so you think it's pointless to work more on your short game then long game? I never said it is pointless to work on the short game. What I am saying is that the numbers regarding strokes gained and such agree that more strokes can be saved by improving tee shots/long game compared to short game.
if you work on your short game more and then work on your long game you will score better because your short game is where it really matters. This thread with over 30 pages of great information backed up by statistics seems to disagree with you
just cause i worked on my weakest parts of my game. If your short game is a glaring weakness relative to your long game, then of course working on the weakest parts of YOUR game benefited you the most
and lets say you can drive it and your 2nd shot is 130y into the green and you come up short or go into the bunker. and your short game isn't good at all and you can get around the green in 2 but you end up with a 4 or 5 because you can't control your balls on the greens or even putt. Most golfers (even pro) are happy if they are around the green in 2 and end up with a 4..... by you saying "lets say you can drive it" you are assuming that high handicap golfers (target audience of this thread) are able to drive it in play and consistently enough to leave themselves 130yds into the green, which simply isnt the case. Even on a short 375yd par 4, that would require a 245 drive, back that to 400 yds, and now that requires a 270 yd drive, which the majority of golfers, lets alone high handicap golfers, aren't capable of hitting.
Now lets say you CANT drive it, so your 2nd shot is 200y into the green from the rough and through some trees. That is a much worse situation to be in, and more often than not, that approach from 130 yds is going to be much closer to the green than that shot from the rough at 200 yds is, regardless of how good or bad your short game is.
I get what Dave is saying...if the ball is simply rolled back distance-wise, the guy who is 30 yards shorter than the big hitters will still be 30 yards shorter, so the longer hitters will still have an advantage. But, once upon a time distance was not such a huge factor and there were plenty of guys who were not among the longest hitters winning on a regular basis. When did this change?
The big change happened when solid core golf balls were introduced, so roughly 1999. The reason was that although everyone gained distance with the new balls, the guys with higher swing speeds gained more distance than players with below average swing speeds (average driver clubhead speed on Tour is about 113 mph). So even though the shorter hitters picked up 10-15 yards, the big hitters gained 25. This created a bigger separation and this is when short hitters found it more difficult to compete with the big hitters and the focus shifted more heavily on hitting the ball long.
The new balls didn't spin nearly as much off the driver either, so they were much straighter. Clubheads had already started getting bigger and more forgiving, so hitting precise shots was not as important. This created a new generation of players who could swing as hard as possible and not get hurt by hitting marginal shots. Spin was the great equalizer! Back in the day, even power players had to hit the ball well to play, so you still had guys who were long (Andy Bean, Fred Couples, Davis Love III) but still had to swing within themselves.
Here is a good example of how much the new ball changed things...In 1981 Dan Pohl was the longest driver on Tour with a 280.1 yard average. 13 years later in 1994, Davis Love III led the Tour in driving distance averaging 283.8 yards (just over 3.5 yards difference). Just 9 years after that in 2003 Hank Kuehne was at 321.4. That's 37.6 yards longer! Pretty impressive. Not to take anything away from Hank, but if he had to play with a persimmon driver and a wound ball there is a good chance he would have never gotten his Tour card. Players could not swing as hard as they do now simply because it was imperative to hit the sweet spot and to control the spin. Before anyone brings up Bubba Watson and tries to point out that he is long and works the ball like they used to back in the day, let me stop you. If Bubba had to play with traditional gear, he might not break 80. I understand he is a multiple major winner, but I'm telling you, he doesn't hit the ball precisely enough to have even been a pro, much less win majors.
Check this out: In 2010, Bubba and Corey Pavin were in a sudden death playoff along with Scott Verplank. Their stats for the week:
Driving Distance 262.0
Driving Accuracy 89%
Putts Per GIR 1.643
Sand Save Percentage 1-1- 100%
B. Watson Stats:
Driving Distance 321
Driving Accuracy 66%
Putts Per GIR 1.63
Sand Save Percentage 3-4 75%
Bubba was hitting the ball 60 yards longer than Pavin, but hit less greens and more bunkers. The first playoff hole, Corey hit a hybrid into the green, Bubba hit sand wedge. If Bubba hit less fairways, less greens and more bunkers with today's drivers and balls with Corey spotting him 60 yards, he would have no chance with a ball that spun twice as much.
This is extremely specific. I understand if there isn't much to be said.
One of my local courses is Miami Shores GC in Troy, OH. As near as I understand Mr. Ross designed the course very near the end of his life (the course opened in 1947). It's always sort of been neat to think that greatness touched one of our local munis. I do understand they have substantially changed both nines since then and would love to have seen it as Ross created it.
Any details on this project would be really cool.