Why have I always been told to work most on my short game?

[Deryck Griffith]

Ok, so let's use this example that I saw playing with my buddy the other day....First shot, sliced into crap.  Penalty, duff the thrid, get the fourth out, fly the green on the fitth,...at this point, he has already used 3 more shots than I have to get in the proximity of the green.  If he chips on and 2 putts, his score is an 8.  If he doesn't, maybe his score is a 10.  So a good "short" game "at this point" gives you an 8 and a bad one gives you a 10.  To me, the difference between an 8 and 10 really isn't that much.  My friend three putted for a 9.

What is missing in his game?  Ball striking.

When I frist started, the same thing was told to me.  Short game, short game, etc etc.The first two years, that's what I did with very minimal improvements on my score at the END of the second year taking this approach.  I then clued in to realize that I was taking WAY to many shots TO GET TO THE GREEN before the short game was needed.

So, I made a decision to continue practicing short game but the bulk of my practicing revolved around ball striking.  I did a ton of research on the swing...used this forum for help..etc etc and my ball striking has improved exponentially.  So what about my short game?  Well, it has improved exponentially as well.  The ironic thing is that it is has without me practicing on it extensively....why?

Well because if I miss a green, I miss it CLOSE TO THE GREEN.  My misses are much better than they used to be.  It's easy to chip on and chip close to the green if you are pin high off of the green vs. way off to the right or left in a ditch of some short trying to play a shot like Mickelson.   Conversely if I do miss the green poorly, which still does happen, the improved elements in my full swing translates to my chipping and pitching swing fundamentals.  So when I am in the ditch, I'm MUCH better today than I was before when I was practicing my short game with crappy full swing fundamentals.

Some have mentioned the pros and how their shorts games are soo tight.  Well that's correct; however, what we are all forgetting is that these "pros" have been grooving their FULL swings from anywhere between 2-3, like Tiger, to 11-13 like a Jim Furyk.  So ball striking for them isn't the issue becasue at this point in their lives, it's pretty much automatic.  So the emphasis for them AT THAT level is pin point scrambling because they all pretty much stripe it as good as the guy next to them.

Us amateurs aren't on TOUR and on average, picked up the game waaay later than the touring pro to Golf professional in your town.  Some of us amateurs also have sub-par athletic abilities to really have the chance to hit it well when we decided to start playing this sgame. So for us, we need to first improve on ball striking to achieve our long terms goals (scoring lower) in this game.  The short game aspect will come and when the ball striking gets to when it needs to be and, when you are finally confident with it, you can refine the short game to get your handicap REALLY low....

One more things, as it pertains to putting. That is something that you should allocate time to do after EVERY full swing or short game practice session.

[x129]

Here is an article I came across a while back. Basically they take a 14 handicapper and the club pro off the course to play 9 holes. The club pro plays the same shot as the amateur from a hundred yards in. Over those 9 holes, the pro is 4 shots better due to the short game.  To put it another way, this amateur could go from a 14 to  6 or so if he had a better short game.

Look if your long game is at the level that you are dealing with out of bounds, total shanks, 50 yard drives and so on, you obviously need to work on that.  Somewhere when you drop into the low 90s you tend to hit the ball well on most holes.  At that point you can either try to get another 20-30 yard of distance and to be more accurate with your longer clubs or you can focus on scoring.   Both will work. To get down to scratch you need to do both.

[Tomboys]

Originally Posted by x129

Somewhere when you drop into the low 90s you tend to hit the ball well on most holes.  At that point you can either try to get another 20-30 yard of distance and to be more accurate with your longer clubs or you can focus on scoring.   Both will work. To get down to scratch you need to do both.

Sorry, I respectfully disagree.  A player that shoots low 90s only realizes about 2 GIR per round.  A player that shoots low 80s realizes about 7 per round.  A scratch player realizes about 12 per round.  As such, AFAIK, the only way to increase your GIR is to become a better ballstriker.

