2016 Distance Data from Game Golf (and "How Far do Ams Hit the Ball?")

[Blackjack Don]

59 minutes ago, Lihu said:

They're not really going for "distance" in the sense that we generally do.

They are not playing the same game I play. Even if I someday reach my maximum plateau, I'll never be playing the same game. Might as well call it miniature golf. It's just as close to disc golf as it is to professional golf.

As we now know, due to technology and our never-ending curiosity, golf is more about length than accuracy. The guy who is hitting two clubs less has such an advantage over the straight guy who is constantly having to reach to get to the green. I know that a par 3 buck thirty is a whole lot easier than a par 3 180. The guys I play with are playing woods while I'm hitting a five iron. As good as they may be, I have the advantage. The stats show that I hit a 20 foot putt as often as they do, and nearly as often as the pros. The stats from two feet are +/- who cares. The point is, size does matter here.

Whether we believe it or not, the data is there. The old adage drive for show, putt for dough was wrong--like many old adages, actually. It is based on false assumption and false pattern recognition. This is something scientists and poker players know all too well. The odds don't change on getting pocket aces when you have had them two hands before in a row. The odds are the same for getting them again. It's weird, but true. That's the reality of statistics. 

Your brain lies to you. The voice in your head telling you stuff is not your friend. Decisions have to based on reality, or your failure rate has to be acceptable, because failure is going to happen way more than you think it should. If you think you can hit 250 and can't clear 200 on the fly, then you're not going to reach your potential. Heck, you might not even have a chance. The odds are not very good when you aren't getting the math right.

I have no idea, what any of this means. What are the questions and what are the answers? I hit a seven iron somewhere between 140 and 160. Those are the stats, but what do they mean? For the pros they mean something entirely different. But two foot putts remain the same for both of us. They miss them as often as I do.

That's what the stats tell me.

/rant

[Lihu]

1 hour ago, Blackjack Don said:

They are not playing the same game I play. Even if I someday reach my maximum plateau, I'll never be playing the same game. Might as well call it miniature golf. It's just as close to disc golf as it is to professional golf.

As we now know, due to technology and our never-ending curiosity, golf is more about length than accuracy. The guy who is hitting two clubs less has such an advantage over the straight guy who is constantly having to reach to get to the green. I know that a par 3 buck thirty is a whole lot easier than a par 3 180. The guys I play with are playing woods while I'm hitting a five iron. As good as they may be, I have the advantage. The stats show that I hit a 20 foot putt as often as they do, and nearly as often as the pros. The stats from two feet are +/- who cares. The point is, size distance does matter here.

Whether we believe it or not, the data is there. The old adage drive for show, putt for dough was wrong--like many old adages, actually. It is based on false assumption and false pattern recognition. This is something scientists and poker players know all too well. The odds don't change on getting pocket aces when you have had them two hands before in a row. The odds are the same for getting them again. It's weird, but true. That's the reality of statistics. 

That's what the stats tell me.

/rant

I agree with this. I was just talking about this subject with another high single digit player, and the main difference between us and the average bogey golfer is that we can hit longer. It's still bogey golf, but at least most of the mistakes are simply closer to the green which makes the mistakes less bad.

I don't consider what you said a rant, but more of simple information.

[JonMA1]

6 hours ago, Blackjack Don said:

As we now know, due to technology and our never-ending curiosity, golf is more about length than accuracy. 

I think that most of us agree that all things being equal, distance is a huge advantage. At the same time, what am I going to work on at my age?

I can bust my ass and devote a disproportionate amount of my available practice time trying to squeeze 15 more yards out of my driver, or I can work in proper ratios towards improving all aspects of my game including accuracy with my full swing and a better short game and putting.

We can take the good concept - such as added distance being advantageous - and make some bad decisions on how important it is, or ignore the fact that we have limited potential regarding distance. 

I think I read somewhere on this site "Accuracy and distance are both important, with distance being a bit more so."

6 hours ago, Blackjack Don said:

I hit a seven iron somewhere between 140 and 160

That's not too shabby and you're bound to get longer. You can play some decent golf hitting a 160 yard 7i - assuming you can hit close to a green with it.

