striking is the table stakes, putting is the luck of the river card.

1 hour ago, ncates00 said:

They're misinformed and don't accurately perceive reality.

Putting gets a lot of weight, too, because it's the final act, and because it's largely binary. It's in or out. Unlike approach shots, which can be 39 feet away on the green or 18 feet away in the rough, or 22 feet away in a bad lie, or 30 yards away in a bunker… or five, six, seven, eight, nine, nineteen, twenty nine, etc. feet away on the green… and anything else.

1 hour ago, ncates00 said:

It makes people think they are better than they are and blinds them to the fact they suck at ballstriking.

We used to get a chuckle out of the number of 15 handicappers who would join the site and say "I'm a great ball striker but I'm a 15 because of my putting and short game." If that were literally the case, it would be the most obviously horrible short game and putting combo ever seen - like full on yips on EVERY shot inside of 50 yards.

Truth is most people over-rate their ballstrikingi and under-rate their putting and short game.

1 hour ago, ncates00 said:

The golf swing, at its best, requires athletic ability.  Putting does not.  Any one can learn to putt, and that's largely the reason why people go with the putting and short game addage--to pad their ego, to make them think they're not far away and that great golf is only a few more putts made away. 

I think that's a big part of it. Ditto for the mental game - it's a way of conning oneself into thinking you're just a better thought away from being scratch.

51 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

You never see through the veil of your own ego-protecting false sense of your lack of ability.  That guy probably keeps it together in the long game better than they realize because they likely only see that guy when they meet on the green after they've hit it all over the place.  Thus, they missed all the great shots in between and only saw him make a few putts or get up and down here or there.  Plus, they forget how this plays out over an entire season; one round of great short play doesn't mean that should be the basis for your game!  There's more strokes to be had in the long game than in the short game, but long game takes a lot of work.

Uh huh.

34 minutes ago, Patch said:

I think the idea of amateur golfers, who work more on their short games, score better than those who don't, is some what viable.

I don't understand this.

We're not talking about individual golfers. Were we, I could be the counter-argument: I almost never practice putting, and I haven't really practiced my short game more than an hour (total) in the last two years.

If you're talking generally about five handicappers versus ten handicappers… then again, about 2/3 of the difference in their scoring is going to be in the full swing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

In this thread we can't talk about individual cases,  nevermind golf is an individual sport,  just focus on cherry picked studies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, trainsmokegolf said:

In this thread we can't talk about individual cases,  nevermind golf is an individual sport,  just focus on cherry picked studies. 

"Cherry picked?"  You do play golf, right?  Even common sense affords the understanding of the importance of the golf swing over the short game.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

3 minutes ago, trainsmokegolf said:

In this thread we can't talk about individual cases,  nevermind golf is an individual sport,  just focus on cherry picked studies. 

Because individual cases aren't statistically significant.

Since you think we are focused on cherry picked studies, please link some studies that support your point of view

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

4 minutes ago, trainsmokegolf said:

In this thread we can't talk about individual cases,  nevermind golf is an individual sport,  just focus on cherry picked studies. 

Until you're hitting 70% GIR on average, I don't want hear anything about short game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 minute ago, klineka said:

Because individual cases aren't statistically significant.

Since you think we are focused on cherry picked studies, please link some studies that support your point of view

When you are staring at a 7 footer within striking distance of winning an event,  the statistics don't matter,  you need to make the putt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, trainsmokegolf said:

When you are staring at a 7 footer within striking distance of winning an event,  the statistics don't matter,  you need to make the putt. 

How the hell did you get to the 7 footer?  Which requires more ability--the "getting there" or the final putt?  Of course, the putt matters, but you're missing the point of this discussion and failing to realize the proven fact that ballstriking is the key to golf.  Go watch anybody putt.  Literally any one can learn to putt.  The same is not true in ballstriking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Just now, ncates00 said:

How the hell did you get to the 7 footer?  Which requires more ability--the "getting there" or the final putt?  Of course, the putt matters, but you're missing the point of this discussion and failing to realize the proven fact that ballstriking is the key to golf.  Go watch anybody putt.  Literally any one can learn to putt.  The same is not true in ballstriking.

I agree with you that ball striking is so critical,  totally agree. Putting is critical as well,  there are a lot of golfers out there who confirm that working hard on their short game yields great results,  so why hand waive that stuff and keep pointing to reading material. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, trainsmokegolf said:

I agree with you that ball striking is so critical,  totally agree. Putting is critical as well,  there are a lot of golfers out there who confirm that working hard on their short game yields great results,  so why hand waive that stuff and keep pointing to reading material. 

It's about reading the topic. Nobody's saying putting is unimportant. But it's often vastly over-stated, generally speaking. Putting is about 1/2 as important as driving and nearly 1/3 as important as approach shots in terms of "Separation Value®" - the amount that separates one level of player from another.

Driving: 28%
Approach: 39%
Short Game: 19%
Putting: 14%

14% isn't unimportant, but it's not "super important" nor are you going to get what I call "great results" if you've got a great short game and putting game while being relatively poor at ball striking.

32 minutes ago, trainsmokegolf said:

In this thread we can't talk about individual cases,  nevermind golf is an individual sport,  just focus on cherry picked studies. 

These are not cherry picked studies at all. You're arguing from a position of ignorance here man.