If ballstriking (GIR) wasn't a strong predictor of what type of score you would generally shoot, you wouldn't see much variance in the GIRs at the various levels.  Meaning that the GIR numbers would be very similar to one another whether you were a 70s, 80s or 90s shooter.  However, that is not the case.  The low 80s shooters average 3 times more GIR than the low 90s shooter.  The scratch player averages twice as many GIRs than the low 80s shooter.

Also, FWIW, according to Dave Pelz, he states that the scrambling rate for an amateur scratch golfer is about 30% and about 10% for the double-digit handicap golfer.  Based on this, if a golfer that averaged low 90s score had the short-game prowess of a scratch golfer, he would convert only 5 of the 16 GIR that he missed.  So, he now averages 85 which is better, but not great.  In contrast, if a scratch golfer had the short-game of a double-digit 'capper, he'd convert <1 of the remaining 6 GIR that he missed.  At that point, his average score would be about 74.

[Harmonious]

Originally Posted by Tomboys

Also, FWIW, according to Dave Pelz, he states that the scrambling rate for an amateur scratch golfer is about 30% and about 10% for the double-digit handicap golfer.  Based on this, if a golfer that averaged low 90s score had the short-game prowess of a scratch golfer, he would convert only 5 of the 16 GIR that he missed.  So, he now averages 85 which is better, but not great.  In contrast, if a scratch golfer had the short-game of a double-digit 'capper, he'd convert <1 of the remaining 6 GIR that he missed.  At that point, his average score would be about 74.

I've read a lot of Pelz' stuff, and don't recall seeing this stat.  30% scrambling for a scratch player seems way too low.  Heck, I've averaged over 50% each of the past five years.  I would expect to convert a minimum of 8 out of 16 up-and-down opportunities.  I think most other scratch players would respond the same way.

[zeg]

http://www.golf.com/golf/instruction/article/0,28136,1655500,00.html

I seriously doubt that typical scratch golfers are anywhere near 50% scramblers.  The number in this article matches the stats I found on the PGA Tour site for 2011 --- the pros range from about 45% to 66%.

[Tomboys]

Originally Posted by Harmonious

I've read a lot of Pelz' stuff, and don't recall seeing this stat.  30% scrambling for a scratch player seems way too low.  Heck, I've averaged over 50% each of the past five years.  I would expect to convert a minimum of 8 out of 16 up-and-down opportunities.  I think most other scratch players would respond the same way.

From the horse's mouth (or laptop, I should say):

From fairway lies, Tour pros scramble to save par 58 percent of the time when they miss a green in regulation, while scratch amateurs are successful only half as often. The results drop again for higher handicappers, who get up-and-down at a rate of only 10 percent.

Looking more closely at amateur scrambling, a few things become apparent: (1) The lower your handicap and the closer you are to the green, the better chance you have of scrambling success (Figure 3) ; and (2) if your approach shot finds the rough, the situation becomes more dire. In fact, double-digit handicappers make less than one up-and-down save for every 10 short-game shots played from the rough

Read more: http://www.golf.com/golf/instruction/article/0,28136,1655500-2,00.html#ixzz1QGA1hW1E

I crossed-checked this information with another study (independent of Dave's) and the information is consistent (see below).

	AVERAGE SCORE									Relationship
CATEGORY	71	75	79	81	85	89	91	95	99
GIR	12	10	8	7	5	3	2	0	0	Strong
% Fairways	81	71	61	56	46	36	31	21	11	Weak
Iron Accuracy	80	68	53	47	33	20	13	0	0	Good
Putts per Round	29.0	30.3	31.7	32.3	33.7	35.0	35.7	37.0	38.3	Weak
Pitch/Chip/Sand	5.1	7.4	9.8	10.9	13.3	15.6	16.8	19.2	21.5	Strong
Birdies	3.2	2.4	1.8	1.5	0.8	0.1	0	0	0	Strong
Pars	11.8	10.3	8.8	8.1	6.6	5.1	4.3	2.8	1.3	Strong

The last column indicates the strength of the statistical relationship between score and the statistic. A "Strong" relationship is one that predicts quite well one statisitic given the other (i.e. the SCORE given the GIR). A "Weak" relationship does not predict as well.

