The myth if GIR

[alomar123]

Found it interesting in the latest issue of Golf that the top 5 GIR players on tour, not one was in the top 20 in scoring average.

Also, the top 5 in scoring average on tour, not one was in the top 20 for GIR.

Goes to show that GIR isn't that important when you get to the tour.

edit. title should be myth of gir

[Borf]

Found it interesting in the latest issue of Golf that the top 5 GIR players on tour, not one was in the top 20 in scoring average.

Hide behind all the stats you want.

[alomar123]

Hide behind all the stats you want.

Yes, i am hiding? Just found it interesting ehh.

[golfro]

read the same issue. I too found it interesting actually. just goes to show how strong these tour players are when it comes to greenside wedge work.

[TheLauncher]

It has to say a lot about the difficulty of tour leve greens too, right?

The guys hunting for flags are likely to miss their GIR more often than those shooting for the fat part of the green. And a 15 yard putt may be more difficult than a 15 yard pitch, IMO. Sometimes it helps to be able to fly two thirds of the break.

[chrisronline]

Like everyone on tour is between 60-70% GIR. The difference between the top 20 and the top 100 is about 4% which is less than one more missed green per round.

[TheLauncher]

Like everyone on tour is between 60-70% GIR. The difference between the top 20 and the top 100 is about 4% which is less than one more missed green per round.

Very salient point.

Damn statistics! They can be so misleading wehn out of context. Wehn presented as the OP put it it is interesting. Considering this, it is entirely understandable.

[alomar123]

Like everyone on tour is between 60-70% GIR. The difference between the top 20 and the top 100 is about 4% which is less than one more missed green per round.

That 4% seems to be about average for every stats. The difference in putting from top 20 to top 100 is less than .04 putts per hole. All these players are just crazy good at everything. Makes you think how Tiger was able to do what he did for all those years. One of the only stats where there is a big difference is driving accuracy.

[sean_miller]

That 4% seems to be about average for every stats. The difference in putting from top 20 to top 100 is less than .04 putts per hole. All these players are just crazy good at everything. Makes you think how Tiger was able to do what he did for all those years. One of the only stats where there is a big difference is driving accuracy.

Comparing hackers like us to even the worst player on the worst professional tour is still unrealistic. We all could benefit form increasing our GIRs and FIRs and reducing our putts per GIR.

[Shanks A Million]

GIR is probably the most important stat to raise to lower the handicap. The worst tour player averages 58% of greens in regulation. That's about 10-11 greens in regulation per round. The worst average proximity to the hole is about 40 feet. The number of greens in regulation is paramount to playing well. If you hit 100% of your greens in regulation, you could 3 putt every hole but one and still break 90. You could 3 putt 5 holes and break 80. The odds are, none of us are going to putt that badly.

But as has been said, even the worst player on tour is better than the best of us. The absolute worst, can't hardly hold his card, sleeping in cars, eating dog food tour pro on the PGA tour is around a +5 handicap. To get on tour, you must have an incredible full swing, as well as a very good short game. People with one or the other need not apply. If any one of us on this forum were to get into a putting contest with Sergio Garcia, he'd likely win. Never underestimate just how good a tour player is.

[saevel25]

Makes you think how Tiger was able to do what he did for all those years

Couple reasons, he made positives out of his mistakes. If he missed with a drive, he would hit it close out of the rough. He was a clutch putter, meaning he putted good as other putters normally but when it came to shut people out he made that single putt, that moment.

[saevel25]

I would agree with that Shanks, We can say that with Pro's since they hit so many GIR's then you have to go into a substat, how close are they getting to the pin. Average distance with wedges, mid irons and long irons from the pin.

For us Amateurs, we want to hit greens, we shouldn't be pin hunting unless its an easy spot, go for center of greens, you shoot lower quick.

[walk18]

I'm still most amazed at the short game of the pros. When I take an honest look at my game I throw away way too many shots around the green.

[Shanks A Million]

I'm still most amazed at the short game of the pros. When I take an honest look at my game I throw away way too many shots around the green.

A better short game comes from a better swing. Flip on your full swing, and you're probably flipping on the shorter ones. Short game is probably the easiest part of the game for me, because I'm not very flexible, so I have trouble turning through a full swing. But on my chips, it's huge. With that forward press, I can very easily chip it close from nearly anywhere. That's the only reason I play anywhere near as well as I do.

[alo1984]

Yeah, who needs to hit more greens in regulation anyways. I sure don't. I play better when I miss em all :-/

[B-Con]

I'm terrible at hitting GIRs. Absolutely terrible. Average game I'll hit maybe 2 on the new course I started playing, and that's because there are a three par 4s under 310 yards.

I definitely note that my better games are the ones where I hit GIRs. It makes sense, fewer chances to duff a shot, fewer pitches and chips that I have to get up-and-down on. Hitting one more green than another player on average may not make you noticeably better than them, but for the average player hitting 3 vs hitting 6 is probably a big difference. Not only does that have the opportunity to translate into 3 fewer strokes, but it probably means that on average their shots.

That's actually probably a large factor: Pros are used to having good/close approaches even when they don't hit the green (remember, even hitting the fringe counts as a missed GIR). Amateurs who don't hit greens probably aren't missing nearly as close as the pros. The pros are probably narrowly missing greens by an unlucky bounce here and being on the fringe there a couple times a game, being much closer to getting an extra couple GIRs than amateurs are.

[Paradox]

I'll say to the end of my golfing days...if you want a better handicap, then take note of what clubs you usually hit into greens and then go practice with them until you hit them where you want to every time. Sure, you'll miss a few shots and not every one will be perfect...but you'll hit a lot more GIR and 2 putting is not nearly as hard when you've got a boost in confidence. ON top of that, you won't be having to try and save yourself with chips and pitches all the time. Working on the short game to save strokes just seems backwards to me...don't put yourself there to begin with and you won't have to chip all the time.

[Zeph]

Myth? It's no myth, it's the truth. Hitting more greens is the best way to lower your handicap. Looking at those PGA Tour data doesn't say much. What we don't know is how big a miss those shots really are. For a high handicapper, a missed green can be 20 yards left, right or short. For a PGA player, it's usually on the fringe, greenside rough or bunkers. And they are exceptional short game players, so they get up and down a lot. If they don't hit the approach shot within a distance that sets up for a birdie, the chances of making birdie are very low.

I scored 10 shots less in two rounds at a course, the only thing changing being my iron ballstriking. I hit more greens and my misses were a lot better.