5 hours ago, Lihu said:

I was just talking about this subject with another high single digit player, and the main difference between us and the average bogey golfer is that we can hit longer. It's still bogey golf, but at least most of the mistakes are simply closer to the green which makes the mistakes less bad.

I've never heard this, but it makes sense.

So the question becomes, what turns a long-hitting high single digit player into a long-hitting low single digit player? Would it be even more distance or better accuracy?

I know... the standard answer will be "both".

[Lihu]

12 minutes ago, JonMA1 said:

I've never heard this, but it makes sense.

So the question becomes, what turns a long-hitting high single digit player into a long-hitting low single digit player? Would it be even more distance or better accuracy?

I know... the standard answer will be "both".

This is just for our two cases.

Guessing there are more people like that? I know plenty of single digit players who have all around really nice games who don't hit far. They are like machines. They hit perfect shots from the tee, then hit a nice approach on the green or really close to the green. They have really good short games and putt really well. It's appallingly good playing.

Yeah, unfortunately, the answer is both.

[JonMA1]

7 minutes ago, Lihu said:

I know plenty of single digit players who have all around really nice games who don't hit far. They are like machines. They hit perfect shots from the tee, then hit a nice approach on the green or really close to the green. They have really good short games and putt really well. It's appallingly good playing.

I have played with those types as well.

Perhaps with an improved swing I could hit longer and with less effort. But I'm simply hoping to become much better at making clean contact with hopes of tightening up my dispersion.

The single-digit train has left the station, but the idea of playing better golf always keeps me coming back for more.

[natureboy]

11 hours ago, Blackjack Don said:

golf is more about length than accuracy.

Somewhat more but more along the lines of 60/40 than 99/1.

11 hours ago, Blackjack Don said:

I hit a seven iron somewhere between 140 and 160. Those are the stats, but what do they mean?

It means your distance control isn't great, which is a reflection of your consistency in achieving a centered hit and/or repeating the same swing.

In terms of golf skill consistency with quality shots is also huge, which is where the shorter hitting single digits (or plus digits for that matter) clean up.

3 hours ago, JonMA1 said:

I think I read somewhere on this site "Accuracy and distance are both important, with distance being a bit more so."

Would it be even more distance or better accuracy?

I know... the standard answer will be "both".

Yes. Plus consistency.

[Lazarus]

As someone who took to the game a touch late (40) 4 years ago, the idea of a whole lifetime of a golfer trying to maximise his/her abilities becomes a bit of a challenge. What do we do, find a solid swing as quickly as possible, live with that limit (distance wise), make it tidy, make small improvements,  learn to score and see how low (HCI) you can get to? Or push everything, strive to simply swing faster like a junior, and then refine the outcome so you know you're maximising your distance and ability (and no doubt score a bit more erratically for a while until the technique catches up), all the while hoping that the body can handle it .

 

 

[woodzie264]

On 1/5/2017 at 10:42 AM, Kalnoky said:

I would say those median driver numbers are very accurate for my current age and handicap. 

Same here

[woodzie264]

On 1/5/2017 at 11:02 AM, mcanadiens said:

Not that it really matters, but it's a bit heartening since my numbers are more or less in line with what they had there. I'm not that short. The people I play are just too damn long.

This.

[Lihu]

8 hours ago, Lazarus said:

As someone who took to the game a touch late (40) 4 years ago, the idea of a whole lifetime of a golfer trying to maximise his/her abilities becomes a bit of a challenge. What do we do, find a solid swing as quickly as possible, live with that limit (distance wise), make it tidy, make small improvements,  learn to score and see how low (HCI) you can get to? Or push everything, strive to simply swing faster like a junior, and then refine the outcome so you know you're maximising your distance and ability (and no doubt score a bit more erratically for a while until the technique catches up), all the while hoping that the body can handle it .

Three letters "L", "S", "W", but I see that you've already read it.

[JonMA1]

13 hours ago, Lazarus said:

As someone who took to the game a touch late (40) 4 years ago, the idea of a whole lifetime of a golfer trying to maximise his/her abilities becomes a bit of a challenge. What do we do, find a solid swing as quickly as possible, live with that limit (distance wise), make it tidy, make small improvements,  learn to score and see how low (HCI) you can get to? Or push everything, strive to simply swing faster like a junior, and then refine the outcome so you know you're maximising your distance and ability (and no doubt score a bit more erratically for a while until the technique catches up), all the while hoping that the body can handle it .

