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

[JonMA1]

23 minutes ago, iacas said:

That's not how that works.

Understood.

23 minutes ago, iacas said:

I don't know that you're qualified to make those determinations.

Seriously? Who else is going to do it?

Are you suggesting this because you think I'm unable to be objective or because I'm not smart enough or experienced enough to know where strokes are lost?

That's not a defensive reply, it's fair for you might think either of those. You're right in that I don't fully understand the strokes gained methodology. I guess all I'd have to do is read up on it in GameGolf.

But it's not hard to know what type of shot cost me strokes. And it's not that hard to look over previous rounds and see where strokes were lost there either. It's also not that hard for me to judge where my limit is going to be on a given skill.

23 minutes ago, iacas said:

And… again, this isn't about individual players.

Except that you have some calling out others who claim they have to work harder on their short games as being misinformed or not qualified to make those determinations.

If we (members) can't apply this stuff to our own game, what good is the information or the discussion. I seriously doubt I'm the only golfer in the world who falls outside the norm. Seems like a reasonable thing to talk about.

Erik, it's your site. You want me to stop talking about it, say the word and there will be no hard feelings. I just wanted to correct an opinion I'd made previously.

Edited October 26, 2018 by JonMA1

[iacas]

1 minute ago, JonMA1 said:

Understood.

Then why make that comment?

1 minute ago, JonMA1 said:

Seriously? Who else is going to do it?

Someone qualified. Someone who understands the difference between a solidly struck shot that goes 220 into the left rough versus a slightly mis-hit ball that goes 190 into the fairway. Someone who actually knows how many strokes you'll take, on average, from a funny lie at 50 yards out, or from 50 feet across a green, or five feet, and the abilities of other golfers for every shot you hit in a round of golf.

Someone who understands partial shots, which most golfers aren't really capable of understanding, since they measure scores in full strokes.

1 minute ago, JonMA1 said:

Are suggesting this because you think I'm unable to be objective or because I'm not smart enough or experienced enough to know where strokes are lost?

I don't think you've got a clue what the average ability levels are for golfers of your scoring average, nor golfers better or worse than your skill level for comparison's sake.

1 minute ago, JonMA1 said:

That's not a defensive reply, it's fair for you might think either of those. You're right in that I don't fully understand the strokes gained methodology. I guess all I'd have to do is read up on it in GameGolf.

Then stop acting like you do. If you don't even "fully understand" strokes gained… that's step one of many, and you've not even achieved that.

1 minute ago, JonMA1 said:

But it's not hard to know what type of shot cost me strokes. And it's not that hard to look over previous rounds and see where strokes were lost there either. It's also not that hard for me to judge where my limit is going to be on a given skill.

Yes, it is.

1 minute ago, JonMA1 said:

If we (members) can't apply this stuff to our own game, what good is the information or the discussion.

You can apply it to your own games. But you've not demonstrated that you understand it well enough to apply it to your own game. If you're losing as many strokes with the short game and putting as with the full swing, then your short game and putting are a glaring weakness. There's no way that ratio should be 50/50.

1 minute ago, JonMA1 said:

Erik, it's your site. You want me to stop talking about it, say the word and there will be no hard feelings. I just wanted to correct an opinion I'd made previously.

Stop talking about your own game.

This stuff is general, and without a good amount of data, and unbiased information, assessments of someone's individual game aren't really possible.

[JonMA1]

9 minutes ago, iacas said:

This stuff is general, and without a good amount of data, and unbiased information, assessments of someone's individual game aren't really possible.

Can't an individual (not me) get that unbiased information through 120 rounds recorded in GameGolf?

[iacas]

1 minute ago, JonMA1 said:

Can't an individual (not me) get that unbiased information through 120 rounds recorded in GameGolf?

Where's your data?

Because if the answer is "I don't have it," then once again… we don't need to hear about your own game. And if that person has that data, the appropriate place to discuss it is their Member Swing topic.

You're one data point.

[JonMA1]

1 minute ago, iacas said:

Where's your data?

Because if the answer is "I don't have it," then once again… we don't need to hear about your own game.

Why wouldn't I have the data? And I made a point of turning this discussion away from me in my last post. Why bring that up????

You asked that I not bring my game up. Perhaps you could show me the same courtesy.

I disagree that some golfers - especially those on this site and those who track stats - are not qualified to determine weaknesses. They are not going to be as thorough or exact and they are going to get it wrong to some degree, but they are there watching what happens. It is possible to be objective.

[iacas]

1 hour ago, JonMA1 said:

Why wouldn't I have the data? And I made a point of turning this discussion away from me in my last post. Why bring that up????

You asked that I not bring my game up. Perhaps you could show me the same courtesy.

FFS, it's not a matter of "courtesy." You brought up your own game, as you seem to do quite frequently, in a general topic instead of in your Member Swing topic, and illustrated your inability to properly diagnose these things again in doing so.

I'm pointing out again that the place for individual stuff by anyone is best served in their Member Swing topic.

1 hour ago, JonMA1 said:

I disagree that some golfers - especially those on this site and those who track stats - are not qualified to determine weaknesses.

I never said ALL golfers on the site were not qualified. I said you weren't. So you're disagreeing with something I never said.

Now… Back to the actual conversation, not Jon's (mis)understanding of his own game.

[Vinsk]

6 hours ago, JonMA1 said:

At where my game is and at my level, they are both very close to equally important. Both are bad, both cost a lot of strokes. I just can't see the logic of one being drastically more important than the other.

I apologize if you’ve already answered this but have you read LSW or Mark Broadie? It’s all right there. I’ve had several lengthy discussions with people over this topic and the worst response I’ve heard is, ‘No thanks...I’ll stick to what I know is right.’ LSW clearly explains difference in importance. 

