Would you rather have ...

[Big C]

Originally Posted by Jeremie Boop

It's rare to get those good breaks, not so rare to get the bad ones though!

True, and this only gets more amplified the better your game gets. When you hit a good shot, or even a decent one, the only "break" that is possible is a bad break. A good result is going to be attributed to your shot-making, whereas a bad result (ball ends up in a divot, ball runs through the fairway, ball spins off the green, ball hit a sprinkler head and caroms 20 yards too far) is going to be the result of bad luck. Think about it, our only opportunities for "good breaks" are when we hit terrible shots!

[boogielicious]

I would absolutely change if I had to hit a 4 iron instead of a 7 or 8. I would take 140-150 from the rough.

Thanks for the response.   It helps to have better players share their approach.

[GangGreen]

I had previously replied to this post but thought I would add on. Had a chance to play at a charity golf outing yesterday at a really nice course, fairways were immaculate and the rough was somewhat high but not outragous. Turned out to be a scramble format and I had one of my better days off the tee, alot of decent shots in the fairway but I've never been a long hitter (maybe 230-240 yards on a good day). One of the guys we were with was absolutely BOMBING it all day, easily anwhere between 50-75 yards past the rest of us on any given hole. Everytime we had to choose between being back in the fairway vs. closer to the green in the rough, we went with closer to the green without a second thought.

[Kieran123]

I had previously replied to this post but thought I would add on. Had a chance to play at a charity golf outing yesterday at a really nice course, fairways were immaculate and the rough was somewhat high but not outragous. Turned out to be a scramble format and I had one of my better days off the tee, alot of decent shots in the fairway but I've never been a long hitter (maybe 230-240 yards on a good day). One of the guys we were with was absolutely BOMBING it all day, easily anwhere between 50-75 yards past the rest of us on any given hole. Everytime we had to choose between being back in the fairway vs. closer to the green in the rough, we went with closer to the green without a second thought.

But that is a scramble. 4 players hitting from the same spot.

[Jeremie Boop]

But that is a scramble. 4 players hitting from the same spot.

It's the same principle, you choose the spot that gives the highest possibility for a good shot. Most people are going to have an easier time getting close if they are closer to the hole.

[mdl]

But that is a scramble. 4 players hitting from the same spot.

It's the same principle though.  They picked the closer ball without a second though cause they knew each of them had a better chance of a better result from there.  This is an easy call.  It's an easy call at a 30 yard difference like in the OP.  Even easier at a 50-75 yard difference.  Think about how penal the rough would have to be for you to prefer a 3i/4i approach from the fairway over a 9i approach from the rough.  More penal by far than any course I've ever played.

[Kieran123]

It's the same principle though.  They picked the closer ball without a second though cause they knew each of them had a better chance of a better result from there.  This is an easy call.  It's an easy call at a 30 yard difference like in the OP.  Even easier at a 50-75 yard difference.  Think about how penal the rough would have to be for you to prefer a 3i/4i approach from the fairway over a 9i approach from the rough.  More penal by far than any course I've ever played.

I don't think so. My shot distances are far more consistent from the fairway than they are from the rough. I may have an idea of how far my shot will go from the rough, but the chances it will fly, or come short, go left, or go right are much higher than they are hitting from the fairway.

[chasm]

A lot of the different responses here depend on what people regard as "penal" rough. The semi rough where I play is dense enough for a ball to settle down in (I've lost plenty of balls there) and certainly lush enough to compromise one's chances of making good contact. So I'd certainly be happier playing a 5-iron from the fairway than a seven or eight iron from the semi rough, because with the latter I'm much more likely to lose control of the shot.

[mdl]

I don't think so. My shot distances are far more consistent from the fairway than they are from the rough. I may have an idea of how far my shot will go from the rough, but the chances it will fly, or come short, go left, or go right are much higher than they are hitting from the fairway.

I don't have numbers (yours, or even specifics from pros that really answer this question) to back this up.  But at least on the kinds of courses I've played, I have a hard time believing that rough makes your PW GIR% lower than your GIR% with a 7i from the fairway.  Are you sure it's not just that you feel less confident than you want to holding a PW when you're lying in the rough, so you misestimate the comparative GIR%s from those two situations?

