Relative Importance of Driving/Approach Shots, Short Game, Putting, etc. (LSW, Mark Broadie, Strokes Gained, etc.)

[billchao]

2 hours ago, criley4way said:

I have a problem with this whole conversation. Why are we assuming that there is 1 answer for everyone or even that everyone is asking the same question.

While I generally agree with what you're saying, that's not really what this thread is about. It's about the fact that the long game is more important than the short game (has greater impact on scoring), not necessarily what areas are the best for individual improvement. That depends on the individual.

[iacas]

3 hours ago, criley4way said:

This is a generalization and should be considered for average golfers as I think it becomes much more personal when you are looking at low single digits.

It is a generalization, but it applies to the VAST majority of golfers: they lose far more strokes from the full swing ("long game" isn't about distance) than the short game or putting. For the golfers for whom that is untrue… they've got the yips or something. I caddied in a round where another guy in the playing group could have shot 65 with me putting for him (and not even putting super well). He three putted four times from inside of three feet. Double hit a putt, too. No kidding. Shot 78 or something. But that's rare as heck.

3 hours ago, criley4way said:

This is a generalization and should be considered for average golfers as I think it becomes much more personal when you are looking at low single digits.

It applies to all playing ability levels - not just lower handicappers or higher handicappers.

3 hours ago, criley4way said:

If the objective to quickly an consistently cutting a few strokes, I would support the idea that the short game (chipping and putting) would have the biggest bang for the buck.

I agree.

But the gains to be made there are small, relatively. They're easier to achieve, and quicker, but they will take a 95 shooter to shooting 90 or 91 or so… and then they have to work on the rest of their game again.

3 hours ago, criley4way said:

So assuming that 95% of people here have limited time and conflicting demands including work, family and life. Also most people are more interested in playing and having fun with their friends than shooting par. I say that based not on expressed desire but their actions and choices. Finally most people are not willing to persevere through the change process.

So then this topic isn't for them. This topic is about how to get better. If someone "just wants to have fun and play golf with their friends" then they're not going to care about this topic.

One small point, though: you can work on your full swing and improve with as little as five to ten minutes per day of practice, particularly if you practice properly. (P.S. please click those links.)

3 hours ago, criley4way said:

All of that said I would suggest that for most people who play a few times a month, don't spend hours on the range every week and won't take regular lessons, spending an extra 20 min 3 times a week on short game will have the greatest impact on a consistent basis and when the long game is working will allow for some "good" scores.

I don't agree.

If someone has 60 minutes per week to practice, sure, maybe for a week or two they should do that, but after that their practice time should roughly be:

• 40 minutes full swing
• 12 minutes short game
• 8 minutes putting

There's another topic about that…

Check out the LSW book.

And the 5 minutes topic, and the "how to practice" stuff.

[criley4way]

2 hours ago, billchao said:

While I generally agree with what you're saying, that's not really what this thread is about. It's about the fact that the long game is more important than the short game (has greater impact on scoring), not necessarily what areas are the best for individual improvement. That depends on the individual.

Billchao

I will profess ignorance on how you would calculate strokes gained for amateurs. For Pros it is a direct comparison of players on the same course under similar conditions with the same pins. How do you extrapolate this to amateurs or even calculate it?

I completely agree that more impact it from Long game. But ultimately that stat and all stats are directed to improvement. I mean measuring what your lost strokes are but not being realistic about what you can change seems strange to me. Is the objective to shoot the lowest score with what you have available?

1 hour ago, iacas said:

It is a generalization, but it applies to the VAST majority of golfers: they lose far more strokes from the full swing ("long game" isn't about distance) than the short game or putting. For the golfers for whom that is untrue… they've got the yips or something. I caddied in a round where another guy in the playing group could have shot 65 with me putting for him (and not even putting super well). He three putted four times from inside of three feet. Double hit a putt, too. No kidding. Shot 78 or something. But that's rare as heck.

It applies to all playing ability levels - not just lower handicappers or higher handicappers.

I agree.

But the gains to be made there are small, relatively. They're easier to achieve, and quicker, but they will take a 95 shooter to shooting 90 or 91 or so… and then they have to work on the rest of their game again.

