Is Distance Really That Important for Amateurs?

[mmoan2]

Not for a majority of the population it isn't. I think mvmac was playing the odds there guessing that the person was not in the .01% of people on the planet who can do that, especially based on the distance that the balls were going.

Nobody who creates 145 mph of clubhead speed will be only hitting the ball with 250 yards of carry. I have a fairly pedestrian swing speed (comparatively) of 114 and I can fly it further than that with range balls.

You have a pedestrian swing speed of 114 mph? Is Jaime Sadlowski or Bubba Watson your playing partner?

[Pretzel]

You have a pedestrian swing speed of 114 mph? Is Jaime Sadlowski or Bubba Watson your playing partner?

Compared to the 145 mph I was referring to it is (it was mentioned earlier in the thread, I believe near the middle of page 31), sorry for the confusion. I should have specified that since I didn't have it directly quoted.

[Jakester23]

I hear you, but this seems a bit oversimplified. All of this stuff about trajectory, spin rate, face technology... I don't think if you took TM R9 irons and just changed the 5 to a 6 etc. you'd have Sldr irons. Anyway, I'm straying OT here...

I personally don't think all things being equal (same shaft same loft same lie same strike) they would be much different.

[Somerset Simon]

Compared to the 145 mph I was referring to it is (it was mentioned earlier in the thread, I believe near the middle of page 31), sorry for the confusion. I should have specified that since I didn't have it directly quoted.

Sorry, it was me who posted the 145 mph and 250 carry.

Like others have said, it must have been ball speed not club head speed.

He was swinging fast, but not that fast :-)

Simon

PS The balls at this range go about 20-25 yards less than a real ball with a driver.

I have tested by hitting a couple of real balls and seeing how much further they go.

Therefore, his 250 carry with range balls was probably equivalent to 270-275 carry with real balls.

Pretty long, but he would have been in the deep rough and trees quite a bit.

[Lihu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pretzel

Compared to the 145 mph I was referring to it is (it was mentioned earlier in the thread, I believe near the middle of page 31), sorry for the confusion. I should have specified that since I didn't have it directly quoted.

Sorry, it was me who posted the 145 mph and 250 carry.

Like others have said, it must have been ball speed not club head speed.

He was swinging fast, but not that fast :-)

Simon

PS The balls at this range go about 20-25 yards less than a real ball with a driver.

I have tested by hitting a couple of real balls and seeing how much further they go.

Therefore, his 250 carry with range balls was probably equivalent to 270-275 carry with real balls.

Pretty long, but he would have been in the deep rough and trees quite a bit.

Are they labeled something like "Wilson Limited Flight"? Usually only limited flight balls go shorter. Other ones seem to go about the same distances. I might have lost 5 yards or so. I've found some on the course and hit them about the same distance as my Pro-V1x balls. Not much difference.

[Hammer 4]

They have Limited Flight balls at my range, very frustrating, But, they have regular golf balls mixed in with them. Crazy watching a well struck 8i ball go soooooooooooooo much higher, and longer...lol

[natureboy]

Here are the stats for the 2014 PGA Tour.

I know these are pros and the thread is about amateurs, but it's still interesting.

The first chart shows driving distance vs. average score.

The second chart shows fairway percentage vs. average score.

The data was taken from the following site:

http://www.pgatour.com/stats.html

I have to admit that driving distance does appear to be slightly more beneficial than driving accuracy, especially for lower scoring players.

However, neither chart shows a very strong correlation.

If I had not added the trend lines, could you have guessed accurately where they would go?

One interesting observation is that the worst scoring players tend to hit the ball further than the average guys, suggesting there really is an optimal distance for any given level of accuracy, and hitting it further can indeed be counter productive if you're not accurate enough to control the extra distance.

Everyone will see something different in these charts, but it seems clear to me that there is a lot more to shooting low scores than simply hitting the ball a long way.

Driving accuracy estimated only by fairway percentage for pros or amateurs is misleading as to actual accuracy (average deviation from target).

When you factor in both deviation from target and distance with a measurement like Broadie's 'degrees offline' then accuracy will be much better correlated to average score (across multiple rounds).

Accuracy at a goodly distance is definitely the best of both worlds. If you are unable to hit it far, then more accuracy will give you better average scores with the distance you have. If you can work on both - that's better. In my own case, though, poor short game can also limit your scoring potential even if your distance and accuracy are above average for your handicap.

[onthehunt526]

I know, that a few people are dead set against doing it, but when golfers are first starting out, especially men, usually play from a set of tees that are too long for them, a lot NOT ALL golfers play from a set of tees that is too long for them... That being said, distance is to a small extent important, accuracy is important too, but there is a happy medium there... When I was young and first started playing this lovely game... I thought I had to hit the ball a long, long way to score... even into my high school years I played this way, sometimes it would pay off, mostly not... I found I need not focus on getting virtually unlimited distance, but adequate distance that didn't sacrifice accuracy to the extent of lost balls, o.b. etc... My point is: Distance is important for amateurs, yes... but not to where you are sacrificing so much accuracy to achieve "maximum distance" I'll take 260 in the fairway, or 280 in light rough, but 300 in the weeds is out of my golfing vocabulary...

[RFKFREAK]

I would say that if you can hit the ball 250 yards, you're really good.

13 handicaps on average have a 92-95mph drive that gets then 220-250 yards.

http://thesandtrap.com/t/64681/handicap-versus-clubhead-speed-driving-distance

250 carry or carry and roll?

