p1n9183

I also go with this one. Tiger was always a great lag putter. We normally remember all the clutch putts he made but I think that his strength was always speed. Don't know if stats back that up.

After decades of hitting the ball to much from the outside to the inside for a big cut and to much from the inside to the outside for a big hook, I changed to a more neutral inside to inside path. Currently I'm adapting to it so maybe I'm a little bit worse than a year ago but I'm definitively moving in the right direction, one step back / two steps forward. Also started speed training to boost the new swing even more.

Scramble is a game of good shots, not misses like normal golf. They can be 20 handicapers but if all of them are pretty long of the tee and were lucky to at least one of them hit a decent shot on each shot, then 6 under is a posibility... small one but can happend.

I'm not but each posture let the arm extend different amounts because of the angle in relationship to your torso. The idea is to use only one method to be consistent. Besides that, you need to use different lengths of the arm in the same positions to account for different green speeds. Personally I never used aimpoint, I use fingers just to measure lateral dispersion, even on putts. It was a good "discovery" to see that the closer to the hole you are, the less the finger system works.

For fade/slices around trees I use a weak grip. It make me early extends so I loose speed and present to much loft at impact. My stock draw goes 165 with 7 iron. With fades I only hit 160 with the 4 iron. Despite that, is pretty accurate. At least for me a double-cross is impossible and is really good when wind is pushing from rights to left. Used it at a stock shot for many years until I finally cracked a more neutral draw that is more reliable in most conditions.

I have to agree with the fact that is more a you thing than it's actually happening things in every single tournament. I have a guy in my club that is so sensible to everything, he stops his routine every time a plane fly's over the course, way way up because none airport is near the course. I'm on the other side, unless a ball hit me or someone yells fore then I'm not going to be bothered at all by the surroundings. This was funny!

Most of people does it! (but none over the ball) Gave it time.. Hehe... Funny story... almost a decade ago I started to aim 3..4 fingers away from penalty hazards on long shots. At 270 yards, each finger is around 10 yards sideways (I got to that number experimenting at my home course and using google maps). Been my dispersion around 70/80 yards this almost put the penalty hazard out of play for me. But most importantly I found a way to measure distance sideways on a golf course. Of course till today everybody ask me what am I doing with my fingers on tee shots, even on approach shots. Last year, playing a mid-Am I was paired up with a guy with a caddie, the caddie was his friend but also a decent golf PRO. After a couple of holes he asked me what I was doing and he pulled out his phone to show me an app or "system" that can be purchased were it tells you how much a finger is in yards from different distances. Of course if I could figure out how to measure distance sideways in a golf course many people can do the same and make it a trend an even sell it so... you never know! Thanks for the info. The patch is getting worse... more accurate but less intuitive to follow. I rather look funny doing aimpoint on my knee and just use 1 simple formula than using this patch. I invite you to measure it yourself, don't trust my numbers. Even your arm length, height and finger width are going to change the numbers. Over the 3 footer was clear that my fingers were farther away from the hole standing up than the others. (even with the arm stretch issue i will explain in the next paragraph) Over the 9 footer I agree with you that it should be the longest of the 3 but in practice it wasn't. My best guess is the arm position on each set up. Standing tall the arm is in front of the body aiming a little down, really easy to stretch. Kneeling, because of my spine been tilted forward (20/30°) the arm is aiming to the front but more up been a little harder to stretch. Laying on the floor the arm is pointing over the shoulders making it even harder to stretch. The less the arm is stretched, the less distance the fingers are from the eyes resulting in bigger results. At this distance it started to matter, but not on shorter ones.

No entiendo! Sorry, language barrier 😉 Came back home and numbers are in... I messured 2 fingers from 3 and 9 feet from the ground, from standing up and kneeling. The clear winner is kneeling. It respected perfectlly the 3 times less "break" from 9 feet to 3 feet. Standing tall gave more break than needed on shorter putts by a big margin and at ball heigth is closer but not exactly rigth on the lower side. This is because, despite the eyes are at ball heigth, the extended arm changes the distances a little bit. The longer the arm, the taller you can be when usign your fingers and the shorter it get closer to the ground messure. If you aim with your fingers inside 10 feet don't belive me. Do your own test and see how it goes and make your own conclusion to help your game.

I didn't knew either that the method changed in the last years. I agree that over maybe 8 feet the difference between the reality and the fingers method is not significant because of been the length of the putt longer than the height of the player. But inside that area and closer to 3 feet the difference is important and can lead to confusion.

This is the concept I wanted to be noticed. I can recheck the numbers to make them more accurate. The closer you get to the hole, the more the height of the player affect the reading of the putt and the system starts to diverge from reality. Aiming to the low part of the hole in short putts is a way to patch the method so that it gets closer to reality. Only using it at ball heigth, as camilo villegas used to read lines, is going to give you the exact distance away from the hole to aim at.

