Short Siding Yourself Isn't (Often) That Bad

[iacas]

I'm not going to belabor this point too much because there are a lot of specific scenarios people can use to prove or disprove this. I'm talking very generally here.

If you were given the choice between a 50-foot putt or a 20-foot putt, which would you choose?

Why, of course you'd choose the 20-foot putt, even if you had to putt up a tier or down a slope. As we know (from statistics, common sense, etc.), proximity to the hole is the single biggest determinant of the resulting distance from the hole. Duh. Shots from 20 feet finish closer to the hole and go in more frequently, on average, than shots from 25 feet, 30 feet, 40 feet, 20 yards, etc.

Yet if I change the word "putt" to "chip" in the above ("If you were given the choice between a 50-foot chip or a 20-foot chip, which would you choose?"), you'll get people that assume they're better off with "more green to work with." Much of the time, on the courses amateur golfers play, that doesn't work out. Much of the time, if you have a 20-foot chip, you'll hit it closer to the hole than if you have a 50-foot chip.

Often, short-siding yourself is not really a sin. You're closer to the hole, and unless there's a treacherous slope away from you, you're more likely to get that ball close to the hole than you would from farther away.

PGA Tour pros short-side themselves pretty darn often. Look at how often they miss the green from 75-100 yards: the median player hit the green less than 80% of the time (and that's from only 75-100 yards away!). Why? Because from that distance they're going at the flag and quite often short-siding themselves. To a PGA Tour player (who excels at the higher SV skills), a 20-foot chip is often easier than a 40-foot putt! PGA Tour players willingly short-side themselves all the time. There are plenty of times to avoid it, for example on the treacherously sloped 10th at Riviera, but a lot of the time they can get away with it just fine.

Now, this does not mean you should willingly short-side yourself. Unlike a PGA Tour player, you're comparatively better at the lower SV skills. You're virtually as good as a PGA Tour player from three feet, and you're comparatively closer at putting than you are at chipping. So for you, a 40-foot putt (SV②) is preferable most of the time to a 20-foot chip (SV③).

But if you happen to short-side yourself, or if you have the choice, don't worry about it. You're probably fine. If you compare like to like - a 50-foot chip to a 25-foot chip - you should take the shorter chip most of the time, and save the fractions of a stroke that come with it.

[natureboy]

How about with bunkers? Aren't they a bit more costly as far as being short-sided? If so, where's the approximate risk / reward line?

Edited October 21, 2015 by natureboy

[iacas]

How about with bunkers? Aren't they a bit more costly as far as being short-sided? If so, where's the approximate risk / reward line?

As it says in the book, bunkers may as well be water hazards. They're a much darker color. Nothing here changes that or says otherwise.

[alleztom]

I agree with this, a well made point, also considering that the courses I'd say most of us play aren't PGA tour difficulty around the greens, in terms of rough length, sharp slopes, tight pins etc (a point made in LSW as well).

[natureboy]

As it says in the book, bunkers may as well be water hazards. They're a much darker color. Nothing here changes that or says otherwise.

Not disagreeing with your post. Just thought a gnarly bunker might be a special case. Are they dark, because the likelihood of a one-putt after getting out of a bunker is relatively low (especially when short-sided), even for pros?

[iacas]

Not disagreeing with your post. Just thought a gnarly bunker might be a special case. Are they dark, because the likelihood of a one-putt after getting out of a bunker is relatively low (especially when short-sided), even for pros?

Read the book.

Amateurs suck out of bunkers.

[boogielicious]

Thanks for this post @iacas. I aim to do this when my shot zone for the center of the green would include bunkers or steep drop offs, but the front of the green is not bad. I adjust my target point so my zone doesn't include the bunkers/hazard. If I'm a few feet or yards short of the green, the chip (with a putting method) works great. I've holed out from there and my lag control is really good.

From bunkers, I average close to a sand shot plus two putts. I very rarely have an up and down. But from off the green with a chip, I average much closer to an up and down.

[14ledo81]

What are your thoughts when you have 15' of gnarly rough and only 10' of green.  In that case, you need to land the ball in the 10' of green and get it to stop quick enough.  

That is a pretty tough shot for me.