18 minutes ago, ncates00 said:

How the hell did you get to the 7 footer? Which requires more ability--the "getting there" or the final putt?  Of course, the putt matters, but you're missing the point of this discussion and failing to realize the proven fact that ballstriking is the key to golf.

Seriously. The average 90s golfer out-putts a PGA Tour player ~10% of the time. The average 70s golfer out-putts a PGA Tour player >30% of the time. Gonna quote Mark Broadie on that one:

Quote

We all have good days on the course. How often does a 90-golfer putt better than a tour pro? Strokes gained putting to the PGA Tour benchmark provides a good estimate of the answer: A 90-golfer will beat a pro in almost 10% of rounds. An 80-golfer’s SGP will beat a pro’s almost 20% of the time. And a scratch golfer will putt better than a pro more than 30% of the time. Amateur golfers aren’t bad putters!

Broadie, Mark. Every Shot Counts: Using the Revolutionary Strokes Gained Approach to Improve Your Golf Performance and Strategy (p. 56). Penguin Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

4 hours ago, trainsmokegolf said:

. I think it breaks down to mental game,  "golf is 90 percent mental". 

Yeah...and the people who win are those who "want it more". 🙄

1 hour ago, trainsmokegolf said:

I agree with you that ball striking is so critical,  totally agree. Putting is critical as well,  there are a lot of golfers out there who confirm that working hard on their short game yields great results,  so why hand waive that stuff and keep pointing to reading material. 

Of course it yields results. Of course a good short game can turn an 80 into a 76 or a 90 into an 85.

But that doesn't negate the fact that driving sets everything up.

If you cannot drive the ball into play consistently, as soon as you are on a course which has any length at all, or has trouble off the fairway, you will never break 90.

Courses which do not penalise errant tee shots or are so short that they still allow you to hit short irons into every green make very poor golfers think they are good players.

People talk about breaking 80 and stuff like that - as if it is an indicator of ability. You aren't comparing apples with apples. A 75 on some courses is a 95 on others. 

When someone says "I'm a 70s shooter" or a "low 80s shooter" -where? On what course ? In what conditions?

If you stand on a tee and watch a hundred players tee off I'll bet you can tell the ones who are the good players after that one shot. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps some perceive that saving strokes is "quicker" to learn with their short game vs their long game? Maybe they don't care about statistical averages. 

Is it easier to learn to putt, time wise, than to learn how to drive the ball competitively?

Is chipping close to the pin easier to learn than a full swing shot from the fairway hitting the green? Again, time wise.

Is a 40 yard pitch shot easier to learn than a full swing 100 yard approach shot? (Time wise)

Right, wrong, or indifferent, there are thousands of pieces of info out there that states "the quickest way, time wise, to save strokes is to practice the short game". 

There's even a sizeable amount of instruction out there that says learning game backwards, from green to tee is a good way to lean to play well. The reasoning being that learning the easier strokes first leads to learning the tougher strokes easier, and faster. That while learning the tougher, full  swings, the golfer can fall back on their already proven short hame to make up stroke count. I have actually seen this type instruction work for quite a few golfers.. 

False info? Yeah, maybe for most, but not for all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

1 minute ago, Patch said:

Perhaps some perceive that saving strokes is "quicker" to learn with their short game vs their long game? Maybe they don't care about statistical averages. 

Is it easier to learn to putt, time wise, than to learn how to drive the ball competitively?

Is chipping close to the pin easier to learn than a full swing shot from the fairway hitting the green? Again, time wise.

Is a 40 yard pitch shot easier to learn than a full swing 100 yard approach shot? (Time wise)

Right, wrong, or indifferent, there are thousands of pieces of info out there that states "the quickest way, time wise, to save strokes is to practice the short game". 

There's even a sizeable amount of instruction out there that says learning game backwards, from green to tee is a good way to lean to play well. The reasoning being that learning the easier strokes first leads to learning the tougher strokes easier, and faster. That while learning the tougher, full  swings, the golfer can fall back on their already proven short hame to make up stroke count. I have actually seen this type instruction work for quite a few golfers.. 

False info? Yeah, maybe for most, but not for all. 

You're finally saying it correctly.  Short game is easier and quicker; but that doesn't mean it has the most benefit long term or in overall quality of your game.  The long game is the biggest piece of the puzzle that has the greatest impact, but it is not easy and it is not quick.  You are correct on this point. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

30 minutes ago, Patch said:

Perhaps some perceive that saving strokes is "quicker" to learn with their short game vs their long game? Maybe they don't care about statistical averages. 

Is it easier to learn to putt, time wise, than to learn how to drive the ball competitively?

Nobody here has said otherwise.

30 minutes ago, Patch said:

Is chipping close to the pin easier to learn than a full swing shot from the fairway hitting the green? Again, time wise.

Is a 40 yard pitch shot easier to learn than a full swing 100 yard approach shot? (Time wise)

Ditto. Nobody's said otherwise.

30 minutes ago, Patch said:

False info? Yeah, maybe for most, but not for all. 

No, info nobody's argued with at all. You're not reading what's been typed @Patch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

2 hours ago, trainsmokegolf said:

When you are staring at a 7 footer within striking distance of winning an event,  the statistics don't matter,  you need to make the putt. 

PGA TOUR pros only make that 7’ putt 50% of the time. So in your cherry picked scenario what do you make of that? You’re assuming your cherry picked golfer has that putt for par or birdie? How did he do that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...