So then this topic isn't for them. This topic is about how to get better. If someone "just wants to have fun and play golf with their friends" then they're not going to care about this topic.

One small point, though: you can work on your full swing and improve with as little as five to ten minutes per day of practice, particularly if you practice properly. (P.S. please click those links.)

I don't agree.

If someone has 60 minutes per week to practice, sure, maybe for a week or two they should do that, but after that their practice time should roughly be:

• 40 minutes full swing
• 12 minutes short game
• 8 minutes putting

There's another topic about that…

Check out the LSW book.

And the 5 minutes topic, and the "how to practice" stuff.

Iacas

I understand your point about the strokes gained but as above I am not sure how they are calculated for amateurs which would impact my assessment. For myself i agree that the long game is better place to spend my time.

I hit 60-70% of fairways with a driving average of 245-255.

I hit about 50% of greens with proximity of about 50'

I get up and down about 50% of the time

And I average 30-32 putts a round.

I lose most of my strokes in the 2nd shot/approach

I do about 60% long game (80% with W-7i) 25% putting and 15% short game. Most of my focus is on a small tweek or sequence.

But as you said this is about getting better. To change the pattern of your long game and improve consistency, which is the key to being a better player, one needs to fix these flaws. Often that takes (with 20 min a day) weeks or months to see the real gain. For a better player who has the occasional "big miss" this could be much faster or slower. 

I agree that you don't need hours of practice if you do it well. But that is a WHOLE different topic. In short most players do not practice well or with intent. I will definitely take a look at the book. Fun conversation

[iacas]

Just now, criley4way said:

I will profess ignorance on how you would calculate strokes gained for amateurs. For Pros it is a direct comparison of players on the same course under similar conditions with the same pins. How do you extrapolate this to amateurs or even calculate it?

The same way, except that you can't assume they're on the same course.

Basically, like this:

You just generalize to say "440 yard par four, scratch golfers average 4.21, and so if a player hits it to a point at which he averages 3, his tee shot got him 0.21 strokes.

Just now, criley4way said:

I completely agree that more impact it from Long game. But ultimately that stat and all stats are directed to improvement. I mean measuring what your lost strokes are but not being realistic about what you can change seems strange to me. Is the objective to shoot the lowest score with what you have available?

This one confuses me.

You're talking about improving the short game, no? So that's not "with what you have available." That's getting a better short game.

Just now, criley4way said:

I understand your point about the strokes gained but as above I am not sure how they are calculated for amateurs which would impact my assessment. For myself i agree that the long game is better place to spend my time.

See above.

Just now, criley4way said:

I hit 60-70% of fairways with a driving average of 245-255.

I hit about 50% of greens with proximity of about 50'

I get up and down about 50% of the time

And I average 30-32 putts a round.

I lose most of my strokes in the 2nd shot/approach

Okay.

There's obviously a little bit more nuance to it than that, but… okay. I read it, I hear you. And agree with your assessment likely being correct.

Just now, criley4way said:

I do about 60% long game (80% with W-7i) 25% putting and 15% short game. Most of my focus is on a small tweek or sequence.

Okay.

Just now, criley4way said:

But as you said this is about getting better. To change the pattern of your long game and improve consistency, which is the key to being a better player, one needs to fix these flaws. Often that takes (with 20 min a day) weeks or months to see the real gain. For a better player who has the occasional "big miss" this could be much faster or slower. 

Sure, but not always. And spending 10 minutes per day is better than spending even three hours once every three weeks or whatever.

Just now, criley4way said:

I agree that you don't need hours of practice if you do it well. But that is a WHOLE different topic. In short most players do not practice well or with intent. I will definitely take a look at the book. Fun conversation

I agree.

I think you're under-estimating how good some players can get with a little practice, so long as the practice is done well.

We've seen people make tremendous gains in very little time… because they're disciplined in how they practice.

[criley4way]

14 minutes ago, iacas said:

The same way, except that you can't assume they're on the same course.

Basically, like this:

You just generalize to say "440 yard par four, scratch golfers average 4.21, and so if a player hits it to a point at which he averages 3, his tee shot got him 0.21 strokes.

