Jump to content
Check out the Spin Axis Podcast! ×
Note: This thread is 5476 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Recommended Posts

Posted

Which yardage do you prefer on your golf course, Yard or Meter?   And why?

Which one is more accurate?

Whats in my Golf Bag:
Driver: Nike Sumo 5000
5 Wood: Mizuno MP-001
Iron: Mizuno MX-950 5-PW
Wedge: Cobra FP 60 degrePutter: Odyssey 2-BallBall: Yellow balls

Posted

1 yard equals 3 feet exactly whereas 1 meter is 3.28 feet.  I think most people will have an easier time judging yards over meters, even us canucks that are brought up with the metric system.  I have yet to see a course that measures off in meters..


Posted

I live in Europe and Norway, where the imperial system doesn't even exist (Norway), of course I use and prefer the metric system. The imperial got some advantages in terms of using the body to measure stuff, but it's no more difficult than to use the distance in centimeters. I'll have to calculate it over to metric in the end anyways. The metric system is of course more logical and easier to use.

Ogio Grom | Callaway X Hot Pro | Callaway X-Utility 3i | Mizuno MX-700 23º | Titleist Vokey SM 52.08, 58.12 | Mizuno MX-700 15º | Titleist 910 D2 9,5º | Scotty Cameron Newport 2 | Titleist Pro V1x and Taylormade Penta | Leupold GX-1

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Administrator
Posted

Yards is more accurate only because it's a slightly smaller unit of measurement.

But whatever - yards or meters - very little difference between the two.

Erik J. Barzeski —  I knock a ball. It goes in a gopher hole. 🏌🏼‍♂️
Director of Instruction Golf Evolution • Owner, The Sand Trap .com • AuthorLowest Score Wins
Golf Digest "Best Young Teachers in America" 2016-17 & "Best in State" 2017-20 • WNY Section PGA Teacher of the Year 2019 :edel: :true_linkswear:

Check Out: New Topics | TST Blog | Golf Terms | Instructional Content | Analyzr | LSW | Instructional Droplets

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

I saw one scorecard from Germany which listed both yards and meters for the tee boxes.

If you go to a course with metric distances, make up an index card with major yardage conversions on it. Laminate it so sweat and rain doesn't blur things.

Rough conversion factor: meter = 1.1 yards.. So

90 meters = 99 yards

100 meters = 110 yards

Etc.....

That way, you don't have to try computing things in your head while playing a strange course for the first time.

Or, if you have a rangefinder set to yards, you don't need the index card.

Focus, connect and follow through!

  • Completed KBS Education Seminar (online, 2015)
  • GolfWorks Clubmaking AcademyFitting, Assembly & Repair School (2012)

Driver:  :touredge: EXS 10.5°, weights neutral   ||  FWs:  :callaway: Rogue 4W + 7W
Hybrid:  :callaway: Big Bertha OS 4H at 22°  ||  Irons:  :callaway: Mavrik MAX 5i-PW
Wedges:  :callaway: MD3: 48°, 54°... MD4: 58° ||  Putter:image.png.b6c3447dddf0df25e482bf21abf775ae.pngInertial NM SL-583F, 34"  
Ball:  image.png.f0ca9194546a61407ba38502672e5ecf.png QStar Tour - Divide  ||  Bag: :sunmountain: Three 5 stand bag

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

  • Moderator
Posted

They both have the same accuracy.  When playing in the opposite system you are used to, you just need to do a quick conversion, 100 meters ~ 110 yards, 200~220, 300~330.

Just remember, the British gave the world the Imperial System even though it is associated with the US now.  So don't blame us (USA)!!

Scott

Titleist, Edel, Scotty Cameron Putter, Snell - AimPoint - Evolvr - MirrorVision

My Swing Thread

boogielicious - Adjective describing the perfect surf wave

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

Or if you're not a complete math slouch, you can just take the yard length and subtract 10% for meters (or add 10% if converting meters to yards).

The meter/yard conversion doesn't bother me too much (provided that you know which one the course is using), what kills me more are differences in measurement methods (e.g., middle of the green vs. front of the green).  I played a course in France that used meter measurements to the front of the green but didn't know about the front of the green part until my second round there.  I was having a heck of a time figuring out why my shots kept coming up short!  Figured it was heavy French air or something.