Looking at the average score of 71 (the study assumes a CR of 70), the player misses 6 GIR.  If the player had a short-game conversion rate of 30%, that would be 2 strokes "saved".  However, that player tends to realize 3.2 birdies per round.  That would off-set (well, most of it anyway) the failure to convert on the remaining 4 GIRs.

Also, just from my own analysis of a few of my rounds, I've found that the GIR stat relevency to my average score was accurate within 1 stroke.

[sean_miller]

People can use stats to "prove" whatever they want.

An up and down isn't a simple "yes or no" with the only choices being 1 stroke or 2. Maybe scratch golfers only have 3x the coversion rate on u/d opportunities, but they're typically making a bogey on those missed chances. For high cappers, once the u/d has been missed, it's often missed by several strokes over par. It's not just about pars and birdies for low index players. It's also about limiting the damage to a bogey instead of doubles, triples, and higher.

And GIR percentage? No shit having a high GIR percentage is desirable, but what does that mean exactly? The high capper can just work on his GIR club (whatever that is) and just get that dialed in? What about his can't get off the tee club, his bag of can't reach the green on his best day clubs, and his can't putt worth shit when he gets there anyway club?

[ks8829]

A simple question is who are the top five players on tour?

What is their strength?

What allows them to shoot under par consistently?

Luke Donald is not a long hitter on tour but he is the number one player in the world.

[Stretch]

Re: Scratch scrambling. That Pelz article is a bit misleading because he's including long-range u/d attempts. If you look at his data for shots from inside 30 yards -- which is what most of us are thinking of when we talk about scrambling I reckon, then scratch golfers are above 50%.

This more or less accords with other estimates I've seen: Hank Haney says 52% percent, for example.

[Tomboys]

Originally Posted by Stretch

Re: Scratch scrambling. That Pelz article is a bit misleading because he's including long-range u/d attempts. If you look at his data for shots from inside 30 yards -- which is what most of us are thinking of when we talk about scrambling I reckon, then scratch golfers are above 50%.

This more or less accords with other estimates I've seen: Hank Haney says 52% percent, for example.

Ok, so the 90 shooter now shoots an 82 instead of a 85.  That's still a far cry from the scratch ballstriker with the 18 'capper short game's score of @ 74.

You posted the above back in May of this year.

The gist of what OP (of this thread) wanted to know is why (at a 13 handicap) people tell him to work primarily on his short game to improve.  He feels he needs to work more on his long game.  As such, the data that both you and I presented l seem to suggest similar findings; improvements in just the long game (shots >100 yards) will lower scores more than improvements in just the short game.  Based on the above data that you presented, a touring pro (Pro1) is 5 strokes better (if you combine short game and sand game) than say a 15 'capper (Am2).  However, Pro1 is 16 strokes better in the long game than Am2.

[Stretch]

Not arguing with you (or myself!). Still believe that the long game is the key to major scoring improvement. Just wanted to clarify the particular point about scratch-level scrambling. OK? :-)

[x129]

On a downhill par 4 that is 300 yards, I can drive it 230 yards right now. Do I work on my ball striking to drive it 250 so I have an easier pitch or do I work on my short game so I can stick it on the green from 70 yards away?  Either works.  To be good, you would need to do both. And yes when pros talk about the short game they are counting all the various wedge shots and putting.

There are guys that shoot 90 that have 80 long games and 100 short games. And guys who are the reverse. And then there are the ones that are solid except for 2 holes when they score 8s. You have to evaluate your weakness and strengths and figure out where you need work. When you get the PGA tour (hell pretty much any minitour level), all of these numbers collapse to small differences. The difference between driving 280 and 290 is minimal in a lot of cases. Having your wedge land at 10 feet instead of 20 feet is huge in terms of puts made which is why all the pros say the short game is what matters.  If was driving the ball 290 and hitting 2/3+ of the fairways, I would be focused in the short game also.