This one confuses me.

You're talking about improving the short game, no? So that's not "with what you have available." That's getting a better short game.

See above.

Okay.

There's obviously a little bit more nuance to it than that, but… okay. I read it, I hear you. And agree with your assessment likely being correct.

Okay.

Sure, but not always. And spending 10 minutes per day is better than spending even three hours once every three weeks or whatever.

I agree.

I think you're under-estimating how good some players can get with a little practice, so long as the practice is done well.

We've seen people make tremendous gains in very little time… because they're disciplined in how they practice.

Really like the discussion.

"With what they have" I was saying that with the time and resources physically, financially and facility. So if  I have 20 min a day to practice will I improve 90% of the strokes gained in putting and chipping but only 20% of the strokes with a driver in 6 months. I see the point that for most people the best place to improve is in the long game. But what level of effort does it take to improve 3 strokes on the Tee or long game vs 3 strokes on the green by improving 10' putting.

I agree that small bits of practice is WAY better than huge blocks. I try to do something every day even if it is just visualization. And you are SOOOO right about disciplined practice. That is SUCH a key to improving is being disciplined and committed to the process.

In the article you are quoting I think that the author is making the same point. That while the most stokes to be gained are in the long game, the most likely place to make up strokes are in the short game and putting.

Broadie, who is a four handicap, knows the heresy his research suggests. He is not recommending that everyone abandon short-game clinics. He said, in fact, that his findings are not inconsistent with the accepted instruction doctrine that practicing the short game may be the easiest way to score lower.

“The data provide objective answers to where strokes are being lost, but the fact is if you’ve got two hours to practice, you probably won’t start hitting the ball longer or straighter in that time period,” Broadie said. “But you could probably get better at your putting or chipping in two hours of practice.”

Edited February 17, 2018 by criley4way

[klineka]

22 minutes ago, iacas said:

I think you're under-estimating how good some players can get with a little practice, so long as the practice is done well.

We've seen people make tremendous gains in very little time… because they're disciplined in how they practice.

This.

I've made a ton of progress in my full swing and overall scoring since August/September when I used video for the first time, did a few months with Evolvr, and started to actually change the picture of my swing.

I've spent a bunch of time putting indoors this winter but thats more because I enjoy it and I dont have a big enough space to swing inside. I dont expect it to translate into dropping 5 strokes per round or anything this year.

Edited February 17, 2018 by klineka

[iacas]

10 minutes ago, criley4way said:

"With what they have" I was saying that with the time and resources physically, financially and facility. So if  I have 20 min a day to practice will I improve 90% of the strokes gained in putting and chipping but only 20% of the strokes with a driver in 6 months.

Well, I'm not really too interested in the hypothetical stuff.

But I would say:

• It's unlikely you're going to get 90% of the way to a scratch golfer with your short game and putting.
• That you're only going to improve 20% in just your driving in that same time.

More likely it'd be something like 45% and 25%… but since the 25% of your full swing is 2/3 of the strokes you lost, you're still gaining more that way.

Two things are true:

• You can make faster, smaller gains (a few strokes) by improving your short game.
• The larger, more significant improvements come from the full swing, but take more time.

So… do both. Start by improving your short game to a level where it is "better" than your full swing, then spend only a little time to maintain it while devoting 65-75% of your time to the full swing.

10 minutes ago, criley4way said:

I see the point that for most people the best place to improve is in the long game. But what level of effort does it take to improve 3 strokes on the Tee or long game vs 3 strokes on the green by improving 10' putting.

Pretty tough to know exactly what you're picturing in your mind, versus what's generally true, versus the ability level of the person we're talking about, and a bunch of other factors.

The two bullet points above remain true.

10 minutes ago, criley4way said:

In the article you are quoting I think that the author is making the same point. That while the most stokes to be gained are in the long game, the most likely place to make up strokes are in the short game and putting.

Broadie, who is a four handicap, knows the heresy his research suggests. He is not recommending that everyone abandon short-game clinics. He said, in fact, that his findings are not inconsistent with the accepted instruction doctrine that practicing the short game may be the easiest way to score lower.