I played a pretty wet and soggy course a week and a half ago and hit driver 12 times, lost two balls, and my total distance with the driver ranged from 170-294.  The 170 was a miss-hit and I'm almost certain that the 294 received some cart path love even if I didn't see it happen b/c it was a blind shot.  Otherwise, my driver range for the other 8 shots averaged 226 with my longest of those 8 being 264.  On a day where the ball was getting plugged on the greens on the approach shots, not too bad.

When I make good contact with my driver the total distance ranges from 270-280.  On average hits, the range is from 240-260.  I know my iron play and short game truly are bad but I'm starting to think they're worse than bad, they're horrific.

[billchao]

Therefore, his 250 carry with range balls was probably equivalent to 270-275 carry with real balls. Pretty long, but he would have been in the deep rough and trees quite a bit.

[spoiler=OT]You're making the assumption that the guy doesn't adjust his aim on course for his flight, aren't you? When you go for a fitting, you stand square to the launch monitor and parallel to the "target" line so they can chart your dispersion and deviation from the center. You'd have to be a fool if you hit your ball 20 yards left of center and aim so that center is the center of the fairway.[/spoiler]

[Somerset Simon]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Somerset Simon

Therefore, his 250 carry with range balls was probably equivalent to 270-275 carry with real balls.

Pretty long, but he would have been in the deep rough and trees quite a bit.

OT (Click to hide)

You're making the assumption that the guy doesn't adjust his aim on course for his flight, aren't you?

When you go for a fitting, you stand square to the launch monitor and parallel to the "target" line so they can chart your dispersion and deviation from the center.

You'd have to be a fool if you hit your ball 20 yards left of center and aim so that center is the center of the fairway.

You're right, sometimes when you're on the course you can feel that you're going to hit a fade or a draw and you can adjust accordingly.

But I could tell from his reaction that the ball was not going where he intended or expected it to go.

His good ones (maybe 1 in 3) were straight or with a touch of fade.

His bad ones were pull hooks and big slices.

I don't think he would have hit more than 30% of fairways, and probably 1 in 3 would have been deep rough or trees.

Maybe he was struggling with a small swing fault on the day and normally hits it much straighter, but to me it looked like he was just trying to hit it way too hard, well beyond his natural length.

[Somerset Simon]

Are they labeled something like "Wilson Limited Flight"? Usually only limited flight balls go shorter. Other ones seem to go about the same distances. I might have lost 5 yards or so. I've found some on the course and hit them about the same distance as my Pro-V1x balls. Not much difference.

I never payed much attention to the labeling, but they are definitely limited flight range balls.

Short irons go about the same as normal balls, but long irons and woods are significantly shorter.

I regularly hear the pro explaining to students that the range balls go around 10% less with a driver.

[iacas]

You're right, sometimes when you're on the course you can feel that you're going to hit a fade or a draw and you can adjust accordingly.

But I could tell from his reaction that the ball was not going where he intended or expected it to go.

His good ones (maybe 1 in 3) were straight or with a touch of fade.

His bad ones were pull hooks and big slices.

I don't think he would have hit more than 30% of fairways, and probably 1 in 3 would have been deep rough or trees.

Maybe he was struggling with a small swing fault on the day and normally hits it much straighter, but to me it looked like he was just trying to hit it way too hard, well beyond his natural length.

@Somerset Simon , this is off topic. A single example means nothing, regardless of the "side" it supports, and particularly when you can type that a 145 MPH clubhead speed produced drives of 250 yards without pausing to think about the unlikeliness of that being accurate…

[Ernest Jones]

[billchao]

You're right, sometimes when you're on the course you can feel that you're going to hit a fade or a draw and you can adjust accordingly. But I could tell from his reaction that the ball was not going where he intended or expected it to go. His good ones (maybe 1 in 3) were straight or with a touch of fade. His bad ones were pull hooks and big slices. I don't think he would have hit more than 30% of fairways, and probably 1 in 3 would have been deep rough or trees. Maybe he was struggling with a small swing fault on the day and normally hits it much straighter, but to me it looked like he was just trying to hit it way too hard, well beyond his natural length.

[spoiler=Still OT]Sounds like the guy swings to the left. He probably has other swing flaws along with this, which may be why he looked like he was swinging out of his shoes, because his sequencing is not very good. He'd still have these flaws, even if he swung easier. I don't think your assessment of his problem being "trying to hit too hard" would help him much at all. He needs to work on his swing.[/spoiler]What you're seeing is confirmation bias. The player's flaws have little to do with distance vs accuracy.

[golf-noob-bruce]

The player's flaws have little to do with distance vs accuracy.

I don't understand what point you're trying to make with this statement. Is this a typo? In this thread the statement that better players are both longer and more accurate has been made repeatedly. Presumably better players have fewer flaws?

[mvmac]

I don't understand what point you're trying to make with this statement. Is this a typo? In this thread the statement that better players are both longer and more accurate has been made repeatedly. Presumably better players have fewer flaws?

A single player's swing flaw, which direction he misses it, it's off topic and not the point of the discussion.

[Somerset Simon]

@Somerset Simon, this is off topic. A single example means nothing, regardless of the "side" it supports, and particularly when you can type that a 145 MPH clubhead speed produced drives of 250 yards without pausing to think about the unlikeliness of that being accurate…

You keep saying a single example means nothing, but it's an example to illustrate something I see a lot.

Somebody said earlier that young players should initially be encouraged to swing fast, and then later ease back and focus more on control.

I totally agree with this.

The question is...

At what point should they make that switch from focusing on distance to focusing on control?

When they are 15? When they are 18? When they are 21? When they are 25?

I would say it is no later than 18, otherwise you miss out on all the junior championships.

Maybe 21 if your sole aim is to be a pro and you don't care about junior championships.

The guy on the range was clearly still focusing on distance, and wasn't getting good results.

Simon