Questions about some golf terms

[leon555]

Hello,

New to golf world and want to understand some golf terms.

Can anyone tell me what the definitions about "Up and down", "Sand save" and "Green in regulation" are?

Thank you.

[Shorty]

Up and down: Taking two shots to get in the hole after being near the green. Usually a chip and one  putt.

Sand save: Getting down in two from a bunker - the bunker shot itself and one putt. (Unless you hole the bunker shot!)

Green in regulation: Par 3  - on the green in one. Par 4 - on the green in two Par 5 - On the green in three.

[leon555]

Appreciate your reply.

Quote:

Up and down: Taking two shots to get in the hole after being near the green. Usually a chip and one  putt.

Sand save: Getting down in two from a bunker - the bunker shot itself and one putt. (Unless you hole the bunker shot!)

Green in regulation: Par 3  - on the green in one. Par 4 - on the green in two Par 5 - On the green in three.

Please correct me for my understanding from your reply.

GIR is "Par" related but, Up and down and Sand save are not related to "Par". For example, regarding Up and down definitions, if I've got 3 shots to have my ball near the green for Par 4 hole and I got another two shots (chip and putt) to get hole out. I can still say I got up and down in finishing the hole. Is that correct? Is it the same as Sand save?

Thank you very much.

[Fourputt]

Originally Posted by leon555

Appreciate your reply.

Please correct me for my understanding from your reply.

GIR is "Par" related but, Up and down and Sand save are not related to "Par". For example, regarding Up and down definitions, if I've got 3 shots to have my ball near the green for Par 4 hole and I got another two shots (chip and putt) to get hole out. I can still say I got up and down in finishing the hole. Is that correct? Is it the same as Sand save?

Thank you very much.

In my opinion, up and down is not par related.  Getting up and down is when you hole out in two shots or less from some point near the green, but not necessarily just for par or better.  You can get up and down for par, up and down for birdie, or up and down for bogey or worse.  All it refers to is making it into the hole in two shots.

A sand save is when you save par after playing from a bunker.  A "Sandy" is when you get up and down from  greenside bunker regardless of the end score.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Fourputt

In my opinion, up and down is not par related.  Getting up and down is when you hole out in two shots or less from some point near the green, but not necessarily just for par or better.  You can get up and down for par, up and down for birdie, or up and down for bogey or worse.  All it refers to is making it into the hole in two shots.

A sand save is when you save par after playing from a bunker.  A "Sandy" is when you get up and down from  greenside bunker regardless of the end score.

It's fine if that's what you like to do, but you have them precisely backwards as far as the PGA Tour is concerned:

Sand Saves : The percent of time a player was able to get 'up and down' once in a greenside sand bunker ( regardless of score ). Note: 'Up and down' indicates it took the player 2 shots or less to put the ball in the hole from that point.

Up and Down : The percent of time a player misses the green in regulation, but still makes par or better.

Again, y'all are free to do what you want, but the true definition kind of comes from the PGA Tour if that's what you want to compare yourself to. If you're just starting out, though, and aren't getting many pars, I recommend counting your "scrambling" (up and down) as just that: two shots from inside of maybe 50-75 yards or so. Then as you get better, switch to the "official" way of requiring par or better.

[The_Pharaoh]

I also have this discussion with other players regarding GIR. A lot of people count a GIR when their ball is on the apron. Then to compound the error, they count the next stroke as a putt when they use their putter!

[sean_miller]

A "sandy" is making par after hitting the sand (greenside or fairway) and a "barky" is making par after hitting at least one tree. We came up with a "fatsy", "topsy", and "flubsy" after our group all made par on the same hole after completely awful drives.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by The_Pharaoh

I also have this discussion with other players regarding GIR. A lot of people count a GIR when their ball is on the apron. Then to compound the error, they count the next stroke as a putt when they use their putter!

I write down the true definitions when I play. That's why my UD percentage is higher and my putts lower than some people. Lots of "two foot leaves" after missing the green, often from putting just off the fringe.

But when I consider my ball striking for the day I count "GIR + Fringes." My best ever is 16 GFIR (greens or fringes in regulation). Sometimes it's better to be on the fringe than on the green.

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by iacas

I write down the true definitions when I play. That's why my UD percentage is higher and my putts lower than some people. Lots of "two foot leaves" after missing the green, often from putting just off the fringe.

But when I consider my ball striking for the day I count "GIR + Fringes." My best ever is 16 GFIR (greens or fringes in regulation). Sometimes it's better to be on the fringe than on the green.