“The data provide objective answers to where strokes are being lost, but the fact is if you’ve got two hours to practice, you probably won’t start hitting the ball longer or straighter in that time period,” Broadie said. “But you could probably get better at your putting or chipping in two hours of practice.”

Again, we've never said otherwise.

But those gains are limited in their size. A 10 handicapper is only about three strokes worse than a scratch golfer in his putting AND short game. He's looking to gain 1-2 strokes by improving to a 3-6 handicap level with just their short game/putting. That's not a lot. Or if he becomes a scratch golfer with his putting and short game… he's a 7 handicap, and it's now entirely from his full swing.

The two things above remain true.

[MrGolfguy67]

59 minutes ago, klineka said:

I disagree with this advice.

Short game isnt as important as you make it seem.

Short game and putting are very important to me and my game, 40+ years of playing tell me that. Of course everyone is entitled to their own thoughts, but i'll stand pat with the advice i gave Bertie.

[sheepdog]

3 hours ago, billchao said:

Not going to turn this into a putting versus long game thread, but this advice is terrible.

You can lose more strokes with a single swing of the driver than you can with a putter.

I'd argue that chipping on and two-putting isn't all that enjoyable after hitting one OB or topping/chunking all over the hole.

Ever knock one OB and still par the hole because you made a good putt? One of the biggest confidence builders in the game is the feeling of walking off a green that you just saved par on from 6 feet, yes or no? After all confidence is a big part of shooting good scores, right?

3 hours ago, klineka said:

I disagree with this advice.

Short game isnt as important as you make it seem.

Would you shoot lower scores with your current short game (50 yds and in around the green) and Dustin Johnson's long game (or any tour player for that matter) or Dustin Johnson's short game and your current long game?

 

In terms of drills that will help the OP, I highly recommend video recording your swing from face on and down the line angles so you have an idea of what aspects of your swing you need to improve the most. It doesnt make sense for you to work on a drill to stop flipping your wrists at impact if you already have a flat left wrist at impact. You need to find what your weaknesses are and do drills that target those weaknesses.

Short game isn't important? I know a bunch of gorillas, some that have won long drive contests that couldn't break par on their best day, why because their short games were awful. Sean "the beast" Fister was one.

Watched Tom Weiskopf and Gary Player play in Memphis one year, Weiskopf was hitting his one iron past Player's driver, Player was beating him like a Tom Tom. Player had a great short game, made putts,

Face it putting is almost half of the game and when it comes to practice, what's easier?

 

 

[sheepdog]

3 hours ago, iacas said:

The old adage is wrong.

That’s a fact these days.

I realize that anything I say you're going to disagree with, seems that way anyway. I think putting is an important part of the game, you don't. I think you're wrong. The old adage is correct, I still hear it a lot. Must have some truth to it.

[billchao]

34 minutes ago, sheepdog said:

Ever knock one OB and still par the hole because you made a good putt?

You know how you even have a 6' par putt after you hit one OB? By hitting two great long shots to put yourself there. You can't even par most par 4s after hitting it OB without holing out from off the green.

[Foot Wedge]

4 hours ago, billchao said:

I'd argue that chipping on and two-putting isn't all that enjoyable after hitting one OB or topping/chunking all over the hole.

I've done this enough to know it's true.  Or getting up and down for bogey...been thinking about making that my little tag line.  May go through with it now.

[Jeremie Boop]

40 minutes ago, sheepdog said:

I realize that anything I say you're going to disagree with, seems that way anyway. I think putting is an important part of the game, you don't. I think you're wrong. The old adage is correct, I still hear it a lot. Must have some truth to it.

You hear it a lot just like other old school sayings that are just not right. Like, keep your head down,keep your trail leg flexed, etc. These sayings don't persist because their true, the persist because people who say them don't really know any better, they just heard some "good player" tell them that before.

 

53 minutes ago, sheepdog said:

Ever knock one OB and still par the hole because you made a good putt? One of the biggest confidence builders in the game is the feeling of walking off a green that you just saved par on from 6 feet, yes or no? After all confidence is a big part of shooting good scores, right?

