Golf Strategy Choices

[edomingox]

I was wondering what the low handicappers would prefer in these polls.  In particular, the uneven lie question.

[Big C]

Questions 1 and 2 are fairly straightforward. I would take the closer shot every time. 

Question 3 might be somewhat dependent on the hole layout. If there were OB or hazards in play, i could see myself laying up on certain holes. If the worst trouble were a green side bunker then I would almost certainly go for it.

Edited to address your question about the uneven lie. A "moderately" uneven lie from 100 yards is going to be an easier shot for most than a 175 yard shot from a flat lie. 75 yards is a really big difference - the lie would have to be really severe for most golfers to be better off taking the 175 shot.

Edited July 25, 2018 by Big C

[Golfingdad]

The difference between 100 and 175 is a bunch - I'd take the shorter shot in every instance.

You do have me wondering, though, where my cutoff is for each of the first two situations.  Maybe if the choices were 100 uneven vs. 115 flat lie, I'd go with the longer one.  And the same might be true for the rough vs. fairway question, but that also would depend on the lie in the rough and now much green there is to work with.

The third question is the easiest for me.  If me "punishment" for going for it is a greenside bunker or a 20 yard pitch, then I'll take that every single time.

[Piz]

I wouldn't consider myself a low handicapper; but I would prefer to be closer to the objective every time.  The farther away I am...the more things can go haywire.

[DaveP043]

I'm with the rest on the first two, closer is the better option unless the "moderately uneven lie" means I have to be a mountain goat to stand there.  For the third question, my answer is probably none of the above.  Its really rare that conditions will force me to lay back as far as 100 yards.  If I can stay short of the greenside bunkers and probably be in good shape in the fairway, that might be preferable.  If the greenside bunkers are particularly deep, or the rough is scary tough, that colors my preference.  I want to be as close to the green as possible without being in a really bad spot.  Light rough, "average" bunker, those might not be bad enough to keep me from going after the reward on the green.

[Aflighter]

Id take 1 on first one but you need to define how deep rough is for 2 and 3 is layup but not 100 yards back.Close as possible.Of course 175 yards might not get any closer than hacking out of thick rough from 100.Rough I generally see around here your not getting out of.

[GolfLug]

Short shots on the first two and go for green on 3 unless there is OB lurking close to the green. Actually it's get as close to green as possible. Getting in green from 240 out is not realistic for me. 

 

[DaveP043]

26 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

The difference between 100 and 175 is a bunch - I'd take the shorter shot in every instance.

You do have me wondering, though, where my cutoff is for each of the first two situations.  Maybe if the choices were 100 uneven vs. 115 flat lie, I'd go with the longer one.  And the same might be true for the rough vs. fairway question, but that also would depend on the lie in the rough and now much green there is to work with.

The third question is the easiest for me.  If me "punishment" for going for it is a greenside bunker or a 20 yard pitch, then I'll take that every single time.

Reading this again, I have to question the assumptions that go into each of the first two questions.  If I try to hit the ball 70 yards closer to the green, its not certain that I'll hit it into the rough.  The real question becomes:

Would you rather take a 70% chance of being in the fairway, 175 yards out, or a 40% chance of being in the rough at 100 yards out. 

Each question becomes a question of some percentage of certainty of each outcome, versus the chances of success at the following shot.  I see that @edomingox is new here so probably hasn't found this yet, but there's a really good explanation of smart decision-making in the book Lowest Score Wins.  http://lowestscorewins.com/  I know that a lot of us will tell you that its a really good read.

Welcome to TheSand Trap, @edomingox  

[Shindig]

Question 3 needs far more options.  There's one hole on my home course where going for the green from 180 or more yards out brings some bunkers into play that I'd rather not be in.  There are usually layups that aren't 100 yards out -- next time I play this course (a little over a week from now) I'll be laying up on that hole to 40 yards from the green.

[edomingox]

so the reason why I ask these is that I read somewhere that the tour pros have the same change of hitting the green from 100 yards in the rough as hitting 175 yards from the fairway.  But, as mentioned in a previous post, I would be interested in knowing what the cut off is for everyone.  I think if I was to choose, this would be my cut off.

100 uneven lie and 160 flat

100 rough and 145 fairway

lay up if I can't get within 20 yards

[chilepepper]

#3 .....it really depends on how I’m swinging the fwy wood recently. Sometimes is good, sometimes I have a week where things get wonky with it

[Shindig]

7 minutes ago, edomingox said:

lay up if I can't get within 20 yards

Lay up to 100?  Why not lay up to 35 yards?

I'm going to give you a one-hour homework assignment that will save you strokes going forward.  It's seriously one of the easiest ways for someone to improve their scoring.  

Learn your tweener yardages.  It's really that easy:

 

[Mmgolfwiz]

First off uneven lie is not a problem at all. Second. Bunkers are not a problem. It’s usua easier to get out of a bunker than tall hay grass

[billchao]

47 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

Reading this again, I have to question the assumptions that go into each of the first two questions.  If I try to hit the ball 70 yards closer to the green, its not certain that I'll hit it into the rough.  The real question becomes:

Would you rather take a 70% chance of being in the fairway, 175 yards out, or a 40% chance of being in the rough at 100 yards out. 

Each question becomes a question of some percentage of certainty of each outcome, versus the chances of success at the following shot.  I see that @edomingox is new here so probably hasn't found this yet, but there's a really good explanation of smart decision-making in the book Lowest Score Wins.  http://lowestscorewins.com/  I know that a lot of us will tell you that its a really good read.

Welcome to TheSand Trap, @edomingox  

This is the flaw in all of these "distance vs accuracy" or "shorter in the rough vs longer in the fairway" hypotheticals. People seem to want to present and argue them in theory as either/or when in practice it's about percentages. Not every shot with the driver on a given hole is destined for the rough or worse, just as not every layup with an iron is destined for the fairway.

[ejm1994]

Apparently I'm in the minority on the last one. But this comes down to my having never played a course before (heading out this Friday). I think I would err on the side of caution unless I get into the scenario and realize that there's minimal risk to going for the green.

[Shindig]

3 minutes ago, ejm1994 said:

Apparently I'm in the minority on the last one. But this comes down to my having never played a course before (heading out this Friday). I think I would err on the side of caution unless I get into the scenario and realize that there's minimal risk to going for the green.

That's because most regulars on this site recognize that the "lay up to a full swing yardage" is terrible, stroke-costing advice.  In almost every circumstance, almost every level of player will be more accurate from 50 yards than from 100.

[Patch]

The two choices would have a lot to do with the talent level of the golfer.

For the less talented, the 100 yard shots would be easier. Lay ups are more in play. For the better talented golfer, the longer shots would be less of a problem, although not preferable to the shorter shots. . 

[boogielicious]

10 hours ago, billchao said:

This is the flaw in all of these "distance vs accuracy" or "shorter in the rough vs longer in the fairway" hypotheticals. People seem to want to present and argue them in theory as either/or when in practice it's about percentages. Not every shot with the driver on a given hole is destined for the rough or worse, just as not every layup with an iron is destined for the fairway.

Just ask J B Holmes at Torrey Pines!