"Lowest Score Wins" by Barzeski and Wedzik

[dsc123]

First thing I did was hire some trackman time and set to work on my shotzones (which were inevitably bigger than I thought ;) ).

After reading the book, I initially thought "wow, I really should be hitting driver off the tee much more often."   But I suspect that when I get to a trackman and hit 20 shots with my driver and count what, 18 of them? I'm going to end up with a really wide shot zone and will end up hitting 3 wood off some tees that I previously hit driver.  Even without actually mapping my shot zones, there are one or two holes on my home course which, after reading the book, I have decided to stop using my driver.

I think what makes this book really unique is that it will encourage people who often lay up to go for it more, but also help people who go for it too often to better understand the risks of doing so.  Most books, tips, advice, etc. would simplify it to something that is good advice for most people but not everyone, where Erik and Dave have been able to clearly describe a more complex idea and more nuanced approach so that it can be applied by everyone.  This isn't surprising because there are often instructional discussions here on TST where a typical instructor might say "don't do x because it causes y"--as a rule--where Erik and Mike often say "don't worry about x unless it causes y."  I think its this understanding of when to apply the "rules" and when doing so would be counterproductive that is the real value in the book and the golf evolution's instruction.

I'll eventually write a real review, but I've only read parts of the book so far.

[CarlSpackler]

Thinking ahead a bit, what would be a good tool to make decision maps with?

[Lihu]

Seems like skipping around a bit is helping me as well. I actually got though a couple more pages and skimmed about ten others.

The subliminal assimilation of the information alone has done something to my game today!  I just shot my lowest round on my home course to date "86", and drove the longest average in one round including the worm burners/slices at 246 yards. This is without doing anything remarkable, nor feeling extra good this morning (In fact, I was tired, sore and hungry). I felt so bad about my game today, until I actually tallied it up and came up with a course low score for me.

This round was more "solid" than any other round, and I know exactly where I messed up. It was a not a mere coincidence that I was more aware of using the same setup each time and keeping the first three keys in mind as I made each shot. This is in part because I am more aware of the things I am messing up, which made me feel bad about my round even though it was actually a good one.

It will take some time for me to grasp enough of the book to really start shooting low scores, but the knowledge contained within is really valuable long term and, as I found to be the case, short term.

[saevel25]

Thinking ahead a bit, what would be a good tool to make decision maps with?

Well distance is important, clearly. I kinda wished I had a GPS unit I could just plug all the info into.

Erik has put up some grids on the http://lowestscorewins.com/ website in the members content area. So using that, I would get some string to form a straight line, and that would be the bottom line of the grid. Then you just go from the corner over and up, and then just plot them on the same area on the grid sheet.

So lets say you start bottom right, and walk off 10 yards, and up 5 yards. That would be point 1.

Of course for driver, you might not have long enough string. So just marking a corner is good enough. Then get a reference point to pace towards each time

[CarlSpackler]

Well distance is important, clearly. I kinda wished I had a GPS unit I could just plug all the info into.

Erik has put up some grids on the http://lowestscorewins.com/ website in the members content area. So using that, I would get some string to form a straight line, and that would be the bottom line of the grid. Then you just go from the corner over and up, and then just plot them on the same area on the grid sheet.

So lets say you start bottom right, and walk off 10 yards, and up 5 yards. That would be point 1.

Of course for driver, you might not have long enough string. So just marking a corner is good enough. Then get a reference point to pace towards each time

I'm thinking about how to capture hole images from (pick favorite mapping site) and plotting shot zones on it.

[rdsandy]

One thing has been bugging me for a couple of days now ... and that is the notion that the better the player, the closer their target is to the center of the shot zone.  Obviously, the better the player, the smaller the shot zone.  That's completely linear and not in question.  But I've been thinking about the relationship of shot zones, shot CONES, and shot centers, and it seems to me that once you get to a really** high level, the target should show up near either end of the shot zone.

Shouldn't guys like Zach Johnson or Kenny Perry, who both play a very reliable draw, have a tiny shot zone with the target all the way to the left edge of the oval?  Well, not all the way because there will be slight overdraws, but it seems that their goal would always keep all misses to one side of the target.

**I stress really high level, because short of the pros, I'd think that even really good players will miss their shot cones often enough.

For another perspective of "shot zones", Dave Pelz's Damage Control book goes in depth into what he calls "shot patterns", a golfer's signature. They are shaped like teardrops with the pros looking like a bulbous headed needle.

