Would You Rather…?

[WillieT]

2 hours ago, ChetlovesMer said:

Would You Rather Number 64:
Would you rather be a person who loves to win?

or 

Would you rather be a person who hates to lose? 

Bonus question: You can respond with what you actually think you are, in addition to which one you'd like to be. 

Definitely in the loves to win camp, but it’s more enjoying the win as I was raised to accept the fact your value is not the win but rather the grace exhibited in defeat.  So - makes the most of the wins and try to cultivate positives in the losses.  In the weekly men’s group event I’ve shared in the pot some, but more times than not I haven’t.  We are only talking a few bucks - so it’s not a life changing event.

[Clemsonfan]

In golf, I love to win.
 

In every other sport, I hate to lose, and it is an awful way to play since it leads to burnout. I played collegiate tennis and went 28-9 my freshman year. I can tell you about every one of those lost matches and I am 60 years old.i quit after my sophomore year and didn’t play again, at least competitively, until I was 48!

[ChetlovesMer]

Would You Rather #65:

Would you rather be a golfer who can control the distance you hit your irons within a yard or two, but left right dispersion is 15 yards. 

or

Would you rather be able to hit your irons pretty much dead straight but your distance control is only plus or minus 10 percent. 
 

[klineka]

1 minute ago, ChetlovesMer said:

Would You Rather #65:

Would you rather be a golfer who can control the distance you hit your irons within a yard or two, but left right dispersion is 15 yards. 

or

Would you rather be able to hit your irons pretty much dead straight but your distance control is only plus or minus 10 percent. 
 

The first choice, absolutely no doubt IMO. 

A 15yd dispersion is PGA Tour level with a 7 iron. you mean to tell me I'm going to hit my number within 1-2 yds AND be like 8yds left or right at the most? Yeah I'm taking that every single time. There'd be almost no excuse to miss a green honestly.  

A distance control of +- 10% is 40yds from 200yds out. That's not good. 

[ChetlovesMer]

3 minutes ago, klineka said:

The first choice, absolutely no doubt IMO. 

A 15yd dispersion is PGA Tour level with a 7 iron. you mean to tell me I'm going to hit my number within 1-2 yds AND be like 8yds left or right at the most? Yeah I'm taking that every single time. There'd be almost no excuse to miss a green honestly.  

A distance control of +- 10% is 40yds from 200yds out. That's not good. 

Well, I kind of suck. 
I meant it as 15 yards to the left or 15 yards to the right. ... Which would actually be a 30 yard dispersion. But I'm an idiot... so there's that. 

[klineka]

3 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

Well, I kind of suck. 
I meant it as 15 yards to the left or 15 yards to the right. ... Which would actually be a 30 yard dispersion. But I'm an idiot... so there's that. 

I'd still take the first option. Knowing exactly how far your ball is going to carry every single time is huge. 

Plus an average dispersion of 30yds isn't that big, that's still going to result in the overwhelming majority of your shots on the green. 

 

[iacas]

30 minutes ago, ChetlovesMer said:

Would You Rather #65:

Would you rather be a golfer who can control the distance you hit your irons within a yard or two, but left right dispersion is 15 yards. 

or

Would you rather be able to hit your irons pretty much dead straight but your distance control is only plus or minus 10 percent. 

First option, easily. ± 15 yards with an 8I is unacceptably poor. Every iron would basically overlap two other irons plus a little into the other one (max of one, min of the one two irons away).

[GolfLug]

5 hours ago, ChetlovesMer said:

Would You Rather #65:

Would you rather be a golfer who can control the distance you hit your irons within a yard or two, but left right dispersion is 15 yards. 

or

Would you rather be able to hit your irons pretty much dead straight but your distance control is only plus or minus 10 percent. 
 

Option 1 for 8 iron and above. (150 yards and above), Option 2 for 9 iron and below.

To pick one, since 75% or my irons are 9 iron or less (I play my rounds at 6,000-6,200 yards 90% times), I would settle for Option 2. Basically under Option 1 a 15 yards dispersion left or right for short irons and wedges would be terrible. I mean who wants to hit half wedges 15 yards left or right? That would make me quit golf. But OTOH the +/-10% (10 yards long/short variance but dead straight) would be manageable.