Originally Posted by Tomboys

Sorry, I respectfully disagree.  A player that shoots low 90s only realizes about 2 GIR per round.  A player that shoots low 80s realizes about 7 per round.  A scratch player realizes about 12 per round.  As such, AFAIK, the only way to increase your GIR is to become a better ballstriker.

If ballstriking (GIR) wasn't a strong predictor of what type of score you would generally shoot, you wouldn't see much variance in the GIRs at the various levels.  Meaning that the GIR numbers would be very similar to one another whether you were a 70s, 80s or 90s shooter.  However, that is not the case.  The low 80s shooters average 3 times more GIR than the low 90s shooter.  The scratch player averages twice as many GIRs than the low 80s shooter.

Also, FWIW, according to Dave Pelz, he states that the scrambling rate for an amateur scratch golfer is about 30% and about 10% for the double-digit handicap golfer.  Based on this, if a golfer that averaged low 90s score had the short-game prowess of a scratch golfer, he would convert only 5 of the 16 GIR that he missed.  So, he now averages 85 which is better, but not great.  In contrast, if a scratch golfer had the short-game of a double-digit 'capper, he'd convert <1 of the remaining 6 GIR that he missed.  At that point, his average score would be about 74.

[McKee]

Maybe we should do what Ben Hogan said and just eliminate putting from golf???

No. I understand that the short game is the most stressful part of golf and the game would be a lot easier if we didn't have to deal with it.  The fact is - it is a great short game that gives you the confidence to swing freely at the ball. Practicing your short game will help you hit better iron shots. Having a mediocre short game just puts added pressure on your approach shots as well as your tee shots.

Learn to love practicing the short game and getting up and down from everywhere.

[Tomboys]

Originally Posted by x129

On a downhill par 4 that is 300 yards, I can drive it 230 yards right now. Do I work on my ball striking to drive it 250 so I have an easier pitch or do I work on my short game so I can stick it on the green from 70 yards away?  Either works.  To be good, you would need to do both. And yes when pros talk about the short game they are counting all the various wedge shots and putting.

There are guys that shoot 90 that have 80 long games and 100 short games. And guys who are the reverse. And then there are the ones that are solid except for 2 holes when they score 8s. You have to evaluate your weakness and strengths and figure out where you need work. When you get the PGA tour (hell pretty much any minitour level), all of these numbers collapse to small differences. The difference between driving 280 and 290 is minimal in a lot of cases. Having your wedge land at 10 feet instead of 20 feet is huge in terms of puts made which is why all the pros say the short game is what matters.  If was driving the ball 290 and hitting 2/3+ of the fairways, I would be focused in the short game also.

Who said improving ballstriking is all about gaining distance?  IME, while you may realize more distance with improved ballstriking, the main reasons are to improve consistency in contact, distance and direction.  Indeed, all you're trying to do is reduce the variance between your good shots and your bad shots.  If you actually understand the data presented, you'll see that when you compare each level against each other, more shots are to be gained by the long game than by the short game.  So, it's not about the "The Pros vs The Joes".  Also, long game is defined by shots outside of 100 yards--in essence, full swings.  So, again, it's not just about the driver or the 3i.  It includes the 120 yard pitching wedge and the 160 yard 7i approach shot to the green.  If you're missing those shots substantially more than you're making them, then perhaps having a deft shot game will help you salvage par.  However, nail those shots to where you can realize more GIRs and now you have a legitimate chance at a birdie or a tap in par.

Look, if you want to believe (as a 20 'capper) your path to enlightenment is primarily via the short game, then by all means, go for it.  I'm not going to sit here and try to convince you otherwise.

Originally Posted by Stretch

Not arguing with you (or myself!). Still believe that the long game is the key to major scoring improvement. Just wanted to clarify the particular point about scratch-level scrambling. OK?

I apologize if I came off pithy, it was not my intention.  We're on the same page.

Originally Posted by McKee

Maybe we should do what Ben Hogan said and just eliminate putting from golf???

No. I understand that the short game is the most stressful part of golf and the game would be a lot easier if we didn't have to deal with it.  The fact is - it is a great short game that gives you the confidence to swing freely at the ball.