Short game isn't important? I know a bunch of gorillas, some that have won long drive contests that couldn't break par on their best day, why because their short games were awful. Sean "the beast" Fister was one.

Watched Tom Weiskopf and Gary Player play in Memphis one year, Weiskopf was hitting his one iron past Player's driver, Player was beating him like a Tom Tom. Player had a great short game, made putts,

Face it putting is almost half of the game and when it comes to practice, what's easier?

 

 

Nobody says short game isn't important. It is important. However, most players would benefit from improving their long game over their short game. It's basically a 60/40 split *if you put putting and chipping/pitching together* best practice when it comes to working on your game. Your citing of long drive players as an example of why putting practice is more important isn't accurate. Those guys don't practice their short game, like at all... They don't need to, their job is to hit the ball a long way.

 

3 hours ago, MrGolfguy67 said:

Short game and putting are very important to me and my game, 40+ years of playing tell me that. Of course everyone is entitled to their own thoughts, but i'll stand pat with the advice i gave Bertie.

Short game is important for everyone, but if you neglect working on full swing to focus on short game, more than likely you are hurting yourself. Again, it's 60/40 split in favor of full swing over short game. It's not like anyone's saying don't practice short game at all.

[iacas]

3 hours ago, MrGolfguy67 said:

Short game and putting are very important to me and my game, 40+ years of playing tell me that.

I would wager that you're wrong, even if we're just talking about your game. If we're talking about everyone's game, I know you're wrong.

3 hours ago, MrGolfguy67 said:

Of course everyone is entitled to their own thoughts, but i'll stand pat with the advice i gave Bertie.

It's not an opinion, or my "thoughts." It's wrong information:

Players lose far more strokes with the full swing and driver, in general, than with the short game and putting. They lose about as many with the driver, in fact, than with the short game and putting combined.

This is no longer "new" information. Lowest Score Wins and Every Shot Counts were published within a month of each other in 2014.

1 hour ago, sheepdog said:

Ever knock one OB and still par the hole because you made a good putt?

I've seen it done once… because the guy hit a tremendous (second) tee shot and a phenomenal hybrid to a par five, and drained the six-footer.

Unless you're talking about a reachable par five or a drivable par four… it's not even possible to putt for par after hitting one OB. What kind of math are you doing?

1 hour ago, sheepdog said:

One of the biggest confidence builders in the game is the feeling of walking off a green that you just saved par on from 6 feet, yes or no? After all confidence is a big part of shooting good scores, right?

If I have a lot of six-footers for par, I'm not happy because I'm clearly not playing all that well.

When I'm happiest? I have a lot of birdie putts because my ball-striking is on form that day. The game gets pretty easy when you have 14 birdie putts per round…

Ballstriking.

1 hour ago, sheepdog said:

Short game isn't important? I know a bunch of gorillas, some that have won long drive contests that couldn't break par on their best day, why because their short games were awful. Sean "the beast" Fister was one.

Watched Tom Weiskopf and Gary Player play in Memphis one year, Weiskopf was hitting his one iron past Player's driver, Player was beating him like a Tom Tom. Player had a great short game, made putts,

Awesome. A sample size of one, as told by you, a biased kinda guy. I'll be sure to give that all the weight it deserves…

Conversely, if we weight ALL of the evidence from the last 20 years or so, we see factually that what separates players on the PGA Tour is not the short game and putting. That those account for about 1/3 of the scoring differences between players.

We see that what actually separates players is the full swing: driving and approach shots. That those two areas of the game account for 2/3 of the difference.

1 hour ago, sheepdog said:

Face it putting is almost half of the game and when it comes to practice, what's easier?

PGA Tour pros average 9 tap-ins per round.

That's 12.5% of their shots.

Do you honestly believe that they should spend 12.5% of their practice time - valuable time - practicing tap-ins because it's 12.5% of their shots?

Do you?

Because if you're not a complete stooge, you will say that's preposterous. You'll also realize that you can't ever get so good at putting that you can make every putt you ever have, or even 2x as many as most people. The most you can save, if you're the best putter in the world, is a few shots here or there. But if you became the best driver in the world, you can become Dustin Johnson.

If you become the best iron player the game has ever seen, you can become Tiger Woods.

