Better chance to..

[GHIN0011458]

Do you have a better chance of holing a 40 foot putt or a 40 foot chip?

I say chip, but I suck at putting.

[Dave2512]

Putt is easier to line up, hit the line and control the speed.

[GHIN0011458]

Putt is easier to line up, hit the line and control the speed.

Probably so- I only ask because I notice that I hole 3x the amount of shots from that distance when chipping than putting.

[Dave2512]

Which is still probably not many. Holing out from 40 feet isn't common even on the PGA tour.

[GHIN0011458]

Which is still probably not many. Holing out from 40 feet isn't common even on the PGA tour.

Correct- putt or chip it is still a hard shot to hole. I chip in an average of 1/3 rounds usually, from various distances. I make a 40 ft putt like once a year. I will practice short game and putting though and I hole out at least 5-6 times per night at 40 feet and might make 1 putt from 30 or so feet- if I am hitting from the same area I will make one here and there just from seeing the line multiple times and being able to gauge my speed without moving.

[Patch]

I have made both of similar range in the past, so I am going to say it's 50/50, with a <10% chance of making either one. On another note,  40'  from the hole is usually off the green at most of the places I play.

[mvmac]

Assuming both shots have similar break/slope and speed I'm definitely going with the putt. "Worst putt is as good as your best chip" type of thing. More variables with the chip than with a putt.

[iacas]

I say chip, but I suck at putting.

I'd take that bet. Unless you have some weird sort of putting yips or something… there's no way that's accurate.

A putt is a putt. A chip is not only a putt, but you have to judge the lie, the firmness of the green, the amount of spin you'll get, etc. So many more factors.

The only advantage a chip gives is that you can leave the flagstick in.

[dkolo]

Do you have a better chance of holing a 40 foot putt or a 40 foot chip?

I say chip, but I suck at putting.

That's a really interesting question! My intuition says that it's the putt because I feel like there's more control over the different factors of line and speed. But I think I'd vote for chip. At that distance, depending on the club you use, you can get over a significant portion of the green so you have less break and green to factor in. All else being equal, I'd choose the chip if given the option for that reason: less green interactions I need to account for. But I love chipping and hate putting, generally speaking, so it might just be me.

[mvmac]

All else being equal, I'd choose the chip if given the option for that reason: less green interactions I need to account for.

But with chipping you have to account for the lie, determining how the ball will react when it lands and controlling how far to carry it. You also have to hit it relatively solid. You can stub or thin a chip, can't really do that with a putt. With a putt you're just rolling the ball along the ground.

If I gave you 10 balls from each spot, I'd be very, very surprised if you averaged closer to the hole with the 10 balls you chipped.

[GHIN0011458]

But with chipping you have to account for the lie, determining how the ball will react when it lands and controlling how far to carry it. You also have to hit it relatively solid. You can stub or thin a chip, can't really do that with a putt. With a putt you're just rolling the ball along the ground.

Like he said- less green interaction for me is why I would hit the chip over the putt. I grossly misjudge distance when putting a lag whereas my body always seems to get my distance with a chip hole high. Like throwing a ball- I can throw it to you from 20 feet and I can throw it to you from 100 and I will be able to hit that distance. If I roll that ball, I have to factor in speed of the roll. Also, I feel like I have to over think the shot by a bunch with a putt.

[dkolo]

But with chipping you have to account for the lie, determining how the ball will react when it lands and controlling how far to carry it. You also have to hit it relatively solid. You can stub or thin a chip, can't really do that with a putt. With a putt you're just rolling the ball along the ground.

If I gave you 10 balls from each spot, I'd be very, very surprised if you averaged closer to the hole with the 10 balls you chipped.

I sort of assumed the same lie for both shots, something like an inch or two off of the green in the fringe.

Everything you've said makes sense; I think this is one of those things I probably feel differently about than is reality, like people thinking they're better for an approach at a farther, preferred distance with a wedge.

[Golfingdad]

Like throwing a ball- I can throw it to you from 20 feet and I can throw it to you from 100 and I will be able to hit that distance. If I roll that ball, I have to factor in speed of the roll.

This analogy doesn't work.  The hole doesn't have a glove when you're chipping.  You still have to factor in the speed of the roll, but you have to add to it how far it's going to travel in the air before it starts rolling, how hard or soft its going to land, and how it's going to check.

I'm with Erik on this - your stats are inaccurate or you have some sort of weird yips.

[Gunther]

But with chipping you have to account for the lie, determining how the ball will react when it lands and controlling how far to carry it. You also have to hit it relatively solid. You can stub or thin a chip, can't really do that with a putt. With a putt you're just rolling the ball along the ground. If I gave you 10 balls from each spot, I'd be very, very surprised if you averaged closer to the hole with the 10 balls you chipped.

I feel like I'd get the 10 chips closer but I'd bet if I took this challenge you'd be right because with the 2nd and ensuing putts you'd hone in on line and speed. More interesting but tougher to do cuz not a lot of greens are big enough but a 40' putt from each of 10 different spots on the green vs 10 chips from various places. The putts would probably still win but the margin would be much closer I think. I'm going to try both.

[GHIN0011458]

This analogy doesn't work.  The hole doesn't have a glove when you're chipping.  You still have to factor in the speed of the roll, but you have to add to it how far it's going to travel in the air before it starts rolling, how hard or soft its going to land, and how it's going to check.

I'm with Erik on this - your stats are inaccurate or you have some sort of weird yips.

I think it must be weird yips then- Shot 73- 5 three putts. 12 GIR- Got up and down 5/6 times.

[iacas]

I think it must be weird yips then- Shot 73- 5 three putts. 12 GIR- Got up and down 5/6 times.

Your distance control is lousy it sounds like. We have threads on that… ;-)

[Gunther]

Your distance control is lousy it sounds like. We have threads on that… ;-)

Lol. Lousy might be a bit rough, judging it off a round of 73.

[GHIN0011458]

Your distance control is lousy it sounds like. We have threads on that…

Please advise on long putts before I quit this game. Short putts, just fine. In fact, I have lowered on average 1 stroke per round because I am rarely missing the 3-4-5 footers. Its the 30 footer that I blow 10 feet past or leave 10 feet short that I am trying to make. And I do it often. Sometimes I even make the 10 footer coming back and get my par.