[saevel25]

What are your thoughts when you have 15' of gnarly rough and only 10' of green.  In that case, you need to land the ball in the 10' of green and get it to stop quick enough.  

That is a pretty tough shot for me.

So lets say you stop the ball 8 FT past the pin on that shot. Do you think you could do significantly better on a 60 FT pitch across the green?

 

[iacas]

What are your thoughts when you have 15' of gnarly rough and only 10' of green.  In that case, you need to land the ball in the 10' of green and get it to stop quick enough.  

I was going to say what @saevel25 said:

So lets say you stop the ball 8 FT past the pin on that shot. Do you think you could do significantly better on a 60 FT pitch across the green?

You might, you might not.

The problem with short-siding yourself in that situation is that all too often is that golfers are tempted to play the hero shot or just mis-hit one and flub it and leave themselves another short game shot.

Like the wedge shot from 100 yards that the average player thinks they should hit to five feet, and are disappointed when they hit it to 15, they expect to hit a better shot than they really should from eight feet, so their mind plays tricks on them.

On average, even with 15' of rough and the flag 10' on, a player will average closer to the hole from there than they will from the same rough 50 feet away on the other side of the green. But they'll also be better if they're putting from just about anywhere, too, so that's still the play.

[Dave2512]

Sure I prefer short side if I am trading a short chip for longer chip but I'll usually take a very long putt to a shorter chip. Typically if I miss short side it's because I made the mistake of trying to get close to a sucker pin rather than hitting to the fat of the green.  

[Big C]

Interesting post. After reading through, I agree with the premise that the ratio of green to rough/fringe is generally overstated. In most straightforward situations, closer to the pin is going to be better.

That said, when I use the term "short sided" in my own golf game, I'm often referring to those exception situations where there is a meaningful difference between missing on one side or another. I'm talking about hitting it long to a blue flag where the green slopes severely back to front. Or missing to the side where my next shot is going to require me to play a delicate shot over a bunker to a very tight pin position.

But missing the green 10 feet right to a right-position flag? No, I'm not beating myself up about that, nor am I wishing I would have missed left. But that's not really short siding myself, at least not in the way that I use the term. Curious to hear what others have to say. 

What are your thoughts when you have 15' of gnarly rough and only 10' of green.  In that case, you need to land the ball in the 10' of green and get it to stop quick enough.  

That is a pretty tough shot for me.

I agree that's a tough shot, and I would be curious to see the results of how your average amateur would fare in that scenario versus a more straightforward pitch from twice as far away. ‌@saevel25 suggests (and I think he's probably right) that you would end up closer to the hole most of the time with the shorter, trickier pitch. But I think the other side of that coin is that you are more likely to leave yourself another short game shot in that scneario also. Whereas a "bad" result with the 50 foot pitch would leave you a 25 foot putt (and likely 2 putt), a "bad" result on the tricky 25 foot pitch would leave you still in the rough and real possibility of 3 more shots to get down. On the whole, I'm not convinced that I would take the shorter shot in the scenario that you describe.

[Golfingdad]

That said, when I use the term "short sided" in my own golf game, I'm often referring to those exception situations where there is a meaningful difference between missing on one side or another. I'm talking about hitting it long to a blue flag where the green slopes severely back to front. Or missing to the side where my next shot is going to require me to play a delicate shot over a bunker to a very tight pin position.

But missing the green 10 feet right to a right-position flag? No, I'm not beating myself up about that, nor am I wishing I would have missed left. But that's not really short siding myself, at least not in the way that I use the term. Curious to hear what others have to say.

This is how I use the term as well.

I agree that's a tough shot, and I would be curious to see the results of how your average amateur would fare in that scenario versus a more straightforward pitch from twice as far away. ‌@saevel25 suggests (and I think he's probably right) that you would end up closer to the hole most of the time with the shorter, trickier pitch. But I think the other side of that coin is that you are more likely to leave yourself another short game shot in that scneario also. Whereas a "bad" result with the 50 foot pitch would leave you a 25 foot putt (and likely 2 putt), a "bad" result on the tricky 25 foot pitch would leave you still in the rough and real possibility of 3 more shots to get down. On the whole, I'm not convinced that I would take the shorter shot in the scenario that you describe.