[iacas]

10 minutes ago, Vinsk said:

I apologize if you’ve already answered this but have you read LSW or Mark Broadie? It’s all right there. I’ve had several lengthy discussions with people over this topic and the worst response I’ve heard is, ‘No thanks...I’ll stick to what I know is right.’ LSW clearly explains difference in importance. 

He's read LSW.

[Lihu]

6 hours ago, JonMA1 said:

Why wouldn't I have the data? And I made a point of turning this discussion away from me in my last post. Why bring that up????

You asked that I not bring my game up. Perhaps you could show me the same courtesy.

I disagree that some golfers - especially those on this site and those who track stats - are not qualified to determine weaknesses. They are not going to be as thorough or exact and they are going to get it wrong to some degree, but they are there watching what happens. It is possible to be objective.

To be perfectly honest, I have 160 games recorded in game golf and other apps combined, and I don’t really have any idea how to use that data to improve my game. 🤪

I just recorded it on those apps because it scores me better than I do. 😜

I design robots and robotic test systems and have engineered hundreds of things, and still can’t figure out some of those things much less how to shave strokes from my game.

Yeah, I make dumb chipping or putting decisions, but how to save overall? I have no real idea? How many strokes can I reduce by hitting my 9i to 10 yards versus 20? Don’t really know exactly? I’m sure someone does, but not me...

It seems pretty tough.

[iacas]

@Lihu if you post it in your Member Swing thing we can help. But since we don’t see you playing and since the granularity of GG is pretty high it’s onky going to be generalized.

[Lihu]

3 hours ago, iacas said:

@Lihu if you post it in your Member Swing thing we can help. But since we don’t see you playing and since the granularity of GG is pretty high it’s onky going to be generalized.

Yeah, was thinking of starting all that again this season. I’ve just been too lazy find the Action cameras, batteries, SW tools for YouTube, account information, and stuff and look for my GG tagger somewhere in my garage...I’ll get the going as soon as I toss some junk!

At least my Mevo and super Speed are in my bag. 😊

 

[iacas]

9 minutes ago, Lihu said:

Yeah, was thinking of starting all that again this season. I’ve just been too lazy find the Action cameras, batteries, SW tools for YouTube, account information, and stuff and look for my GG tagger somewhere in my garage...I’ll get the going as soon as I toss some junk!

You don't have to do any of that stuff. Just post the data from your last 50 rounds or something.

[DrMJG]

Perhaps a differing point of reference.  When I started the LSW percentages of practice, not only did my drives and longer weapons improve, I became aware of how my game in general improved.  Yes, I still struggle with my wedges at a time, and too little time with putter has its affects.  However, having a stronger full stroke was easier for me to adapt to when I needed a shorter stroke. Most of my strokes are full strokes and that practice allow me to trust the club more.

[Killa]

4 hours ago, DrMJG said:

Perhaps a differing point of reference.  When I started the LSW percentages of practice, not only did my drives and longer weapons improve, I became aware of how my game in general improved.  Yes, I still struggle with my wedges at a time, and too little time with putter has its affects.  However, having a stronger full stroke was easier for me to adapt to when I needed a shorter stroke. Most of my strokes are full strokes and that practice allow me to trust the club more.

 

I have used this principle for the last two seasons. Pretty much all of my practice was devoted to my full swing and only practiced the short game right before a tournament. And while my ball striking has improved my scoring has not really dropped significantly. I think my glaring weaknesses is my putting but I just bought a GameGolf now set so hopefully I’ll be able to get a few rounds in before winter starts so that I get some data. 

And I know most of my strokes are full swing shots, but it’s pretty close, last 2 rounds 97 with 43 putts with 5 GIR and 96 with 35 putts  with 3 GIR (different course easier greens). And since I’m only hitting 3-5 GIR there a lot of chips and pitches as well.

But my thought process has always been - I don’t need the short game if I can hit the green with my approach 🙂

 

[billchao]

4 hours ago, Killa said:

But my thought process has always been - I don’t need the short game if I can hit the green with my approach

This is the wrong way to look at it if you're talking about improving scoring. A scratch golfer averages about 9-12 GIR. They need their short game up to 50% of the holes they play and more on a bad day.

If your short game is a glaring weakness, address it. It's not as significant a contributor to your score as the long game, but that doesn't mean it should be ignored, either.

You're probably joking a bit but I've seen others comment with the similar mindset.

[DrMJG]

13 hours ago, billchao said:

This is the wrong way to look at it if you're talking about improving scoring. A scratch golfer averages about 9-12 GIR. They need their short game up to 50% of the holes they play and more on a bad day.

If your short game is a glaring weakness, address it. It's not as significant a contributor to your score as the long game, but that doesn't mean it should be ignored, either.

You're probably joking a bit but I've seen others comment with the similar mindset.

When rebuilding my game, working to develop ease in the full stroke it allowed be to be more confident in my short came. I am not sure I was clear above.  Much is common between the two.  Putting is a fairly different beast, for the most part.

[billchao]

15 hours ago, DrMJG said:

When rebuilding my game, working to develop ease in the full stroke it allowed be to be more confident in my short came. I am not sure I was clear above.  Much is common between the two.  Putting is a fairly different beast, for the most part.

Broadie defines short game as within 100 yards of the hole which still requires long game mechanics, so yes there is quite a bit of overlap, but if you're talking more about pitching and chipping, the stroke is a bit different. Still fairly easy to get decent at compared to the full swing.

[Vinsk]

Hey @Alfonso ! Come on over! I’ve always enjoyed the discussion regarding the importance of putting vs the long game. Is there any non-anecdotal data showing putting is king?