Posted

There is a huge difference between meters and yards when it comes to golf. 150 meters = 164 yards. That's at least one club! When I played golf in Europe for the first time, I was coming up short based on the yardage (meterage) markers...

If it's 100 meters:club up about one club

If it's 150 meters: club up about 1.5

If it's 200 meters: you're looking at about two clubs.

titleistprov1x |nikeneo |●| callawayx-forged 54/60 |● |mizunoMP68

adamsproblack 3H |●| mizunoMPtitanium5w/3w |●| mizunoMP630FT


Posted


Originally Posted by The Gill

There is a huge difference between meters and yards when it comes to golf. 150 meters = 164 yards. That's at least one club! When I played golf in Europe for the first time, I was coming up short based on the yardage (meterage) markers...

If it's 100 meters:club up about one club

If it's 150 meters: club up about 1.5

If it's 200 meters: you're looking at about two clubs.

Yes, as was said above, a meter is about 10% longer than a yard (39.4 inches vs 36 inches).  It's enough that you have to convert, but not enough that one is any more accurate than the other unless you're worried about about 1 inch extra worst-case error for the meter.  You need to know which it is, but other than familiarity there's no advantage to one or the other when it comes to golf.

In the bag:
FT-iQ 10° driver, FT 21° neutral 3H
T-Zoid Forged 15° 3W, MX-23 4-PW
Harmonized 52° GW, Tom Watson 56° SW, X-Forged Vintage 60° LW
White Hot XG #1 Putter, 33"


Posted

Does it mean that golf course with meter yardage is longer than golf course using yards?

Whats in my Golf Bag:
Driver: Nike Sumo 5000
5 Wood: Mizuno MP-001
Iron: Mizuno MX-950 5-PW
Wedge: Cobra FP 60 degrePutter: Odyssey 2-BallBall: Yellow balls

Posted

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronaldkuntoro View Post

Does it mean that golf course with meter yardage is longer than golf course using yards?

Longer how? In distance? No. A 6000 yard course is 5486 meters.

Ogio Grom | Callaway X Hot Pro | Callaway X-Utility 3i | Mizuno MX-700 23º | Titleist Vokey SM 52.08, 58.12 | Mizuno MX-700 15º | Titleist 910 D2 9,5º | Scotty Cameron Newport 2 | Titleist Pro V1x and Taylormade Penta | Leupold GX-1

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Posted

Longer means when you see 330 meter average distance for par 4 against the average 330 yard par 4 on most courses. Maybe you should play Golf in East Asia once to see my point.

Whats in my Golf Bag:
Driver: Nike Sumo 5000
5 Wood: Mizuno MP-001
Iron: Mizuno MX-950 5-PW
Wedge: Cobra FP 60 degrePutter: Odyssey 2-BallBall: Yellow balls

Posted

The courses are not laid up after numbers regardless of unit of measure, meaning that an average par 4 is not 330 yards in one country and 330 meters in the next.

In Norway the guidelines for the course distances are as follow (for men):

Par 3: Up to 225 meters (246 yards)
Par 4: 200 - 450 meters (219 - 492 yards)
Par 5: 400 - (437 yards)

I couldn't find anything on the USGA website, but other pages use this:

Par 3 - Up to 250 yards (228 meters)
Par 4 - 251 - 470 yards (228 - 430 meters)
Par 5 - 471 - 690 yards (431 - 631 meters)

As you can see, the distances are pretty close to eachother. There are many other variables that make a difference to how long a hole is playing also, of course. In the end, if you play courses around the world, this will not be an issue. The biggest differences are in the individual course lengths.

Ogio Grom | Callaway X Hot Pro | Callaway X-Utility 3i | Mizuno MX-700 23º | Titleist Vokey SM 52.08, 58.12 | Mizuno MX-700 15º | Titleist 910 D2 9,5º | Scotty Cameron Newport 2 | Titleist Pro V1x and Taylormade Penta | Leupold GX-1

Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Note: This thread is 5476 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • TST Partners

    PlayBetter
    Golfer's Journal
    ShotScope
    The Stack System
    FitForGolf
    FlightScope Mevo
    Direct: Mevo, Mevo+, and Pro Package.