And this isn't numbers, but you hear old golfers complain about how modern PGA players with modern balls and clubs have learned that "bomb and gouge" lead to lower scores instead of hitting it shorter but more accurately and having more longer club approaches from the fairway.  You wouldn't hear that if modern players hadn't learned that in fact it is advantageous to have a wedge from the rough instead of a mid iron from the fairway.

[14ledo81]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdl

It's the same principle though.  They picked the closer ball without a second though cause they knew each of them had a better chance of a better result from there.  This is an easy call.  It's an easy call at a 30 yard difference like in the OP.  Even easier at a 50-75 yard difference.  Think about how penal the rough would have to be for you to prefer a 3i/4i approach from the fairway over a 9i approach from the rough.  More penal by far than any course I've ever played.

I don't think so. My shot distances are far more consistent from the fairway than they are from the rough. I may have an idea of how far my shot will go from the rough, but the chances it will fly, or come short, go left, or go right are much higher than they are hitting from the fairway.

A lot of the different responses here depend on what people regard as "penal" rough. The semi rough where I play is dense enough for a ball to settle down in (I've lost plenty of balls there) and certainly lush enough to compromise one's chances of making good contact. So I'd certainly be happier playing a 5-iron from the fairway than a seven or eight iron from the semi rough, because with the latter I'm much more likely to lose control of the shot.

I agree. @Kieran123 would prefer to play from the the longer shot from the fairway many times.  I would almost never because the rough I have at my home course is fairly easy to hit from.  I have hit from thick enough rough before where it is difficult to advance your ball, but almost never run into it.

[mdl]

A lot of the different responses here depend on what people regard as "penal" rough.

I agree with this.  I play in southern California.  Maybe in wetter, cooler climates the rough can be penal enough that it overcomes a 3-club difference.  I still find it incredibly hard to believe that any courses people actually play would overcome the 5-6 club difference @GangGreen .  The rough would have to be essentially unplayable for it not to be an advantage to be hitting 9i from the rough over a 3i or 4i from the fairway.  I'm assuming we're not talking about the huge miss rough (that where I play would probably just be desert scrub, not rough) that's designed to force a semi-miracle approach or more likely a lay up, but rather rough from which, at least on misses to the correct side, the player is supposed to have a makable but more challenging open look approach.

[Spyder]

I'll take the rough. I'll be much better off with a 9/PW than I would be with a 6 iron. Considering both lies are comparable in terms of having a reasonably decent stance, I would take the shorter approach shot 10/10 times. In the past, I played conservatively and considered the fairway to be greater all of the time. I've since proved myself wrong by being a little more aggressive, within reason, and playing my distance to my advantage with much more success.

[BallMarker]

I'll take the rough. I'll be much better off with a 9/PW than I would be with a 6 iron. Considering both lies are comparable in terms of having a reasonably decent stance, I would take the shorter approach shot 10/10 times.

If both lies are comparable, it's not much of a rough. In that case you'd be stupid not to hit it from the, so called, "rough".

[Spyder]

If both lies are comparable, it's not much of a rough. In that case you'd be stupid not to hit it from the, so called, "rough".

Read what I said in my initial post.

I'll take the rough. I'll be much better off with a 9/PW than I would be with a 6 iron. Considering both lies are comparable in terms of having a reasonably decent stance, I would take the shorter approach shot 10/10 times. In the past, I played conservatively and considered the fairway to be greater all of the time. I've since proved myself wrong by being a little more aggressive, within reason, and playing my distance to my advantage with much more success.

To me, there's more to a lie than the physical ball itself and whether it's in the fairway, or in the rough. I consider all aspects of the lie, as I stated, in terms of the stance and obstacles. A good lie is not just "the ball is on a tight cut patch of grass" to me. To me, a good lie is the ball being in a position that does not compromise my stance and swing.

To elaborate, if the ball is in the rough from 140 and the ball is above or below my feet significantly, I would much rather take the fairway lie 30 yards back if the stance is considerably better.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BallMarker

If both lies are comparable, it's not much of a rough. In that case you'd be stupid not to hit it from the, so called, "rough".

