Playing Tees Based on Driver Distance x 28

[nick1998bunker]

I hit my driver 265 and my irons longer proportionately (150 9 iron about 10 yard spreads) and I wouldn't really do well on 7500 yard courses. Maybe because my longer irons are not very good. I would say there are more factors that go into it. Somewhere I read 5 iron distance times 36...that seems about right to me (6800 something for me)

[Lihu]

I hit my driver 265 and my irons longer proportionately (150 9 iron about 10 yard spreads) and I wouldn't really do well on 7500 yard courses. Maybe because my longer irons are not very good. I would say there are more factors that go into it. Somewhere I read 5 iron distance times 36...that seems about right to me (6800 something for me)

Me too, except that my average drive is only 245 and ends up being 6800 anyway.

[tefunk]

I didn't vote. I think Tee It Forward is generally a good idea... But it depends on the course. Not every courses difficulty is measured by distance. Years ago I played Caledonia in SC. I was all hung up on playing the tees that matched my distance, versus playing the tees suggested based on HCP. All I can say... Lesson learned.

[rkim291968]

Years ago I played Caledonia in SC. I was all hung up on playing the tees that matched my distance, versus playing the tees suggested based on HCP. All I can say... Lesson learned.

That's what happens sometimes to the 1st timers on my home course.   A few rounds ago, I've got matched up with 2 young kids (in their 20s) who elected to play from the tips.   I told (hinted) them that the course plays longer than its length.   No matter.  They proceeded to play from the tips.  One kid probably carded 110.  The other kid barely broke 90 although I suspect he was much better golfer than that.   They probably decided to play from the tips by just looking at the course length.  They didn't have much fun that day.    On top of that, one guy played with a brand new Pro V1 dozen balls.   He probably lost most of those balls by the end of the round.  That's $40 more he spent on the round.  Ouch!

[Golfingdad]

On top of that, one guy played with a brand new Pro V1 dozen balls.   He probably lost most of those balls by the end of the round.  That's $40 more he spent on the round.  Ouch!

I've never played a course where I've lost a bunch of balls that nearly all of them wouldn't have been lost from another set of tees.  I'd be willing to bet that his swing that day was producing a lot of lost balls from any set of tees.  It happens.

[rkim291968]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rkim291968

On top of that, one guy played with a brand new Pro V1 dozen balls.   He probably lost most of those balls by the end of the round.  That's $40 more he spent on the round.  Ouch!

I've never played a course where I've lost a bunch of balls that nearly all of them wouldn't have been lost from another set of tees.  I'd be willing to bet that his swing that day was producing a lot of lost balls from any set of tees.  It happens.

The longest tee on this course forces you to hit driver (and hit accurate ones) on most par 4s & 5s.   Had he moved up a tee, he could have used iron on shorter holes as he had a decent iron shot.   He was losing balls, including provision shots, on his drives mostly.   He stopped hitting provisions soon after the round began.

[Dave2512]

I've never seen anyone lose that many balls. I have seen people get into that much trouble but the problem is the resulting search. A big reason I think golfers should play tees appropriate to skill. While it won't prevent errant shots those errant shots are still closer to the hole and it tends to alleviate the desperation that sets in prompting the following hero shot that also tends to lead to trouble.

[rkim291968]

I've never seen anyone lose that many balls. I have seen people get into that much trouble but the problem is the resulting search. A big reason I think golfers should play tees appropriate to skill. While it won't prevent errant shots those errant shots are still closer to the hole and it tends to alleviate the desperation that sets in prompting the following hero shot that also tends to lead to trouble.

At some point, they stopped looking for their errant shots. My point of the story relevant to OP was, they should have considered the course difficulty before electing to play from the tip.   Gven that it was their 1st time playing the course, they may not have believed 1) the course plays longer than its length, and 2) the course plays harder than its rating.   I.e, 28 x driver length does not make sense here unless you have accuracy.   But, hey, when you are 20 something, you hit from the tips anyway if you got the distance.   I can't blame them.

I was kidding with my wife (out of their earshot) that had we played behind the twosome, we would have found a few shiny Pro V1s and sell them on Ebay .

[Dave2512]

Honestly I don't know of ay courses that play "longer", distance is what it is unless there is an abundance of uphill holes or something. The reasons I see golfers lacking skill on back tees get into trouble is their inconsistency prevents them from hitting the ball to designed landing areas. It's not just stuff that lands short but all the directional misses. I could give all kinds of crazy anecdotal stories about some of the long courses here but there really isn't a point. Either you can hack it from where you play or you can't. The emphasis should be playing from a distance that offers scoring opportunities given the frequency of your miss not the assumption you will hit your best drive every time. There doesn't need to be a formula for this. Skill dictates how often a golfer mishits and their scores are the marker not their wishful thinking drives.

[rkim291968]

Honestly I don't know of ay courses that play "longer", distance is what it is unless there is an abundance of uphill holes or something. The reasons I see golfers lacking skill on back tees get into trouble is their inconsistency prevents them from hitting the ball to designed landing areas. It's not just stuff that lands short but all the directional misses. I could give all kinds of crazy anecdotal stories about some of the long courses here but there really isn't a point. Either you can hack it from where you play or you can't. The emphasis should be playing from a distance that offers scoring opportunities given the frequency of your miss not the assumption you will hit your best drive every time. There doesn't need to be a formula for this. Skill dictates how often a golfer mishits and their scores are the marker not their wishful thinking drives.

Wind and hills.