Haha! I do exactly the same thing with the GFIRs. I am always more concerned with how I hit it than how many putts I take. I'd much rather have a high GIR %age and higher total number of putts than low and low. At the end of the day, you can't have your cake and eat it too. I also want to compare myself to the pros on the PGA Tour. Doing it any other way doesn't make sense.

How do you score Sand Saves? Only one per hole? What do you do if you leave the first attempt in the bunker or hit it into another bunker? Also, what do you do about GIRs and putting if you hit the GIR and then putt off of it? It has happened to me! I usually just count it as a GIR and 3 putts as the next shot is usually a putt from the apron.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by The_Pharaoh

How do you score Sand Saves? Only one per hole? What do you do if you leave the first attempt in the bunker or hit it into another bunker? Also, what do you do about GIRs and putting if you hit the GIR and then putt off of it? It has happened to me! I usually just count it as a GIR and 3 putts as the next shot is usually a putt from the apron.

I do sand saves for par only, but that's just because I almost never have a sand save that isn't for par... I rarely chop it around a hole and THEN get in a bunker. Odds are if I'm in a bunker in GIR+1 already I've messed up an UD attempt the shot before. So I just put failed UD and leave it at that.

I don't leave the ball in the bunker either, but unless I hole out with the second bunker shot, it's a failed SS regardless of the score. I don't think I've ever putted off a green either. If I did every shot would be a putt once you putt the first time.

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by iacas

I do sand saves for par only, but that's just because I almost never have a sand save that isn't for par... I rarely chop it around a hole and THEN get in a bunker. Odds are if I'm in a bunker in GIR+1 already I've messed up an UD attempt the shot before. So I just put failed UD and leave it at that.

I don't leave the ball in the bunker either, but unless I hole out with the second bunker shot, it's a failed SS regardless of the score. I don't think I've ever putted off a green either. If I did every shot would be a putt once you putt the first time.

I do sand saves regardless of whether it is for par or not. A lot of the time I'm in a greenside bunker in two on a par 5. The sand save is for birdie and I count that. The same if it is for triple bogey. I used to count two if I had a tricky lie in the bunker and couldn't get it out, and then failed with the second sand save. If I holed the putt from the second sand shot I would count it as 1 out of 2 on that hole. Now I just count it as one failed sand save (0/1).

I think I've putted off a green once since I started keeping stats in 2004. I've always wondered what to do.

I wrote to the Stats department at the PGA Tour about this but never got a reply.

[sacm3bill]

Originally Posted by The_Pharaoh

I also have this discussion with other players regarding GIR. A lot of people count a GIR when their ball is on the apron. Then to compound the error, they count the next stroke as a putt when they use their putter!

I don't see that as compounding the error. In essence what they're doing is just playing slightly larger greens than what they actually are - their stats are still valid for tracking their personal progress.

What would be compounding the error would be if they *didn't* count the putt from the fringe as a putt. (I.e., consider the apron the green for GIR purposes but not for putting purposes.) Their putts per hole would be ridiculously low in that case.

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by sacm3bill

I don't see that as compounding the error. In essence what they're doing is just playing slightly larger greens than what they actually are - their stats are still valid for tracking their personal progress.

What would be compounding the error would be if they *didn't* count the putt from the fringe as a putt. (I.e., consider the apron the green for GIR purposes but not for putting purposes.) Their putts per hole would be ridiculously low in that case.

I used the word compounding to mean two errors instead of one. But fine, if counting a green missed as a green hit and counting putts from off the green as putts on the green is a valid way of tracking personal 'progress', then I need to update my definition of the word progress. I guess these people are the same people that move their ball in the rough, shoot 6 but write down 5, give themselves putts etc. But that's OK, because it is all in the name of "personal progress".

[tristanhilton85]

Originally Posted by The_Pharaoh

I used the word compounding to mean two errors instead of one. But fine, if counting a green missed as a green hit and counting putts from off the green as putts on the green is a valid way of tracking personal 'progress', then I need to update my definition of the word progress. I guess these people are the same people that move their ball in the rough, shoot 6 but write down 5, give themselves putts etc. But that's OK, because it is all in the name of "personal progress".

