Would you rather have ...

[BallMarker]

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.

Ok....

so be it.

Seems you gave a rather complicated answer to a very simple question.

[Spyder]

Ok....

so be it.

Seems you gave a rather complicated answer to a very simple question.

Simply trying to expand the conversation to something beyond a poll and a short response reiterating the selected answer.

[lumpuckeroo]

I picked A, I would rather have a clean look at a ball, anytime.  I would even go so far to say, I would rather have a 5 wood from the fairway then a 7 iron from the rough, but that's just me.

[anthony]

I voted 140-150, but I feel like I'd almost have to see the rough to make an actual decision.

[Uncle Peter]

Rough hands down, as long as the lie was good. I always find it easier to get under the ball in the rough compared to the fairway.

[BuckeyeNut]

That's...ridiculous. I'd be so angry if I hit a halfway decent shot and kept it in play, but still had to declare a lost ball because of that.

Yes, I know...

This is a challenging course and course setup required accuracy..........the response from the course staff to complaints was usually ......"then don't miss fairways". People didn't play this course for easy conditions..........  With that said, I did post my lowest round on this course under these conditions.......a -4.....68.  Playing from the rough was always tough..  I believe the rough was every bit of US Open rough conditions on an every day basis............

[billchao]

Yes, I know...

This is a challenging course and course setup required accuracy..........the response from the course staff to complaints was usually......"then don't miss fairways".  People didn't play this course for easy conditions..........  With that said, I did post my lowest round on this course under these conditions.......a -4.....68.  Playing from the rough was always tough..  I believe the rough was every bit of US Open rough conditions on an every day basis............

Yea, sounds like the course is like a pro setup. Penalizes bad shots, but rewards good shots by allowing you the opportunity to score (some of the "fairway" lies I get at my local muni are less than ideal). Not surprised that you were able to shoot a low score there.

[zipazoid]

Surprised I'm in the minority on this one. I chose the fairway. It certainly helps that I'm in love with my 4-hybrid, which is my 180y club.

[Spyder]

Surprised I'm in the minority on this one. I chose the fairway. It certainly helps that I'm in love with my 4-hybrid, which is my 180y club.

For me, that'd be between my 7 (174) and 6 (185) depending on outside factors (uphill target, downhill target, wind, etc.). Though I'm comfortable with the clubs and distance, I'd be much more likely to get close with a wedge from the rough. I'd give my % of success with the 7/6 about a 30%, while the wedge would likely jump to 40%. The percentages are being made up, of course, based on my thinking of hitting the green 4/10 times with my wedge from 150.

STATISTICS » APPROACH THE GREEN » GIR PERCENTAGE - 150-175 YARDS

GIR PERCENTAGE - 150-175 YARDS

Y-T-D-statistics through: FedEx St. Jude Classic, Jun 08, 2014

RANK THIS WEEK	RANK LAST WEEK	PLAYER NAME	ROUNDS	%	GREENS HIT	TOTAL HOLES	RELATIVE TO PAR
1	2	Peter Hanson	29	73.85	48	65	-0.17
2	5	Russell Knox	66	73.27	159	217	-0.20
3	3	Stewart Cink	61	73.10	144	197	-0.15
T4	8	Kevin Chappell	62	71.58	136	190	-0.18
T4	7	Nicholas Thompson	65	71.58	136	190	-0.13
6	9	Heath Slocum	47	71.53	103	144	-0.14
7	10	Jason Kokrak	55	71.07	140	197	-0.17
8	6	Ben Crane	56	71.04	130	183	-0.23
9	11	Bo Van Pelt	53	71.03	103	145	-0.18
10	13	Billy Hurley III	56	70.59	132	187	-0.13

Here's the guys on the bottom:

185	187	Ian Poulter	37	55.75	63	113	-0.14
186	177	Andres Romero	48	55.19	85	154	-0.15
187	178	Johnson Wagner	43	54.81	74	135	-0.14
188	186	Richard Lee	61	54.78	86	157	-0.19
189	184	Andrew Loupe	43	52.38	55	105	-0.05
190	T188	Paul Goydos	39	51.56	66	128	-0.06
T191	T188	Darren Clarke	29	51.39	37	72	-0.08
T191	190	Peter Malnati	34	51.39	37	72	-0.19
193	191	Alex Aragon	29	46.27	31	67	-0.19
194	999	Bobby Gates	27	41.10	30	73	-0.17

[Pretzel]

Personally I would prefer the lie in the rough and up close. Depending on a variety of factors that would put anywhere from a PW to an 8-iron in my hands, whereas the fairway one could put an 8-iron to a 6-iron in my hands. I tend to do well out of the rough, especially with short irons and wedges, and I am nearly always more accurate in a situation like that versus a longer shot with a clean lie. After looking through my stats I have come to believe the philosophy of "closer is usually better" much more than I used to.

[phillyk]

I'd rather be in the fairway, its either an 8 or 7iron, which is a nice easy club.  Sure 150 is the PW in the rough, but the fairway I know there's 1 possible lie.  In the rough, it could be a jumper, in a hole, who knows? With a nice lie, I know what club I need and what spin it will make.  I dont care about odds, I know what I'm comfortable with.