Read what I said in my initial post.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spyder

I'll take the rough. I'll be much better off with a 9/PW than I would be with a 6 iron. Considering both lies are comparable in terms of having a reasonably decent stance, I would take the shorter approach shot 10/10 times. In the past, I played conservatively and considered the fairway to be greater all of the time. I've since proved myself wrong by being a little more aggressive, within reason, and playing my distance to my advantage with much more success.

To me, there's more to a lie than the physical ball itself and whether it's in the fairway, or in the rough. I consider all aspects of the lie, as I stated, in terms of the stance and obstacles. A good lie is not just "the ball is on a tight cut patch of grass" to me. To me, a good lie is the ball being in a position that does not compromise my stance and swing.

To elaborate, if the ball is in the rough from 140 and the ball is above or below my feet significantly, I would much rather take the fairway lie 30 yards back if the stance is considerably better.

So... does that mean that you have never had an uneven lie in the fairway?  That's a rhetorical question.  Fairways aren't flat... certainly not on many modern courses.  I've had uphill, downhill and sidehill lies galore in the fairway.  I've been in the fairway where I had to stand in a bunker to hit the shot with the ball a foot above my feet.  The lie can be good or bad no matter whether it's fairway or rough.

[GangGreen]

Exactly, I look at things fairly simply and relative to my own experience (and playing level) I'm much less apt to screw up an 8/7 iron out of the rough at 150 yards out vs. 5 iron/4 hybrid from 180 yards out given the conditions at most of the courses I play. For me, it's largely about minimizing the potential (and often times inevitable) miss-hits on my approaches. With a mid-iron out of the rough, an average miss for me might leave me 10 yards off the green with a chance to get it up and down for par (bogey at worst on my good days) while a long-iron out of the fairway could just as easily leave me 30 yards away (short, long, left, or right). Certainly, that level of dispersion is a lot tigher for better players whose ball striking is more consistent to begin with but for a high handicapper like myself the shorter clubs are my best friends under most circumstances.

[BallMarker]

Read what I said in my initial post.

To me, there's more to a lie than the physical ball itself and whether it's in the fairway, or in the rough. I consider all aspects of the lie, as I stated, in terms of the stance and obstacles. A good lie is not just "the ball is on a tight cut patch of grass" to me. To me, a good lie is the ball being in a position that does not compromise my stance and swing.

To elaborate, if the ball is in the rough from 140 and the ball is above or below my feet significantly, I would much rather take the fairway lie 30 yards back if the stance is considerably better.

You said comparable lie. As FourPutt stated you can have an undesirable stance on a fairway.

.

Given scenario was hit from a nice FLAT fairway or the rough, assuming the rough is about as tall as the ball. Otherwise, it's not much of a rough and you wouldn't care if you were in it or not.

Thus, if the lie is comparable, point is moot. go hit it from the short "rough".

[Spyder]

You said comparable lie. As FourPutt stated you can have an undesirable stance on a fairway.

.

Given scenario was hit from a nice FLAT fairway or the rough, assuming the rough is about as tall as the ball. Otherwise, it's not much of a rough and you wouldn't care if you were in it or not.

Thus, if the lie is comparable, point is moot. go hit it from the short "rough".

So... does that mean that you have never had an uneven lie in the fairway?  That's a rhetorical question.  Fairways aren't flat... certainly not on many modern courses.  I've had uphill, downhill and sidehill lies galore in the fairway.  I've been in the fairway where I had to stand in a bunker to hit the shot with the ball a foot above my feet.  The lie can be good or bad no matter whether it's fairway or rough.

I made a simple comment which meant: "I would rather have a lie in the rough with a shorter distance almost always, but if my stance is all screwed up in that rough, I would rather play from the fairway.". Even if my stance is jacked in the fairway, I feel I would personally have a better shot at success with clean ball contact without the rough in that case.

I added something that I would consider when approaching the two scenarios. There's far too many variables to say "I would do A or B, period." I simply elaborated on my opinion. Not sure what you two are lost on.