Yeah, I don't see it quite like that.... personally I wouldn't count hitting the fringe as a GIR and wouldn't count a putt from the fringe as a putt... but if somebody wants to count the fringe as a green a putt from there as a putt then I think that's fine... I know that when I was a worse golfer than I am now I would count up and down as any shot from 100 yards in with a one putt, regardless of score, even though an up and down is technically for par.  As long as a person is consistent in their stat keeping and can compare one round to another then it is a good way to monitor personal progress.  Moving their ball in the rough, shooting 6 and writing down 5, and giving them self putts are all violating rules; keeping stats in a "unique" way is not and is not comparable to this situation.

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by tristanhilton85

Yeah, I don't see it quite like that.... personally I wouldn't count hitting the fringe as a GIR and wouldn't count a putt from the fringe as a putt... but if somebody wants to count the fringe as a green a putt from there as a putt then I think that's fine... I know that when I was a worse golfer than I am now I would count up and down as any shot from 100 yards in with a one putt, regardless of score, even though an up and down is technically for par.  As long as a person is consistent in their stat keeping and can compare one round to another then it is a good way to monitor personal progress.  Moving their ball in the rough, shooting 6 and writing down 5, and giving them self putts are all violating rules; keeping stats in a "unique" way is not and is not comparable to this situation.

People can do what they like when it comes to tracking their stats, but call an apple an apple. Don't count a ball on the apron as a GIR or an U&D; as a shot and putt from 100 yards. Just call them something else.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by The_Pharaoh

I used the word compounding to mean two errors instead of one. But fine, if counting a green missed as a green hit and counting putts from off the green as putts on the green is a valid way of tracking personal 'progress', then I need to update my definition of the word progress. I guess these people are the same people that move their ball in the rough, shoot 6 but write down 5, give themselves putts etc. But that's OK, because it is all in the name of "personal progress".

Bit testy today? ;-) It's okay. Some would tell me I'm testy on days that end in "y." :-)

Anyway, here's how I keep stats. I write down true greens in regulation, as in on the putting surface. If I'm on the fringe, I missed the green and I have an up and down attempt. I'll likely only have one putt, because putts are made from the green, not the fringe.

But when considering my ball striking in general, I'll often mentally flip this. I'll count the number of times I was on the green or fringe - I call it "GFIR" (greens/fringes in regulation), and then I'll consider putts as times when I used a putter.

Consider two rounds:

	GIR	GFIR	Actual Putts	Score
Round 1	9	10	27	72
Round 2	9	16	27	72

Which was the better ball striking round? Which was the better putting round? Better short game?

I consider it "massaging the data." I still keep the "hard data" but when I truly evaluate a round, I see if I'm missing greens by a lot or a little. I see if I'm missing fairways by a lot or a little. I see if I'm facing lots of short putts or if I was holing everything from everywhere that day.

Hard data alone isn't the "whole picture" and thus "massaging the data" can give you a clearer, more accurate picture to allow you to track your progress.

We agree, as you'll notice, that keeping the "hard data" is still important. It's a line in the sand and lets you compare stats on an even keel, or at least, as even a keel as possible (green sizes can drastically skew GIR figures and putts per round figures, for example, just as narrow fairways can skew Fairways Hit).

[sacm3bill]

Originally Posted by The_Pharaoh

I used the word compounding to mean two errors instead of one. But fine, if counting a green missed as a green hit and counting putts from off the green as putts on the green is a valid way of tracking personal 'progress', then I need to update my definition of the word progress. I guess these people are the same people that move their ball in the rough, shoot 6 but write down 5, give themselves putts etc. But that's OK, because it is all in the name of "personal progress".

What are you on about? They're not compounding the initial error, they're actually balancing it somewhat with the second. As long as someone uses a consistent definition for their stats, they'll be able to see whether they're improving or not in whatever areas they're keeping stats on. The only downside is they won't be able to compare their stats to someone who uses the PGA Tour's definition - but that's irrelevant if they're just tracking their *own* progress. (No "quotes" around that word necessary).

Originally Posted by The_Pharaoh

People can do what they like when it comes to tracking their stats, but call an apple an apple. Don't count a ball on the apron as a GIR or an U&D; as a shot and putt from 100 yards. Just call them something else.

Like with creative scoring, as long as we're not betting money on who hit the most greens, call the apron the green for all I care.  Heck, call the fairway the green for all I care.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by sacm3bill

What are you on about? They're not compounding the initial error, they're actually balancing it with the second. As long as someone uses a consistent definition for their stats, they'll be able to see whether they're improving or not in whatever areas they're keeping stats on. The only downside is they won't be able to compare their stats to someone who uses the PGA Tour's definition - but that's irrelevant if they're just tracking their *own* progress. No "quotes" necessary.

I agree with all of this.