No, IME, the short game isn't the most stressful part of golf.  For me, it's been the inability to produce consistent results with my full swings.  A great short game will minimize some of the ill-effects of a mediocre long game, but it's not a long-term solution to mediocre ballstriking.  Again, IME, what gives me confidence to swing freely at the ball is knowing I have a good swing and I can produce shots where the variance between my good shots and bad shots are not that great.  That's what gives me confidence, the other is just damage control.  Suffice to say, if I f*ck up the tee and approach shot bad enough on a certain hole, I get to utilize my great short game so that I take a 10 instead of a 12.  Whoop-dee-do.

Originally Posted by McKee

Practicing your short game will help you hit better iron shots.

Really?  Prove it.  Not with suppositions or innuendo, show some documented facts with a reasonable sample size.  During my lessons, I've worked with a shorter or abbreviated swing to learn a certain component of the full swing.  I had a flip, so my instructor gave me knock-down drills to help ingrain that forward leaning shaft at impact.  However, just because it was a shorter stroke and went a shorter distance, doesn't mean I was "practicing my short game".

[sean_miller]

Originally Posted by Tomboys

Originally Posted by McKee

Practicing your short game will help you hit better iron shots.

Really?  Prove it.  Not with suppositions or innuendo, show some documented facts with a reasonable sample size.  During my lessons, I've worked with a shorter or abbreviated swing to learn a certain component of the full swing.  I had a flip, so my instructor gave me knock-down drills to help ingrain that forward leaning shaft at impact.  However, just because it was a shorter stroke and went a shorter distance, doesn't mean I was "practicing my short game".

Prove it doesn't, and not with a story about your lessons which doesn't serve to disprove anything.

[Bryan SD2]

Why focus on the short game the most?

Simple.... your short game is invovled on EVERY HOLE.  (Don't give me that baloney about holing out from 150 either! - and yes, PUTTING is part of the short game).

Your Driver is not part of every hole.  Neither is the short irons, or mid irons, or long irons.  What's so hard to understand???  Practice the short game.  From full wedges all the way down to 3 foot putts.  You'll never break 80 if you don't.

[Harmonious]

Tomboys:  You advocate the long game as the way to lower scores.  Fair enough.  But where are you currently losing strokes, that causes you to be an 80's shooter rather than a 70's shooter? According to the stats you posted, you should be hitting around 6 greens per round.  What is your target GIR?  Is it 10?  12?  How much time and effort do you think it will take to drop your GIR's that much?

Conversely, if you increased your scrambling percentage, you would drop at least a couple (and probably more) strokes RIGHT NOW.  Why wouldn't you want to do that?

The same holds true for the OP at a 13 hdcp. Per your stats, he hits about 4 GIR. Imagine how much effort he will have to put in to raise his GIR to 9 or 10.  Not saying that the pursuit of better ballstriking is a wasted experience, it certainly is not.  But the short game will pay off for him (and you) much quicker.

[max power]

If he's only hitting 4 GIR and still manages a respectable 13 handicap I imagine he's got a decent short game and the effort required to raise the GIR wouldn't be that significant.  And the improved ballstriking/control would benefit every aspect of his game.  4 GIR is a number that can and should be improved upon.  This one's a no-brainer.

Originally Posted by Harmonious

Tomboys:  You advocate the long game as the way to lower scores.  Fair enough.  But where are you currently losing strokes, that causes you to be an 80's shooter rather than a 70's shooter? According to the stats you posted, you should be hitting around 6 greens per round.  What is your target GIR?  Is it 10?  12?  How much time and effort do you think it will take to drop your GIR's that much?

Conversely, if you increased your scrambling percentage, you would drop at least a couple (and probably more) strokes RIGHT NOW.  Why wouldn't you want to do that?

The same holds true for the OP at a 13 hdcp. Per your stats, he hits about 4 GIR. Imagine how much effort he will have to put in to raise his GIR to 9 or 10.  Not saying that the pursuit of better ballstriking is a wasted experience, it certainly is not.  But the short game will pay off for him (and you) much quicker.