To Golfers Who Score in the 70s - What's Your Story?

[DaveP043]

13 hours ago, Caleb Hoshiyama said:

The question was how does one shoot in the 70's and for me it was learning how to do what most of the golfers are replying to : hitting GIR's , putts, fairways; but in order to hit enough GIR, lower putts and more fairways, one must learn a correct golf swing, and putting stroke.  RST has done that for me and most of the members of RST.  Is it a plug for RST; didn't mean it to be, but it has worked for me and a lot of other golfers, so if you want to call it a plug, fine with me.  I think the real answer is "how" not "what" will make one shoot in the 70's consistently.  All of the comments on "what" it takes means nothing if one cannot perform these tasks; RST teaches one how to get more GIR's, fairways and fewer putts.

Welcome back, @Caleb Hoshiyama  As I'm sure you can imagine, we see a lot of one-time posters, many of them pushing a particular swing theory or system.  When your first post recommends a single system, seemingly as "THE" answer, I suspected that you might be one of those one-timers.  Its always interesting and informative to actually discuss those particular theories or systems, to find what they share and where they differ from other teaching methods.  Now that you've come back, I'd be interested to hear more from you about RST.  You might want to look at some of the instructional content here:

 

and see if you can find differences or commonalities to discuss.  Welcome again to TST!

[Buckeyebowman]

My story is practice and play, practice and play, practice and play! Back in the day it was a lot cheaper for me. I could hit a large bucket at the range for $1,50, and go play 9 at a nice course for $3,50! I LIVED at the range! I hit balls at least 5 if not 6 days a week!

But you have to play as well. You have to be able to take what you learn at the range out to the course! Otherwise, you become Ricky Ranger! It's kind of hard for people these days.

[RickPro]

On 28/07/2012 at 4:16 AM, gr8golf said:

Hello,

 

I am very interested in golfers who score in the 70s. How did they get to that point?

 

If you score in the 70s, can you please share your story? I would greatly appreciate any post at all explaining your path to breaking and consistently scoring in the 70s, but if you want some ideas, this is what I'm particularly interested in:

 

1) How long did it take to break 70? If it took you 2 years, was that 2 years from the first time you picked up a golf club, or did you just play around for the first year and then take the second year seriously?

 

2) What methods did you follow? Did you pick and choose from different instructors, books, DVDs, or even just watching tips on the golf channel? Did you follow a single set method/book/DVD/instructor and follow it like it was your bible?

 

3) What does it take to score in the 70s consistently (in your opinion of course)? A consistent swing? A good mental game? 70% mechanics 30% mental? Please share.

 

Thanks!

1) I started when i was 13 as a caddie, and I hated golf. I was all about basketball, I was super athletic. I received free clubs from the private club i caddied at and we were able to play after everyone was finished. This was usually around 5pm. So 5pm to sun down is when we could play. I played just to kill time until my mother picked me up. It was a very stupid and pointless game at 1st, but then when i hit one good, that was the beginning of my love for golf. I worked 6 days a week, and golfed 6 days a week. I shot in the 70's early in my 2nd year. I was from up north so my 1st year i golfed I only played from june to september. then next year i broke 80's, so it only took me about a year. For me just playing everyday 6 days a week when the weather permits.

2) Early on I took bits and pieces of everything, but every swing is unique, and there isn't really a perfect swing, just a perfect swing for yourself. I just made adjustments myself to make it do what i wanted to do. i pretty much played and was surround around golf all the time. 

3) 99% mental and 1% mechanics (your mind can't swing the club). best way to lower your score is to be in competitions.  Everyone is a scratch player when they play for fun, but when your in competitions you will see what your real scores are. especially with a big crowd of people watching you. now I use game golf live to really see where i am struggling and work on those key pieces.

[Valleygolfer]

For me it was taking everything seriously and getting down to the nitty gritty. Make chips close and making putts. Giving yourself an opportunity to score. Not taking chances or low percentage shots. Making sure you are 100% ready for the shot you are taking at that moment.