Let's assume we have a tool to roll the ball an exact amount of distance and to start in the line we want it to roll. Basically the perfect putter. Now let's assume we have a 9 footer, with 2° consistent slope so we should aim our tool 2 fingers away from the hole (assuming we bent the arm in order to account for green speed) and set it to 10 feet of power to hole the putt. Last assumption we have a perfect green were the ball do what gravity tell it to do , no grass imperfections or grain tendencies. Also 0° degrees of upslope or downslope. We set the perfect putter as mentioned and we hole the putt. Great! Now we place the ball in the same line but now 3 feet from the hole. We aim the tool 2 fingers away from the hole and set the power to 4 feet but this time we miss the hole on the high side. Again we move the ball but now to 15 feet in the same line, aim 2 finger away from the hole and set the power to 16 feet. We run the tool but this time we miss the hole on the low side. As we were told all of those putts should be holed in the middle but all of them acted in different ways.. why? there's a simple reason.. eyes height. If we run the same scenarios but aim the tool using our fingers at ball height we are going to hole all of them, but when we aim with our fingers we do it at eyes height (normally standing tall) witch corrupt the numbers and making the perfect putter aim wrong and miss putts, only to be 100% accurate on the distance it was calibrated, in this example 9 feet. Here is an example of this using a 6 foot golfer (assuming 5.5 feet distance from eyes to ground). Perfect putter was calibrated to hole with 2 fingers away from the hole at 9 feet. From the 9 feet putter you can see that you need to aim 27 inches away from the hole to hole it. Because we calibrated our fingers at that distance using 2 finger works perfectly. But now if the use it in the 3 footer it make us aim 16 inches away from the hole were we only need to be 9 inches away from the hole so because we play more brake than we should we miss on the high side. The contrary happens with longer putts. At 15 feet with 2 fingers we aim 5 inches lower than we need so we miss on the low side. On the last row we can see the real amount of finger we should use if we calibrated our fingers at 9 feet. Of course it changes in relations on what distance you did the calibration. This could could be use an explanation to why on really short putts is recommended to set the fingers in the low side of the hole instead of the middle like in normal putts. As a conclusion, finger aiming is really accurate if we do it at ball height, but the more we lift our eyes away from the ball, the more the method is not going to be accurate, even more on short putts.

Saw this one on youtube the other day. Taylormade is bringing us quality content with this super athletes. Surprised about Nelly height besides Tiger and Rory. Rory a beast, hitting a soft fade 310 carry. Tiger in his new host role. Good video

Bachelor for life! Why to buy the cow if you can drink the milk for free?? Rooting for Spieth as always despite him having almost none chance of winning. I have Rory.. bryson and Scotty with real chances of winning. Would like to see Rham in contention, long time without a win.

As always in golf, is all about misses. Most of the time a bad putt is better than a bad chip but sometimes you get a pretty good lie and grass between your ball and the green that is hard to predict the roll over it so a bad chip becomes better than a bad putt in this scenarios.

Crunching the numbers, if you play the hole.. 100..1000 times, the best average of the hole you are going to get is with the Driver/Hybrid or playing it as a Par 5 hitting 3 wedges. Assumptions of your game: Driver 240 yards (100 yards dispersion) Hybrid 200 (80) 6 iron 160 (60) 9 iron 120 (40) P wedge 100 (30) Other assumptions from the hole: - When you hit it towards the threes 15% of your shots are going to bounce back to the fairway but 40 yards shorter, and 15% are going to remain in the threes but punchable out. The other 70% is going to be lost or OB so you need to Re-Tee (penalty + distance). You are going to hit less balls OB if you hit 7 iron off the tee but you are still gong to hit balls OB! and you are going to play 100% of your 2nd shots from 150 yards where you can still can hit a couple more OB! The average score for each club (assuming you go for the green in the second shot) is: Driver: 5.4 Hybrid: 5.5 6 Iron: 5.9 9 Iron: 6.0 Given that 5.4 is the best average you can get, is not necessary to go for the green in two. So you can hit 3 shots to reach it, maybe P (100), P(100) and wedge (90) and be around bogey or double but with this strategy you are going to be almost 100% in play all the time to avoid a roller-coaster of scores in that hole. Scratch players can hit 150 off the tee with a 9 iron and keep the ball in play almost 100% of the time so they can play the hole as a par 4 and be around par in average.