    Coupon Codes (save 10-20%): "IACAS" for Mevo/Stack/FitForGolf, "IACASPLUS" for Mevo+/Pro Package, and "THESANDTRAP" for ShotScope. 15% off TourStriker (no code).
  • Popular Now

  • Posts

    • Nah, man. People have been testing clubs like this for decades at this point. Even 35 years. @M2R, are you AskGolfNut? If you're not, you seem to have fully bought into the cult or something. So many links to so many videos… Here's an issue, too: - A drop of 0.06 is a drop with a 90 MPH 7I having a ball speed of 117 and dropping it to 111.6, which is going to be nearly 15 yards, which is far more than what a "3% distance loss" indicates (and is even more than a 4.6% distance loss). - You're okay using a percentage with small numbers and saying "they're close" and "1.3 to 1.24 is only 4.6%," but then you excuse the massive 53% difference that going from 3% to 4.6% represents. That's a hell of an error! - That guy in the Elite video is swinging his 7I at 70 MPH. C'mon. My 5' tall daughter swings hers faster than that.
    • Yea but that is sort of my quandary, I sometimes see posts where people causally say this club is more forgiving, a little more forgiving, less forgiving, ad nauseum. But what the heck are they really quantifying? The proclamation of something as fact is not authoritative, even less so as I don't know what the basis for that statement is. For my entire golfing experience, I thought of forgiveness as how much distance front to back is lost hitting the face in non-optimal locations. Anything right or left is on me and delivery issues. But I also have to clarify that my experience is only with irons, I never got to the point of having any confidence or consistency with anything longer. I feel that is rather the point, as much as possible, to quantify the losses by trying to eliminate all the variables except the one you want to investigate. Or, I feel like we agree. Compared to the variables introduced by a golfer's delivery and the variables introduced by lie conditions, the losses from missing the optimal strike location might be so small as to almost be noise over a larger area than a pea.  In which case it seems that your objection is that the 0-3% area is being depicted as too large. Which I will address below. For statements that is absurd and true 100% sweet spot is tiny for all clubs. You will need to provide some objective data to back that up and also define what true 100% sweet spot is. If you mean the area where there are 0 losses, then yes. While true, I do not feel like a not practical or useful definition for what I would like to know. For strikes on irons away from the optimal location "in measurable and quantifiable results how many yards, or feet, does that translate into?"   In my opinion it ok to be dubious but I feel like we need people attempting this sort of data driven investigation. Even if they are wrong in some things at least they are moving the discussion forward. And he has been changing the maps and the way data is interpreted along the way. So, he admits to some of the ideas he started with as being wrong. It is not like we all have not been in that situation 😄 And in any case to proceed forward I feel will require supporting or refuting data. To which as I stated above, I do not have any experience in drivers so I cannot comment on that. But I would like to comment on irons as far as these heat maps. In a video by Elite Performance Golf Studios - The TRUTH About Forgiveness! Game Improvement vs Blade vs Players Distance SLOW SWING SPEED! and going back to ~12:50 will show the reference data for the Pro 241. I can use that to check AskGolfNut's heat map for the Pro 241: a 16mm heel, 5mm low produced a loss of efficiency from 1.3 down to 1.24 or ~4.6%. Looking at AskGolfNut's heatmap it predicts a loss of 3%. Is that good or bad? I do not know but given the possible variations I am going to say it is ok. That location is very close to where the head map goes to 4%, these are very small numbers, and rounding could be playing some part. But for sure I am going to say it is not absurd. Looking at one data point is absurd, but I am not going to spend time on more because IME people who are interested will do their own research and those not interested cannot be persuaded by any amount of data. However, the overall conclusion that I got from that video was that between the three clubs there is a difference in distance forgiveness, but it is not very much. Without some robot testing or something similar the human element in the testing makes it difficult to say is it 1 yard, or 2, or 3?  
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟨🟩⬜⬜ ⬜🟨⬜⬜🟨 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
    • Wordle 1,668 3/6 🟨🟩🟨🟨⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩⬜ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩 Should have got it in two, but I have music on my brain.
    • Wordle 1,668 2/6* 🟨🟨🟩⬛⬛ 🟩🟩🟩🟩🟩
×
×
  • 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.