[Groucho Valentine]

For me, the jump to being a 80's to a 70's shooter is when my putting and short game improved. I think i was shooting in the 70's by the end of my second year playing regularly. You're not going to hit it to 15 feet on every approach shot, and being able to recover from a missed green for par is how you keep the score low at most levels of the amateur game. If you make 3 or 4 more of those 5 footers for par in a round, suddenly those 83's become 79's, and so forth. Dedicating the same focus to your short game and putting work as you do your full swing is key to that.  

Course management comes into play too. I see to many hero shot attempts from high handicappers. It also seemed like my average scoring improved when i just accepted bogey as par on the holes where i was in trouble off the tee, or hit a really bad approach shot.  

[iacas]

5 hours ago, Groucho Valentine said:

For me, the jump to being a 80's to a 70's shooter is when my putting and short game improved. I think i was shooting in the 70's by the end of my second year playing regularly. You're not going to hit it to 15 feet on every approach shot, and being able to recover from a missed green for par is how you keep the score low at most levels of the amateur game. If you make 3 or 4 more of those 5 footers for par in a round, suddenly those 83's become 79's, and so forth. Dedicating the same focus to your short game and putting work as you do your full swing is key to that.

Statistics show you're a bit off target there.

[Groucho Valentine]

3 minutes ago, iacas said:

Statistics show you're a bit off target there.

Those statistics are wrong then. At least when it came to me. 

[iacas]

8 minutes ago, Groucho Valentine said:

Those statistics are wrong then. At least when it came to me. 

They're not wrong generally.

And I'd wager they're closer to correct than incorrect for you too. Unless your short game/putting was incredibly poor relative to your full swing, odds are you were not the exception.

Generally speaking there are far more gains and longer lasting ones to be made in the full swing.

Hence the 65/20/15 guideline.

[Groucho Valentine]

Just now, iacas said:

They're not wrong generally.

And I'd wager they're closer to correct than incorrect for you too. Unless your short game/putting was incredibly poor relative to your full swing, odds are you were not the exception.

As opposed being wrong not generally? It wasn't great. But i practiced and now i recover from a missed green at least half of the time, which improved my scores alot back then.  Im not sure how much id trust statiics on amatuer golf, anyway. Millions of us play and nobody is tracking our shots like players on major tours. Any sample data has to be less than 1%. Should be just simple math, make more par putts, scores drop. 

[iacas]

5 hours ago, Groucho Valentine said:

As opposed being wrong not generally?

No. The stats are, for almost all golfers, correct. It's unlikely - but possible - that you were one of the exceptions. That you had a full swing capable of shooting in the 70s while your glaring weakness was the short game and putting.

There's less Separation Value® to be had in the short game and putting. The average golfer loses far fewer strokes in those categories than they do in approach shots or driving. In fact, they lose on average about half the strokes in their short game + putting than they do in the other two categories.

5 hours ago, Groucho Valentine said:

But i practiced and now i recover from a missed green at least half of the time, which improved my scores alot back then.

Okay.

5 hours ago, Groucho Valentine said:

Im not sure how much id trust statiics on amatuer golf, anyway. Millions of us play and nobody is tracking our shots like players on major tours. Any sample data has to be less than 1%. Should be just simple math, make more par putts, scores drop. 

The simple math is actually this: give yourself more birdie putts (by hitting more greens in regulation), scores drop even more.

You're discussing this from what seems like a position of ignorance. You don't seem to be aware of what I wrote in Lowest Score Wins. Or what Mark Broadie wrote in Every Shot Counts. Or what any of the recent data tells us about how golfers score.

You'd probably guess that Team B would win this challenge:

---

The simple answer to how to "score in the 70s" is:

• Advance your ball. Hit it solidly, forward, between the ropes.
• Get on or near 15-18 greens per round.
• Don't have a huge glaring weakness in any part of your game.
• Don't take many penalty strokes.