Finally, yes, putting IS easier, which is another reason why players shouldn't spend as much time practicing it.

58 minutes ago, sheepdog said:

I realize that anything I say you're going to disagree with, seems that way anyway. I think putting is an important part of the game, you don't. I think you're wrong. The old adage is correct, I still hear it a lot. Must have some truth to it.

Here's what you don't seem to understand: I am not disagreeing with you. You are wrong. The old adage is wrong.

These are facts. This stuff is no longer opinion, but provable, actual fact.

There can still be outliers, yes, but they're just that: outliers.

Now, if you're old and your "full swing game" is what it is, then I would say:

• You can still hit the ball more solidly.
• You can still hit the ball more accurately.
• You can probably still hit the ball a bit farther, though this is the least likely of the three.
• If you cannot do any of the above, then yes, absolutely, spend most of your time on the short game and putting.

But that's not very many people.

[sheepdog]

Like I said, I feel that anything I say here is going to be disagreed with by you. Everything I state is an opinion, I don't need a bunch of stats or graphs, I'm old school, I say what I say from personal experience. Fifty something years of it. I feel like I've hit a million balls in my life but to me the best thing I ever did for my game was sharpen up my putting.by working hard on and around the putting green and not stopping until I was confident that I could handle the knee knockers and par savers.

By the way your comment on tour pros and tap ins is moot because we're talking about beginners not tour pros.

And of course you would agree that Tiger wouldn't be where he is today in the history of the game by being just a mediocre putter. How many times has he or Jack made the putt he had to make on 18.

[iacas]

I moved your comments here, @sheepdog, because they were veering well off topic in the other discussion.

7 hours ago, sheepdog said:

Like I said, I feel that anything I say here is going to be disagreed with by you.

I'm not disagreeing with you at all. I'm telling you that you're wrong. There's a difference.

It's like this:

You: The earth is flat.
Me: Uhhh, no, it's not. You're wrong.
You: I knew you'd disagree with me!

7 hours ago, sheepdog said:

Everything I state is an opinion

No, it isn't. That's why you can be wrong. Opinions are not the same thing as facts.

7 hours ago, sheepdog said:

I don't need a bunch of stats or graphs

Translation: you either don't understand them or don't want any information that contradicts you.

7 hours ago, sheepdog said:

I'm old school, I say what I say from personal experience.

I prefer to actually know what I'm talking about.

7 hours ago, sheepdog said:

By the way your comment on tour pros and tap ins is moot because we're talking about beginners not tour pros.

It illustrates the point that spending time working on your game based on the percentage it contributes to your score is a stupid way of determining what to practice.

7 hours ago, sheepdog said:

And of course you would agree that Tiger wouldn't be where he is today in the history of the game by being just a mediocre putter. How many times has he or Jack made the putt he had to make on 18.

He would have still been great if he had been an average putter. He gained enough strokes just from his approach shot game in some years to be a top 5 player on the PGA Tour in total strokes gained.

[Shindig]

11 hours ago, sheepdog said:

And of course you would agree that Tiger wouldn't be where he is today in the history of the game by being just a mediocre putter. How many times has he or Jack made the putt he had to make on 18.

Tiger doesn't even have one of the top 40 putting rounds of the Shotlink era.   None of the top 25 of the PGA Tour wins-by-putting-contribution in that era are his.  Tiger's average SGP in a win was 1.14 strokes, with an average margin of victory of over 4 strokes.   His average putting contribution to victory is well under the PGA Tour average for the same.  

We think of things like the putt he sank on 72 at Torrey in '08, but that was set up by a better-than-average approach shot too.  The fact of the matter isn't that Tiger was a great putter, it's that his approach shots often set him up to be closer to the hole (by a meaningful margin) compared to his competition, so he sank more.  

[HJJ003]

My last round I putted like a 2-3 handicap. Lost only .9 strokes to scratch. Still only shot 93.

My best ball striking round I only lost 7 strokes on my approach shots (average 10) and lost 2-3 strokes off the tee (average 4). Personal best 85. If I would have putted like I did when I putted lights out, I would have only shot about one stroke better. 

Ballstriking is king.