[klineka]

2 minutes ago, GolfLug said:

I mean who wants to hit half wedges 15 yards left or right? That would make me quit golf.

I think you're underestimating the lateral accuracy of mid/high handicaps even with wedges in hand. 

[GolfLug]

8 minutes ago, klineka said:

I think you're underestimating the lateral accuracy of mid/high handicaps even with wedges in hand. 

Right, genie said he will banish you to terrible lateral accuracy (+/- 15 yards) under option 1.   

[GolfLug]

2 hours ago, klineka said:

I think you're underestimating the lateral accuracy of mid/high handicaps even with wedges in hand. 

Did you mean overestimate?

[iacas]

3 hours ago, klineka said:

I think you're underestimating the lateral accuracy of mid/high handicaps even with wedges in hand. 

Plus, if ALL of your irons are guaranteed to go the right distance but just 15 within a 15 yard right or left window… you can lay way back off the tee, find way more fairways, and still shoot good scores. No need to hit driver to get into 9I range if a 4I (which will find the fairway every time if it's 30 yards wide or wider) and hit a 5I to the green. Easy!

[ChetlovesMer]

6 minutes ago, iacas said:

Plus, if ALL of your irons are guaranteed to go the right distance but just 15 within a 15 yard right or left window… you can lay way back off the tee, find way more fairways, and still shoot good scores. No need to hit driver to get into 9I range if a 4I (which will find the fairway every time if it's 30 yards wide or wider) and hit a 5I to the green. Easy!

Hmmm.... That's pretty good. Very clever, young man. 

[WillieT]

10 hours ago, ChetlovesMer said:

Would You Rather #65:

Would you rather be a golfer who can control the distance you hit your irons within a yard or two, but left right dispersion is 15 yards. 

or

Would you rather be able to hit your irons pretty much dead straight but your distance control is only plus or minus 10 percent. 
 

First - glad to see these popping up again.

Now to the topic at hand - I would rather be option 1.  If I know how far it's going (I mean a yard or two) I can always play to the wider parts of the fairway and/or the green and still do reasonably well.  Now if I could just really hit the "number" that well. 

[GolfLug]

So hit the😝 irons crooked AND play layup golf?? Hahaha.. no thanks. I would rather stay home. 😊

[p1n9183]

On 3/10/2025 at 12:29 PM, ChetlovesMer said:

Would You Rather #65:

Would you rather be a golfer who can control the distance you hit your irons within a yard or two, but left right dispersion is 15 yards. 

or

Would you rather be able to hit your irons pretty much dead straight but your distance control is only plus or minus 10 percent. 

I go with option #2. 
Since my average approach shot is around 130-150, both dispersions are almost equal but I think that in general missing the green short is better than missing left or right. Of course missing long is in general the worst but I can club down and always be on the green or short.  

 

[klineka]

19 hours ago, GolfLug said:

Did you mean overestimate?

Probably semantics but I used underestimating in the sense that there is some number that represents the lateral dispersion for mid/high handicaps and what you think that number is is probably lower than what it actually is. 

So I think (without any real facts) that you're underestimating the actual dispersion number which yeah I guess is overestimating their actual accuracy. 

[GolfLug]

1 hour ago, klineka said:

Probably semantics but I used underestimating in the sense that there is some number that represents the lateral dispersion for mid/high handicaps and what you think that number is is probably lower than what it actually is. 

So I think (without any real facts) that you're underestimating the actual dispersion number which yeah I guess is overestimating their actual accuracy. 

Fair enough and I honestly wasn't trying to trip you up on semantics or rhetoric (I hate the eff out of it when someone does that to me so..). I thought it was a relevant clarification I asked for on what you meant and how I responded. So thanks.

I can understand ways Option 1 would be great. For example 180 yards out, I would be thrilled to have only a 30 yard spread guaranteed given that distance would be spot on, but not from like 70 yards in. While what you say about lateral spread maybe true for the general golfing population I responded from a personal choice perspective, and I can honestly say if my lateral spread with a wedge was 30 yards wide, I would quit golf. I really would and it wouldn't even be about scores. Heck I would even say people underestimate how much of a gift 'dead straight' is.      

Anyway, anyone who is tight/loose straight-ways is probably similarly tight/loose sideways too so the set of choices are an improbable combination to begin with and we are just having a little fun here. Hoping all of it is taken in a light vein.