[Groucho Valentine]

10 hours ago, iacas said:

No. The stats are, for almost all golfers, correct. It's unlikely - but possible - that you were one of the exceptions. That you had a full swing capable of shooting in the 70s while your glaring weakness was the short game and putting.

There's less Separation Value® to be had in the short game and putting. The average golfer loses far fewer strokes in those categories than they do in approach shots or driving. In fact, they lose on average about half the strokes in their short game + putting than they do in the other two categories.

Okay.

The simple math is actually this: give yourself more birdie putts (by hitting more greens in regulation), scores drop even more.

You're discussing this from what seems like a position of ignorance. You don't seem to be aware of what I wrote in Lowest Score Wins. Or what Mark Broadie wrote in Every Shot Counts. Or what any of the recent data tells us about how golfers score.

You'd probably guess that Team B would win this challenge:

---

The simple answer to how to "score in the 70s" is:

• Advance your ball. Hit it solidly, forward, between the ropes.
• Get on or near 15-18 greens per round.
• Don't have a huge glaring weakness in any part of your game.
• Don't take many penalty strokes.

That sounds like you're just reaffirming your own conclusions. It doesn't mean you're right buddy. Im pretty sure you're not. At least not in my case. 

[NCGolfer]

23 hours ago, Groucho Valentine said:

For me, the jump to being a 80's to a 70's shooter is when my putting and short game improved. I think i was shooting in the 70's by the end of my second year playing regularly. You're not going to hit it to 15 feet on every approach shot, and being able to recover from a missed green for par is how you keep the score low at most levels of the amateur game. If you make 3 or 4 more of those 5 footers for par in a round, suddenly those 83's become 79's, and so forth. Dedicating the same focus to your short game and putting work as you do your full swing is key to that.  

Course management comes into play too. I see to many hero shot attempts from high handicappers. It also seemed like my average scoring improved when i just accepted bogey as par on the holes where i was in trouble off the tee, or hit a really bad approach shot.  

I think your second statement is fine.

As for the first, when I started shooting in the 70's with regularity I never practiced my short game.  Never.  It was all about ball striking and limiting mistakes (as your second statement indicates.)  Wayward shots and bad ball striking can compound very quickly...more so than missing a few short putts.

1 hour ago, Groucho Valentine said:

That sounds like you're just reaffirming your own conclusions. It doesn't mean you're right buddy. Im pretty sure you're not. At least not in my case. 

It doesn't mean you're right.  I'm pretty sure you're not.  At least not in my case...and what research has indicated.  

[Groucho Valentine]

4 minutes ago, NCGolfer said:

I think your second statement is fine.

As for the first, when I started shooting in the 70's with regularity I never practiced my short game.  Never.  It was all about ball striking and limiting mistakes (as your second statement indicates.)  Wayward shots and bad ball striking can compound very quickly...more so than missing a few short putts.

It doesn't mean you're right.  I'm pretty sure you're not.  At least not in my case...and what research has indicated.  

Im always right. Have you visited the Healing Lounge? Theres so much truth in there you might puke. 

I was always a good ballstriker. It came naturally to me when i was beginning. But from my experience i made the jump to a good player to an elite player when those parts of my game improved. Like i responded to iacas, I'm just not trusting the sample data, there. Everyone misses greens in a round and to say short game and putting dont matter in becoming a good player is bordering on negligent, IMO. 

[NCGolfer]

17 minutes ago, Groucho Valentine said:

Everyone misses greens in a round and to say short game and putting dont matter in becoming a good player is bordering on negligent, IMO. 

I never said it didn't matter.  I'm arguing that it matters less than good ball striking.  Don't confuse the two.

