Interesting Play Pattern Research Results

[Club Rat]

I've taken the survey and @Psychonana has put together a very good overall questionnaire which many of the questions
are often discussed on this forum.
It covers the basics, individual goals, habits, etc.
I'm not really sure why the perspective of "risk" plays in his analysis, but we shall see.

Nice job Mick.... Looking forward to viewing the results.

[No Mulligans]

I also took the survey.  I can see that it is difficult to write question regarding actual shot scenarios.  I often wanted more information regarding how risky/easy/hard was laying up, how risky/easy/hard was the next shot from the layup position etc.  This goes back to my previous post and how I feel often one underestimates the risk of "going for it" by not considering the risks involved in the "safe" options.  These decisions are not black and white.

My favorite hole on my home course is #11, it's my favorite because it really puts me on a decision.  Assume I can carry about 210 and get a total distance of about 230 when I hit my driver well.  This hole/course is in a canyon with everything sloping down towards the creek.

If I go for it and succeed, I'll end up with a 70 yard easy for me pitch to the green.  If I don't, I could be in the creek or even worse OB to the right.

However, I know from experience if I lay up I sometimes hit a fade and/or get a bad bounce and the ball rolls in the hazard.  Or if I pull it to the left of the cart path I'm on a steep down hill lie in the rough.  And sometimes I put my second shot into the hazard.  The second shot ideally is about 145 up hill, but 180 to 190 from the left of the cart path.

So laying up is no bargain.  I see this as a 50/50, and my scores on this hole reflect that.

[Psychonana]

9 minutes ago, No Mulligans said:

I also took the survey.  I can see that it is difficult to write question regarding actual shot scenarios.  I often wanted more information regarding how risky/easy/hard was laying up, how risky/easy/hard was the next shot from the layup position etc.  This goes back to my previous post and how I feel often one overestimates the risk by not considering the risks involved in the "safe" options.

Lol, yes it's when our thought process starts to look more like when playing chess - trying to anticipate 2 or 3 moves ahead. 

Although, did you mean underestimating the risk rather than overestimating it?

 

[No Mulligans]

8 minutes ago, Psychonana said:

Lol, yes it's when our thought process starts to look more like when playing chess - trying to anticipate 2 or 3 moves ahead. 

Although, did you mean underestimating the risk rather than overestimating it?

 

Yes, I'll go back and change that.  I also added an interesting, to me, hole I often play.

[Psychonana]

13 hours ago, No Mulligans said:

My favorite hole on my home course is #11, it's my favorite because it really puts me on a decision.  Assume I can carry about 210 and get a total distance of about 230 when I hit my driver well.  This hole/course is in a canyon with everything sloping down towards the creek.

If I go for it and succeed, I'll end up with a 70 yard easy for me pitch to the green.  If I don't, I could be in the creek or even worse OB to the right.

However, I know from experience if I lay up I sometimes hit a fade and/or get a bad bounce and the ball rolls in the hazard.  Or if I pull it to the left of the cart path I'm on a steep down hill lie in the rough.  And sometimes I put my second shot into the hazard.  The second shot ideally is about 145 up hill, but 180 to 190 from the left of the cart path.

So laying up is no bargain.  I see this as a 50/50, and my scores on this hole reflect that.

It's hard to tell, of course, especially not knowing the severity of the slope and how much the ball will run out. The way I see it is that there is more risk involved in laying up in front of the creek. (165yds will put you in it on the right.)

Add the downhill aspect and I imagine even a 7 iron off the tee risks scampering down into the creek. (I play a similar hole here in Spain and its unreal how much the ball can roll out depending on the conditions) AND you are still left with the 140-150yd uphill approach possibly with a downhill lie. Eek! 

Either way the risk is a penalty drop, compounded with the risk of that drop not giving you a clear line to the green if you are under the trees on the right?

You also seem to have a visually impaired line to the green off that back tee box. If this is something that you are weary of then you should also consider the effect this has on the risk of executing the shot badly - a huge factor for many golfers.

In regards to the alternative shot, I can drive 270yds consistently and can fade without problem so I know I'd be playing that shot over the right side of the bridge, probably with a little more height than normal to ensure I carry the trees (in the event of a miss hit), and the creek if it leaks a bit to the left.