[iacas]

For another perspective of "shot zones", Dave Pelz's Damage Control book goes in depth into what he calls "shot patterns", a golfer's signature. They are shaped like teardrops with the pros looking like a bulbous headed needle.

That might apply if we were talking more about short game shots. Tear drops aren't really the shape we find golfers hitting.

Did you buy and read LSW @rdsandy ?

[rdsandy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdsandy

For another perspective of "shot zones", Dave Pelz's Damage Control book goes in depth into what he calls "shot patterns", a golfer's signature. They are shaped like teardrops with the pros looking like a bulbous headed needle.

That might apply if we were talking more about short game shots. Tear drops aren't really the shape we find golfers hitting.

Did you buy and read LSW @rdsandy?

Yes, I read LSW and am re reading it now.

Pelz's shot pattern is a teardrop because he includes the duffs that do not reach the normal bubble or LSW's oval. His discussion is for all shots, tee to near the green not just the short shots. His "Damage Controller" is the equivalent to LSW's "Decision Map".

Have you read Damage Control?

[iacas]

Have you read Damage Control?

A long time ago, and I can't speak for Dave. IMO you can't really GamePlan for the aberrations (like outright duffs).

[rdsandy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rdsandy

Have you read Damage Control?

A long time ago, and I can't speak for Dave. IMO you can't really GamePlan for the aberrations (like outright duffs).

True, and I don't think he meant to either. The bulk of the teardrop was overlaid on to the hazard analysis map to come up with the highest percentage shot.

[RFKFREAK]

Seems like skipping around a bit is helping me as well. I actually got though a couple more pages and skimmed about ten others.

The subliminal assimilation of the information alone has done something to my game today!  I just shot my lowest round on my home course to date "86", and drove the longest average in one round including the worm burners/slices at 246 yards. This is without doing anything remarkable, nor feeling extra good this morning (In fact, I was tired, sore and hungry). I felt so bad about my game today, until I actually tallied it up and came up with a course low score for me.

This round was more "solid" than any other round, and I know exactly where I messed up. It was a not a mere coincidence that I was more aware of using the same setup each time and keeping the first three keys in mind as I made each shot. This is in part because I am more aware of the things I am messing up, which made me feel bad about my round even though it was actually a good one.

It will take some time for me to grasp enough of the book to really start shooting low scores, but the knowledge contained within is really valuable long term and, as I found to be the case, short term.

Pretty cool, sir.

I'm about to go play 9 in 45 minutes or so.

Minus the 7 penalty strokes the last time I played, I felt good applying some of the concepts I read in the book.

I was debating mapping out my shot zone today but it's gorgeous out, I had a bad practice session Tuesday, had wicked weather yesterday, and just feel like playing today.

Maybe I'll map out my shot zone after I'm done with the 9.

[Lihu]

Pretty cool, sir.

I'm about to go play 9 in 45 minutes or so.

Minus the 7 penalty strokes the last time I played, I felt good applying some of the concepts I read in the book.

I was debating mapping out my shot zone today but it's gorgeous out, I had a bad practice session Tuesday, had wicked weather yesterday, and just feel like playing today.

Maybe I'll map out my shot zone after I'm done with the 9.

Yes, amazing how it actually works.

[RFKFREAK]

Yes, amazing how it actually works.

Amazing.

I shot a 53 over 9 holes which for me isn't actually terrible, however, it could have been so much better.

I made a change in my swing and now am hitting everything left, but, that said, the last 5 holes I had 2 pars, 2 bogeys, and one double bogey and am feeling so good about my finish and feel like I'm making strides thanks to LSW!

[CarlSpackler]

Finally finished.

[phillyk]

I was going to post this in another thread relating to watching other peoples putts all the time, but figured this thread would be more appropriate.

I am wondering, @iacas , about AimPoint classes.  You state in your book about putting not being a major influence of your game vs pros.  That at given distances, amateurs are almost as likely to make putts as the pros are, and is therefore, I would think, not something that can be improved drastically.  Green reading you do state to be an important SV factor, and advocate taking AimPoint classes but also suggest, I think, that green reading abilities do come with experience.  Obviously, AimPoint instruction can be beneficial for high handicaps (from green reading to making sure your eye fits the putter line, etc.), but for those who are single digits and lower (lots of experience in green reading and most likely start their putts where they want), how much advantage is it really to taking a class if the benefits aren't making that much of a difference in score?  Would it not be better to just take normal lessons that may include green reading abilities?  Or am I missing something?

