Stubbornness or lack of research?: "Drive for Show, Putt for Dough"

[iacas]

20 minutes ago, vangator said:

But that is what GP was talking about.

It isn't. "Drive for show, putt for dough" is not about distance. It mirrors the same (incorrect) sentiments that he expressed in the video you shared: that your chipping, putting, sand play, etc. is what matters most.

[DrvFrShow]

4 hours ago, natureboy said:

Do you literally mean a chip onto the fairway or a low running punch with an iron like below (much easier than 3 wood especially if the rough under the tree is a little less dense from the lower sunlight). Seems like there is very little undergrowth to contend with so a literal chip out of 10-20 yards might be an overly conservative play.

A shot like that could go ~ 100+ yards down the fairway. That would put you around or inside of 115 yards.which is a reasonable distance for making par if that was your approach on a par-4. I think if you can hit this punch shot consistently then the bogey man of the right side tree is less of an issue and you will still do okay if you're miss is under the tree (not talking about total block by the trunk or being rooted), but you still put a few in the short grass and have a go for it chance.

 

 

 

Oh I know how to hit a knockdown. I've been in the woods so often there's no option but to learn. My coach had me learning how to hit them with a pitching wedge. I flared a drive thru the woods about 40 yds off target on one hole and it ended up in the rough in front of the next tee - hit a 7 iron punch about 80 yds through a gap in the trees onto the green, two putt for a par.  

On the hole illustrated, it's just that the low branches weren't trimmed up on purpose on this particular tree to make it a total nuisance. If you get the ball just a little too high, you'll nick one of them and it could go off to the left where if it hit the branch solid it could go out of bounds. Or if you're on the right side you could end up in the adjacent fairway. It's best to avoid the whole mess by hitting a 3W with a little shorter distance but tighter dispersion and having a better position for my second shot. That's the smart play here. The fun play is to try to bomb the driver, but you can end up paying for it.

[pganapathy]

Absolutely no doubt that distance is important.  If you hit your PW 100 yards and your partner hits it 150 yards, his game in theory will be better provided he has the same dispersion pattern as you with the same clubs.

However, I agree with Gary Player that your short game is far more key than the long game.  Very few players (relatively) are capable of hitting a perfect 3 or 4 iron but a lot more can hit a good PW.

[iacas]

1 hour ago, pganapathy said:

However, I agree with Gary Player that your short game is far more key than the long game.  Very few players (relatively) are capable of hitting a perfect 3 or 4 iron but a lot more can hit a good PW.

You're disagreeing with facts, at this point. (Or being either so vague you can shift the argument to mean what you want, or so specific that you're only talking about one or a few people.)

Again, I don't think GP was talking about only gaining distance, but I know I've not been talking about only gaining distance.

@pganapathy, I feel you could learn a lot if you'd open yourself up to it.

[mvmac]

3 hours ago, pganapathy said:

Absolutely no doubt that distance is important.  If you hit your PW 100 yards and your partner hits it 150 yards, his game in theory will be better provided he has the same dispersion pattern as you with the same clubs.

Have you read other posts in this thread? Especially ones by @iacas? It's been said several times that the long game isn't about distance, it's about full swing shots.

[Lihu]

3 hours ago, pganapathy said:

However, I agree with Gary Player that your short game is far more key than the long game.  Very few players (relatively) are capable of hitting a perfect 3 or 4 iron but a lot more can hit a good PW.

Yes,but the key point that is missing from your argument that you need to get to a position where you can hit your PW as an approach shot. It's not like the hole gets shorter to suit your limitations. . .

[natureboy]

11 hours ago, DrvFrShow said:

On the hole illustrated, it's just that the low branches weren't trimmed up on purpose on this particular tree to make it a total nuisance. If you get the ball just a little too high, you'll nick one of them and it could go off to the left where if it hit the branch solid it could go out of bounds. Or if you're on the right side you could end up in the adjacent fairway.

Is the window between the lowest hanging branches and the ground less than a few feet? I can understand if it's a willow, but for a 'typical' tree shape, I would expect enough room to be able to get a low shot with enough spin to advance ~ 100 yards.

If the tree on the right was a thicket with multiple trunks and lots of brush, I would agree on the more conservative strategy, but would expect (not knowing the exact height of the branches and lay of the land) that the net score on the hole across multiple rounds would be better with the driver. Even in match play I would think a worst-case chip out would still leave you with a makeable though tougher GIR for the par.

[mchepp]

2 hours ago, natureboy said:

Is the window between the lowest hanging branches and the ground less than a few feet? I can understand if it's a willow, but for a 'typical' tree shape, I would expect enough room to be able to get a low shot with enough spin to advance ~ 100 yards.

If the tree on the right was a thicket with multiple trunks and lots of brush, I would agree on the more conservative strategy, but would expect (not knowing the exact height of the branches and lay of the land) that the net score on the hole across multiple rounds would be better with the driver. Even in match play I would think a worst-case chip out would still leave you with a makeable though tougher GIR for the par.

In @DrvFrShow's defense the trees in the Pacific Northwest present quite an obstacle when attempting to punch out. I have played all over the country and the most penal trees are up here. I think because the of the way the trees grow like a Christmas tree. So there is no easy way to pitch out because they are so darn close to the ground.

 Here is a view from the 6th fairway at my club in Portland.