With your 210 drive, the risk of catching the creek particularly on the left side would come more into play than it does for me. Certainly if wind is on your back and you can launch it a little higher, I'd tend to go for the drive rather than the layup if I were you. (Although if you've snap-hooked your last 2 drives, maybe reconsider that!) :)

Edited February 10, 2017 by RandallT
Readability

[Psychonana]

11 hours ago, No Mulligans said:

My favorite hole on my home course is #11, it's my favorite because it really puts me on a decision.  Assume I can carry about 210 and get a total distance of about 230 when I hit my driver well.  This hole/course is in a canyon with everything sloping down towards the creek.

What is the difficulty index of that hole? This is something worth considering when you assess the risk. If I am tied between 2 shot options I often will let the index decide. If its rated as a difficult hole, I'll take the safer less risky shot. My thinking being that on average others will be having difficulties on this hole and will be paying the price of their over risky shots. I'm smarter to play it conservatively and walk off with a clean result, reserving my riskier shots for easier holes.

[iacas]

6 hours ago, Psychonana said:

What is the difficulty index of that hole? This is something worth considering when you assess the risk. If I am tied between 2 shot options I often will let the index decide. If its rated as a difficult hole, I'll take the safer less risky shot. My thinking being that on average others will be having difficulties on this hole and will be paying the price of their over risky shots. I'm smarter to play it conservatively and walk off with a clean result, reserving my riskier shots for easier holes.

The handicap number on the hole is not the "difficulty" of the hole. It's simply the holes on which the worse player is most likely to need more strokes.

Par fives are often the "easiest" holes on the course for lower handicappers and the "hardest" for higher handicappers, which is why they're the lower numbered handicap holes - the gap is widest there.

[No Mulligans]

8 hours ago, Psychonana said:

It's hard to tell, of course, especially not knowing the severity of the slope and how much the ball will run out. The way I see it is that there is more risk involved in laying up in front of the creek. (165yds will put you in it on the right.)

Add the downhill aspect and I imagine even a 7 iron off the tee risks scampering down into the creek. (I play a similar hole here in Spain and its unreal how much the ball can roll out depending on the conditions) AND you are still left with the 140-150yd uphill approach possibly with a downhill lie. Eek! 

Either way the risk is a penalty drop, compounded with the risk of that drop not giving you a clear line to the green if you are under the trees on the right?

You also seem to have a visually impaired line to the green off that back tee box. If this is something that you are weary of then you should also consider the effect this has on the risk of executing the shot badly - a huge factor for many golfers.

In regards to the alternative shot, I can drive 270yds consistently and can fade without problem so I know I'd be playing that shot over the right side of the bridge, probably with a little more height than normal to ensure I carry the trees (in the event of a miss hit), and the creek if it leaks a bit to the left.

With your 210 drive, the risk of catching the creek particularly on the left side would come more into play than it does for me. Certainly if wind is on your back and you can launch it a little higher, I'd tend to go for the drive rather than the layup if I were you. (Although if you've snap-hooked your last 2 drives, maybe reconsider that!) :)

Back a few posts, confusion mounts.  I did mean overestimating risk... People overestimate risk of the riskier shot if they think the less risky shot is without risk.

Back to my example hole.  The hole is the 6 Handicap of the course but to me it should be #1 (#2 actually as it's on the back nine).

If one can routinely drive 270 yards, fade or not, "going for it" is actually less risky.  There is a really wide landing area if you hit the ball that far.  This hole is easy for a scratch player but hard for the bogey golfers, the type I mostly play with.  For a scratch player the creek and the OB on the right are pretty much not an issue.

This morning I hit my driver over the right side of the bridge, it looked to me to be on the borderline.  I looked for it in in the rough beyond the bridge near the creak's edge.  Pulled two balls out of the creek, they weren't mine.  Looks like I ended up in the creek.  I went back and dropped,  hit about a 145 yard 7 iron to the back of the green, two putted for a bogey.  Not bad for me on this hole.

Was this a lost ball or a ball in the creek?  I'd say 90% estimate it was in the creek.  Is it proper to consider it in the hazard in this situation/estimation?

[No Mulligans]

2 hours ago, No Mulligans said:

Was this a lost ball or a ball in the creek?  I'd say 90% estimate it was in the creek.  Is it proper to consider it in the hazard in this situation/estimation?

To answer may own question.  I looked it up, the rules use the term "virtually certain". Thinking there is a 90% chance the ball is in the lateral water hazard and a 10% chance it's lost in the rough or embedded etc, 90% is not enough.  I should have played it as a lost ball.

It's hard for me to really, really know the rules.  You pretty much have to consider the exact wording of the rule.  Sure, the rules could probably be simplified, but that is not to say they can be made simple.

Okay, I'll get back on topic now.