If this question was already asked, sorry! I haven't read anything here yet...

[cipher]

I was going to post this in another thread relating to watching other peoples putts all the time, but figured this thread would be more appropriate.

I am wondering, @iacas, about AimPoint classes.  You state in your book about putting not being a major influence of your game vs pros.  That at given distances, amateurs are almost as likely to make putts as the pros are, and is therefore, I would think, not something that can be improved drastically.  Green reading you do state to be an important SV factor, and advocate taking AimPoint classes but also suggest, I think, that green reading abilities do come with experience.  Obviously, AimPoint instruction can be beneficial for high handicaps (from green reading to making sure your eye fits the putter line, etc.), but for those who are single digits and lower (lots of experience in green reading and most likely start their putts where they want), how much advantage is it really to taking a class if the benefits aren't making that much of a difference in score?  Would it not be better to just take normal lessons that may include green reading abilities?  Or am I missing something?

If this question was already asked, sorry! I haven't read anything here yet...

I would look at it this way.  AimPoint has the potential to help you read greens better than a lot of pros.  I can remember maybe one time this year where I miss read the way a putt breaks.  How often do you see pros incorrectly read the way a putt breaks.  It happens more than it should.  I am not a very good putter, but after taking AimPoint, I have been .4 strokes per round better this year(from 31.8 to 31.4 so far).  If I play 50 rounds this year, that is 20 strokes.  The only reason I have not improved more than that, is my putting stroke kind of sucks(start lines/speed).  It may be a small SV skill, but when you are in the single digits or a plus like you are those small things matter as well right?  What if you can improve 20 strokes over 50 rounds?  Plus there is really not a lot of cost or time spent learning the skill.  It is fairly easy to practice and work on in a very short amount of time.

[saevel25]

I would look at it this way.  AimPoint has the potential to help you read greens better than a lot of pros.  I can remember maybe one time this year where I miss read the way a putt breaks.  How often do you see pros incorrectly read the way a putt breaks.  It happens more than it should.  I am not a very good putter, but after taking AimPoint, I have been .4 strokes per round better this year(from 31.8 to 31.4 so far).  If I play 50 rounds this year, that is 20 strokes.  The only reason I have not improved more than that, is my putting stroke kind of sucks(start lines/speed).  It may be a small SV skill, but when you are in the single digits or a plus like you are those small things matter as well right?  What if you can improve 20 strokes over 50 rounds?  Plus there is really not a lot of cost or time spent learning the skill.  It is fairly easy to practice and work on in a very short amount of time.

I agree. The only time I really misread greens is when the slope is very shallow, like 1%-1.5%

I think a lot of people can develop a consistent putting stroke, repeatable. This stroke might be pull, push or straight. With that they can get use to greens over time and putt just fine. I would like to see stats of PGA Tour players versus High Handicap players on greens they never played before. If a person can get a repeatable stroke, then they will over time get closer to making putts. This is why I think reading greens is so important, because it is a SKILL that a person can learn that will give them a greater chance at making putts.

[Golfingdad]

I was going to post this in another thread relating to watching other peoples putts all the time, but figured this thread would be more appropriate.

I am wondering, @iacas, about AimPoint classes.  You state in your book about putting not being a major influence of your game vs pros.  That at given distances, amateurs are almost as likely to make putts as the pros are, and is therefore, I would think, not something that can be improved drastically.  Green reading you do state to be an important SV factor, and advocate taking AimPoint classes but also suggest, I think, that green reading abilities do come with experience.  Obviously, AimPoint instruction can be beneficial for high handicaps (from green reading to making sure your eye fits the putter line, etc.), but for those who are single digits and lower (lots of experience in green reading and most likely start their putts where they want), how much advantage is it really to taking a class if the benefits aren't making that much of a difference in score?  Would it not be better to just take normal lessons that may include green reading abilities?  Or am I missing something?

If this question was already asked, sorry! I haven't read anything here yet...

Part of the reason why it's a low SV skill is because it's relatively easy to learn and do.  Aimpoint is the same.  One class, maybe 3 or 4 hours long for <$200 and you can improve your putting.

It may not be a big improvement if you're already a decent putter, but the opportunity cost is really low so there is really no downside to it.  You WILL improve your green reading skills and at the expense of one round of golf or one practice session.