You can't for example even make a full swing when under the tree.

I get that tree's are trees, but I often feel that the ones up here are much more penal.

[natureboy]

1 hour ago, mchepp said:

In @DrvFrShow's defense the trees in the Pacific Northwest present quite an obstacle when attempting to punch out. I have played all over the country and the most penal trees are up here. I think because the of the way the trees grow like a Christmas tree. So there is no easy way to pitch out because they are so darn close to the ground.

 Here is a view from the 6th fairway at my club in Portland.

You can't for example even make a full swing when under the tree.

I get that tree's are trees, but I often feel that the ones up here are much more penal.

Good point, but your pic looks like a more penal shot than I would expect given the pic that @DrvFrShow posted. Her pic looked like some species of deciduous tree, but overhead angle makes it hard to be certain.

Not being able to make a 3/4 backswing would definitely limit potential distance on a trouble punch and make a miss under a tree much more risky.

[Lihu]

1 hour ago, mchepp said:

I get that tree's are trees, but I often feel that the ones up here are much more penal.

Trees are not just trees. There's a thick ball eating popular tree on my home course that has digested two of my titleist pro-V1s.

[rolopolo]

No doubt that the long game has a bigger impact on score for just about all golfers.

Also no doubt that the short game is where it's at for the average recreational golfer - due to much much less time needed to "master".

In my opinion: Real good golfers (say 0-5hc players) are set apart from avg golfers (say 12-18hc) by their long games more than their short games, however, if you are a working man and want to get down to 5-10ish hc level - then you are gonna get much more reward for your time by focussing on the short game.

[vangator]

5 hours ago, mchepp said:

In @DrvFrShow's defense the trees in the Pacific Northwest present quite an obstacle when attempting to punch out. I have played all over the country and the most penal trees are up here. I think because the of the way the trees grow like a Christmas tree. So there is no easy way to pitch out because they are so darn close to the ground.

 Here is a view from the 6th fairway at my club in Portland.

You can't for example even make a full swing when under the tree.

I get that tree's are trees, but I often feel that the ones up here are much more penal.

Looks nice!

[pganapathy]

18 hours ago, Lihu said:

Yes,but the key point that is missing from your argument that you need to get to a position where you can hit your PW as an approach shot. It's not like the hole gets shorter to suit your limitations. . .

I agree the hole length remains the same.  What I am saying is if I am a 150 from the green, I need a 7 iron.  Someone who is longer only needs say a PW.  He will be more accurate in general.  So even if we both hit the same length off the tee he still has an edge because he is hitting PW instead of 7i.  Not necessarily that he hit it longer off the tee, maybe because he went with a shorter club and I used a driver.  Length does matter but my point is hit shorter clubs in and your game improves, which is my point.  The short game is key.  Each persons definition of short game depends on their length.  An old man who can only hit his PW 50 yards or some really long hitter getting 170 yards off the PW makes that their short game distance

[Ernest Jones]

23 hours ago, pganapathy said:

Very few players (relatively) are capable of hitting a perfect 3 or 4 iron but a lot more can hit a good PW.

Doesn't that just reinforce the idea that the biggest separation between great players and average players is that perfectly struck 3 and 4 iron?

[alleztom]

11 minutes ago, Ernest Jones said:

Doesn't that just reinforce the idea that the biggest separation between great players and average players is that perfectly struck 3 and 4 iron?

No in my view - it's driver - how often do you hit/need a perfect 3/4 iron in the round? And I'd still rather fight Adam Scott in a 3i than a Driver competition (he'd beat me by lots in both)

Edited January 7, 2016 by alleztom
Punctuation

[sirhacksalot]

I watch a lot of Mark Crossfield, he has a couple of videos where he has beaten tour pros in fun little putting competitions.  But honestly he would probably lose 8/10 times to those same pros in match play, due to being shorter.  

It's probably me just giving credit to past heros, but now when I hear things like Gary Player said "drive for show and putt for dough" , I take it as more of don't buy a 48" driver and swing for the fences everytime maybe getting one good drive in 3-4 rounds and honestly probably never that goes the most 10-15- even 20 at most yards past the short driver that you can swing.  

 

[alleztom]

Or put another way - I'd rather have equal driving ability with Mr Scott and have our regular 3i game than have his and my driver and an equalised 3 iron.

[Righty to Lefty]

On ‎1‎/‎2‎/‎2016 at 4:50 PM, vangator said:

To really score, you need all aspects, but the short game is the most important. 

Cory Pavin has won the US Open.  I don't think any long drive champs have ever won a tour event. 

Definitely not true...a middle of the range hitter on tour is still hitting near 300 yard drives.  No putt putt champion has ever won on tour either so the long drive statement doesn't fit as long drive and putt putt champs are specialists.

Corey Pavin had his moment but I doubt that he would be competitive with today's PGA pros.  The shortest of drivers today puts it 20 plus yards by him.  That won't work in the long term on tour.

My Pro at my home course missed getting on the Euro Tour by one shot I asked him what was the biggest difference between him and the guys that made it....he simply replied " the extra 20 yards!"  Mind you he hits it 285 on average.  They all have nasty short games and can make putts but he mentioned that when they came to a par 5 you might as well write down a birdie....unless you had to erase it and pencil in an eagle.  They were looking to attack even from 280 -290 out cause they could still reach.