The thing is, at least IMO, the comparisons probably don't matter all that much, especially if you're on board with the rest of the teachings in LSW.  We should all be aiming for the dead center of the green nearly all of the time anyway, so I can't think of many situations where short-siding yourself actually becomes a decision.

[SavvySwede]

The reason a lot of higher handicaps are so bad at the short sided shots is that they just don't know how to hit a basic pitch shot and get any loft on shots around the green. I get paired up with so many guys I see playing their sandwedge  way back in the stance and stabbing at the ball with the leading edge trying to get it to stop. Just this Sunday I was playing with a guy and this one hole he had the ENTIRE green to work with and I look at the way he is set up and the club is so delofted I already knew he was doomed. Asked him after what club he had hit and he said it was a PW but it looked like a darn 7I from where I was standing.

[JP golf]

I feel like I'm missing something here.  I may differ from some people on this one but I say short siding yourself sucks compared to being on the green the same distance from the hole.  I try to avoid short siding myself because my miss is less severe in a lot of cases.  If I go center green and miss right to a right pin, i'm on the pin.  If I go at the pin and miss right to the right pin, I'm short sided.

Obviously if I have a choice 30 feet from the pin off the green and 30 feet from the pin on the green... I'm choosing on the green.

Now, if we are strictly looking at being off the green with a lot of green to work with vs off the green closer to the hole with less green to work with... then short siding myself doesn't scare me there.  I'll usually take the shorter of the two shots.

[iacas]

Sure I prefer short side if I am trading a short chip for longer chip but I'll usually take a very long putt to a shorter chip. Typically if I miss short side it's because I made the mistake of trying to get close to a sucker pin rather than hitting to the fat of the green.  

Yes, the original post says that you're better off putting from even farther away than chipping from closer.

That's not what it's talking about, though. It's talking about how sometimes people get unnecessarily ticked at themselves for short-siding themselves. There are plenty of times when you can hit a good shot that's in your Shot Zone but which leaves you short-sided. For example, a 5-iron to a par three. Even if you put your Shot Zone over the green, mostly, there are areas where you might be short-sided. That doesn't mean you should move your Shot Zone away from the green to eliminate the possibility of short-siding yourself.

#DeadCenter still applies first.

I feel like I'm missing something here.  I may differ from some people on this one but I say short siding yourself sucks compared to being on the green the same distance from the hole.  I try to avoid short siding myself because my miss is less severe in a lot of cases.  If I go center green and miss right to a right pin, i'm on the pin.  If I go at the pin and miss right to the right pin, I'm short sided.

I never said that you're better off short siding yourself than hitting the green. Just the opposite.

Now, if we are strictly looking at being off the green with a lot of green to work with vs off the green closer to the hole with less green to work with... then short siding myself doesn't scare me there.  I'll usually take the shorter of the two shots.

That's what we're talking about.

[JP golf]

@iacas Thanks for clarifying Erik.  Your last two paragraphs of the OP summed it up good too, I read it but it didn't register lol.

Now, this does not mean you should willingly short-side yourself. Unlike a PGA Tour player, you're comparatively better at the lower SV skills. You're virtually as good as a PGA Tour player from three feet, and you're comparatively closer at putting than you are at chipping. So for you, a 40-foot putt (SV②) is preferable most of the time to a 20-foot chip (SV③).

But if you happen to short-side yourself, or if you have the choice, don't worry about it. You're probably fine. If you compare like to like - a 50-foot chip to a 25-foot chip - you should take the shorter chip most of the time, and save the fractions of a stroke that come with it.

[Gunther]

Good thought.  

I do it all the time, pisses me off but generally it's due to a mishit or misclub.  I think part of the reason we're so averse to many short side situations where we're actually OK is the golf announcers during tour events have trained us how bad it is for a pro to make this mistake.  How many times have you heard McCord say "He's dead from there", only to see the pro put it to 2 feet, at which time McCord marvels at his greatness.  Thinking about it from this angle and the one in the OP has provided me a new perspective.

I think the key from these positions is to play it safe and don't try the miracle shot (easier said than done).