 

I'm not sure which option is best for those of us past our prime. 

It seems like there should be a balance between working on improvement and enjoying the game with the understanding that it's hard to have one and not the other. I can enjoy the game to a certain point with a poor swing. But the thought of getting maximum distance with minimal effort seems so appealing, even if it's unrealistic.

As far as wear and tear on our bodies, golf doesn't need to be that demanding...it's just so easy to get carried away. We practice harder instead of smarter, and while playing, swing harder with poor mechanics in an attempt to get more distance.

When my swing is really off, I feel beat up after a round of golf. 

[Lazarus]

12 hours ago, JonMA1 said:

I'm not sure which option is best for those of us past our prime. 

It seems like there should be a balance between working on improvement and enjoying the game with the understanding that it's hard to have one and not the other. I can enjoy the game to a certain point with a poor swing. But the thought of getting maximum distance with minimal effort seems so appealing, even if it's unrealistic.

As far as wear and tear on our bodies, golf doesn't need to be that demanding...it's just so easy to get carried away. We practice harder instead of smarter, and while playing, swing harder with poor mechanics in an attempt to get more distance.

When my swing is really off, I feel beat up after a round of golf. 

I still feel on the youthful side (feel may not be real) for the time being so I've actively chased distance but am waiting for the side effects. Unsurprisingly however, my recent extra yardage gains have come largely from better technique and less tension, the right equipment and no doubt a bit from being a little more flexible/using golf muscles. Occasionally I feel the wear and tear but not quite ready to stop trying to get more distance (that time will surely come!).

[Lihu]

3 minutes ago, Lazarus said:

I still feel on the youthful side (feel may not be real) for the time being so I've actively chased distance but am waiting for the side effects. Unsurprisingly however, my recent extra yardage gains have come largely from better technique and less tension, the right equipment and no doubt a bit from being a little more flexible/using golf muscles. Occasionally I feel the wear and tear but not quite ready to stop trying to get more distance (that time will surely come!).

If you have good technique, it seems like you can get pretty close to your "maximum" distance.

Sure, it's possible that if you started when you were 10 and are playing as a 16 year old, you might hit a lot farther? But that's not something I would worry too much about.

[Lazarus]

23 minutes ago, Lihu said:

If you have good technique, it seems like you can get pretty close to your "maximum" distance.

Sure, it's possible that if you started when you were 10 and are playing as a 16 year old, you might hit a lot farther? But that's not something I would worry too much about.

I play with a couple of guys who are 5/6 years younger and stronger than I am. They are tidy drivers of the ball around 230/40 yards but I can see them picking up 25-30 yards no problem if they went through the necessary process. I guess unless they have to play from the tips in club/tournament they can do perfectly fine with what they have and understandably feel happyish with that side of the game.

[alleztom]

Haha, British humo(u)r for an Australian is perhaps an insult ?!?

'American' units are great fun. I carry my three wood about 1 furlong.

I have hit a 300 'yard' drive twice but it was downwind and very firm fairways. Probably carried about '250'.

Great post @Blackjack Don - thank you.

 

[natureboy]

2 hours ago, alleztom said:

I have hit a 300 'yard' drive twice but it was downwind and very firm fairways. Probably carried about '250'.

Nice. 13 & 1/2 chains is a sweet clout!

[Buckeyebowman]

On 1/17/2017 at 0:14 AM, alleztom said:

Isn't this why Americans play in yards? 10% for free.

No, it's because we're decimally challenged!

On 1/17/2017 at 8:41 AM, boogielicious said:

We play in yards due to our adoration of the English. They are English units after all and not American units! 

This. It's kind of amazing that that our money isn't counted in Shillings and Pounds! Even though the British currency is no longer. But then, maybe it will be again.

[sjduffers]

19 hours ago, Buckeyebowman said:

the British currency is no longer.

Really? I don't think they use shillings in the UK any longer, but they certainly use pounds. I am use a Brit will confirm and insult you properly for not knowing this!