I think that the short game will start mattering more (separation value) as your index goes lower.  This isn't based on data but understanding and experience of seeing great ball strikers that don't have the short game that is good enough to make it as a pro.  Getting to a + handicap can't happen if you don't hit it great.  If you then layer on great putting/short game then you have something special.  The jump from 80's to 70's...or even the low 70's is more dependent on ball striking.

Putting matters.  Absolutely.  Just not as much. I get the feeling we will agree to disagree...and that's OK.

[p1n9183]

Shoot 77 with average short game and awfull 37 putts. But i hit 14 GIR and 4 nGIR. I will never shoot 77 playing the long game like i play the putter that day.

Off 20 rounds my worst and best Stroke Ganined values are as follow:

Stroke Gained (Best / Worst)
Tee Shots: 0 / 5,1     ( 2,5 strokes to improve here )
Approach to green: -2,4 / 3,8   ( 0,7 here )
Around Green: -1,4 / 1 ( Im better than an average pro :D, why waste my time practicing this??? )
Putting: -1,9 / 4,7 ( 2,8 here, yes i´m the worst putter player in the world and i´m working on it)

If i play my worst long game and my best short game i should shoot= 5,1+3,8+(-1,4)+(-1,9) = 5,6
If i play my best long game and my worst short game i should shoot= 0+(-2,4)+1+4,7 = 3,3

The roof for improving the long game it´s higher than the short game. It takes more time, but on the long run will lower your scores more than the improvements on short game.

7 years ago i only practiced short game. I reach 2 handicap and quit over 2 years.
Last year i returned to practice shot game and lower my handicap from 4 to 2, this year i focus on long game and now im at +1, best handicap of my life with the same short game i always have and i still can improve a lot my ball striking.

 

[Groucho Valentine]

18 minutes ago, NCGolfer said:

I never said it didn't matter.  I'm arguing that it matters less than good ball striking.  Don't confuse the two.

I think that the short game will start mattering more (separation value) as your index goes lower.  This isn't based on data but understanding and experience of seeing great ball strikers that don't have the short game that is good enough to make it as a pro.  Getting to a + handicap can't happen if you don't hit it great.  If you then layer on great putting/short game then you have something special.  The jump from 80's to 70's...or even the low 70's is more dependent on ball striking.

Putting matters.  Absolutely.  Just not as much. I get the feeling we will agree to disagree...and that's OK.

I suppose ball striking matters more than putting and short game to a 10-20 handicap than does to a scratch player. I will admit that. The stuff i play in, everyone hits the ball, so making those 10-15 footers is usually how you separate. I can go out to 150 yards and hit 8 or 9 irons inside 20 feet forever. But i need to drain some of those for my score to be lower. 

[DaveP043]

4 minutes ago, Groucho Valentine said:

I suppose ball striking matters more than putting and short game to a 10-20 handicap than does to a scratch player. I will admit that. 

And I think that's the context of the original post, how does a player go from shooting 85 to consistently in the 70s.  Short game helps, but full swings help more.  

[Lihu]

1 hour ago, Groucho Valentine said:

Im always right. Have you visited the Healing Lounge? Theres so much truth in there you might puke. 

I was always a good ballstriker. It came naturally to me when i was beginning. But from my experience i made the jump to a good player to an elite player when those parts of my game improved. Like i responded to iacas, I'm just not trusting the sample data, there. Everyone misses greens in a round and to say short game and putting dont matter in becoming a good player is bordering on negligent, IMO. 

The ex-D1 +1 handicap my son knew was also a naturally gifted ball striker. He just hits really far. Like, Bubba Watson far. His short game was atrocious and up until this year he really didn't care.

So, you're not the only one I know who could hit a long way and have a terrible short game.

This site, however, is rarely wrong about facts in general. The keyword is in "general". 99.9999% of people don't hit as far as you and this young man do, and fall into the "general" category. That's probably why they doubt you and very likely doubt me in conveying this story to you. But that's life on this site

Just move on to another topic. . .

Edited August 29, 2017 by Lihu