[Lihu]

Honestly I don't know of ay courses that play "longer", distance is what it is unless there is an abundance of uphill holes or something. The reasons I see golfers lacking skill on back tees get into trouble is their inconsistency prevents them from hitting the ball to designed landing areas. It's not just stuff that lands short but all the directional misses. I could give all kinds of crazy anecdotal stories about some of the long courses here but there really isn't a point. Either you can hack it from where you play or you can't. The emphasis should be playing from a distance that offers scoring opportunities given the frequency of your miss not the assumption you will hit your best drive every time. There doesn't need to be a formula for this. Skill dictates how often a golfer mishits and their scores are the marker not their wishful thinking drives.

Even on uphill holes, the course yardages are pretty much right on the dot. I think they measure them as longer when they dip down in the middles and back up again. They use that wheel measurement device and follow the contours of any undulations in the course.

Wind and hills.

I don't think they compensate for wind. Even when I play at Coyote in Sunnyvale with reasonable amounts of constant headwind on some holes, the yardages are pretty consistent with laser readings.

[Dave2512]

Even on uphill holes, the course yardages are pretty much right on the dot. I think they measure them as longer when they dip down in the middles and back up again. They use that wheel measurement device and follow the contours of any undulations in the course.

Speaking more of the affect the slope has on hitting to an uphill target. It's usually not more than one club difference. Even then doesn't matter because all but elite amateurs don't have a reliable stock distance. For example I know what I average because I use Game Golf but in those averages is everything from total duffs to stuff I hit somewhat solid. It gets worse as the clubs get longer. If a course seems to play long it's because the golfer is shorter than they realize or can admit.

Heck I am not ashamed and will offer my own pathetic example. There isn't much data in there because in 13 rounds I haven't hit many 5 irons but my performance for that club is a laughable shortest of 92 yards and a long of 192, average is 175. I am capable of hitting that club further than my longest recorded shot but I damn sure wouldn't count on it.  I'm sure other members playing in my range could offer similar horror stories.

[Lihu]

Speaking more of the affect the slope has on hitting to an uphill target. It's usually not more than one club difference. Even then doesn't matter because all but elite amateurs don't have a reliable stock distance. For example I know what I average because I use Game Golf but in those averages is everything from total duffs to stuff I hit somewhat solid. It gets worse as the clubs get longer. If a course seems to play long it's because the golfer is shorter than they realize or can admit.

Heck I am not ashamed and will offer my own pathetic example. There isn't much data in there because in 13 rounds I haven't hit many 5 irons but my performance for that club is a laughable shortest of 92 yards and a long of 192, average is 175. I am capable of hitting that club further than my longest recorded shot but I damn sure wouldn't count on it.  I'm sure other members playing in my range could offer similar horror stories.

This is kind of why carry makes more sense to me. I don't really care how far my 6i goes on average because this is not relevant to me. All I know is I carry it about 175. When choosing a club I kind of guesstimate if I think I need 165 carry, 175 carry, 185 carry, and choose the appropriate club. Too bad I hit left/right and not dead straight. . .

[Dave2512]

This is kind of why carry makes more sense to me. I don't really care how far my 6i goes on average because this is not relevant to me. All I know is I carry it about 175. When choosing a club I kind of guesstimate if I think I need 165 carry, 175 carry, 185 carry, and choose the appropriate club.

It does but it's not something realistically achieved with every shot with any given club. IMO most amateur golfers should forget  what they think they do and count on some degree of mishit.  We carry it however far that particular crap shot flies and they will be all over the place. Nobody not playing close to scratch can assume they have a consistent carry average on the course but you can bank on hitting it poorly most of the time. In your real world average how the ball gets to that number will be in the air, ricocheting off trees and paths, worm burners and everything else under the sky. If you know your average iron X comprised of misses travels X start to finish that is the club you should choose because that is most likely to happen. If you aren't using GG you should to see what you really do.

[iacas]

I'm perfectly content to play from 7000 yards or so, but @cedrictheo and I played from 6750 on our trip to Hilton Head because it was soggy soggy soggy and balls averaged about two inches of roll (often backward).

I averaged 255 (carry) on the trip and that's… 7180. If I had even 15 or 16 yards of roll, this formula would have me playing from 7600 yards or something ridiculous.

It gets really silly at the PGA Tour level. 290 * 28 = 8,120.

I like the 5-iron yardage mulitiplier (36 I believe) more. In my case, 195 * 36 = 7,020 and 190 * 36 = 6,840.

[Lihu]

I'm perfectly content to play from 7000 yards or so, but @cedrictheo and I played from 6750 on our trip to Hilton Head because it was soggy soggy soggy and balls averaged about two inches of roll (often backward).

I averaged 255 (carry) on the trip and that's… 7180. If I had even 15 or 16 yards of roll, this formula would have me playing from 7600 yards or something ridiculous.

It gets really silly at the PGA Tour level. 290 * 28 = 8,120.

I like the 5-iron yardage mulitiplier (36 I believe) more. In my case, 195 * 36 = 7,020 and 190 * 36 = 6,840.

The 36 multiplier with the 5i more or less works for me as well. There are still a couple par 4 holes I can't reliably reach in 2, but it more or less works for me. My driver is short compared to my irons, maybe that's why the multiplier works for me?

Guess I need to stop slicing/hooking into trees, and it's probably time for a proper fitting. . .

[bkuehn1952]

Are the systems using a multiple of a certain club's distance based on carry or roll?  Presumably it is carry since the roll would be unpredictable (firm flat fairways versus soft rolling ones).

[Lihu]

Are the systems using a multiple of a certain club's distance based on carry or roll?  Presumably it is carry since the roll would be unpredictable (firm flat fairways versus soft rolling ones).

If it's carry, then the formula might work better, but the article does not state carry.