In your first shot of every hole you have 4 balls. If you like your 1st ball, you can just play from there your 2nd shot. If you don't you can hit a 2nd ball but first ball is now lost. Same procedure for 3rd and 4th ball. On the 2nd shot, you have now 3 balls. On the 3rd shot you only have 2 balls, and on the 4th shot you only have one shot. He doesn't say anything beyond the 4th shot. Example: Hole 1.. For his first shot hit ball 1a. Don't like it, hit ball 1b, don't like it. Hit ball 1c, he like it so he don't hit the 1d. He walks to the 1c ball and hit his 2nd shot with ball 2a. He likes it so he don't hit balls 2b or 2c. He plays his 3rd shot with ball 3a, he don't like it. Hit ball 3b to a worst place than 3a. He would love to play 3a but he can't. he is stuck with 3b. He plays his forth short with ball 4a and get the ball into the hole. That's a 4 in the scorecard for hole 1. Hole 2... again you tee off with ball 1a... an have 3 more options if you don't like the shot. I think that this game is going to show us how unrealistic we are about our game. We are going to not choose decent shot in hopes to hit better ones and we are probably going to get stuck with the last ball in most shots that is going to be worst that the previous shots. Even Padraig is so unrealistic on the last pitch he attempted. From the video I can figure out that he is in two shots on a Par 5. So he have 2 balls for the 3rd shot. He hits his first pitch to 4..5 feet from a really difficult place but because he thinks he should chip-in from green side he ditch that shot and proceed to hit another ball, now he is stuck with the 2nd shot from a tough place. He goes and hit a poor shot leaving him with a long put for birdie. He is lucky enough to make it but in reality he is going to score a lot better in average from 4..5 5 feet for birdie than from 20 yards, from the hazard for eagle.

Have a 19° (moved to 20.5°) Titleist 915H. I just love the club. Beautiful feel off the sweetspot, high launch, soft landing. Versatile. In the future, with less overall speed I will replace my 4 and 5 irons with another hybrid, something around 26°.

Broke the head of a Stealth Plus on a warm up. TaylorMade send me a new head but I decided to upgrade it to the new IQ10 LS and pay the difference. While I was waiting for the 8° head to arrive at the store I messed around with all the multi brand putts they had available. I instantly liked a black TaylorMade Spider, not the new one but very similar. The weight felt perfect. Big line in the middle for easy alignment. I was playing and old Zebra so the change in technology and feel was huge. Fast review of both clubs.. Driver QI10 LS. I always hit to ball up in the sky. I was playing the stealth at 7° with a 60g X low flight shaft and I was still hitting it pretty high. With the QI10 playing it at 6° now is almost hard for me to hit it high, with the same shaft the ball comes out lower and with less spin. so I'm really happy with the change. Putter Spider. I love it. It took me an afternoon to figure out how to grip it (it comes with a superStroke grip) but after that it all came into place. More stable on short putts and a good weight to swing smoothly on long putts and with added forgiveness over my old zebra.

I pull it out from outside 50 yards up to 250. Below 50 is all about feel and beyond 250 green is out of reach. I use the GPS to lay-up as close to the green as possible.

Taking your dispersion and distance in consideration I analyzed the 4 posible ways to play the hole, or at least the ones that were listed here. I took the brown grass on the left as fescue were you need to punch out sideways to the fairway and rigth of the car path to be fescue too. Driver "going for the green" You have to aim more rigth, to the bunker in order to center your shotzone in between the fescue. Wood of 240 over the bunkers I already like this one more for you. More room to land between the fescue. Balls in the fescue 11% down from 30% with driver. Improve of score from 4.55 to 4.40. 4 iron 210 yards besides the bunkers. Also a wide area and your shot zone is better than previous ones. This makes almost the fescue dissapear. You really need to hit a bad one (sometimes shit happens). Because of that and only having 120 yards in this is the best choice so far. Down to 4.32 from 4.40. Finally the 6 Iron 180 yards to avoid all trouble. Wide area an narrow dispersion for almost been in the fairway all the time. Similar than the previous one but 25 yards farther for the hole to avoid been in the bunkers. Average remains the same, 4.33 to 4.32. Conclusion is easy. Either your 4iron or 6 iron of the tee are equaly good for you. Glad that you made par!

Last year I made an excel that can easily measure with my own SG data the average score for each club of the tee. Even the difference in score if you aim more left or right with the same club. I like it because it can be tweaked to account for different kind of rough, trees, hazards, greens etc. As an example, On Par 5's that you have fescue on both sides were you can count them as a water hazard (penalty or punch out sideways), unless 3 wood or hybrid lands in a wider area between the fescue you should always hit driver. With a shorter club you are going to hit a couple less balls in the fescue than driver but you are not going to offset the fact that 100% of the shots are going to be played 30 or more yards longer. Here is a 560 par 5. Driver distance 280 yards total, 3 wood 250, hybrid 220. Distance between fescue is 30 yards (pretty tight). Dispersion for Driver is 62 yards. 56 for 3 wood and 49 for hybrid. Aiming of course at the middle of the fairway (20 yards wide) with driver you are going to hit 34% of balls on the fescue (17% left/17% right). 48% to the fairway and the rest to the rough. The average score is going to be around 5.14. Looking at the result with 3 wood and hybrid you are going to hit less balls in the fescue but because of having longer 2nd shots you are going to score slightly worst. 5.17 and 5.25 respectively. Things changes when the fescue is taller and you are probably going to loose the ball so changing the penalty of hitting there playing a 3 wood or hybrid gives a better score in the hole. Off course 30 yards between penalty hazards is way to small. You normally have 60 or more, in that cases the score is going to be more close to 5 and been the Driver the weapon of choice. The point is to see that no matter how tight the hole is, depending on the hole sometimes Driver is the play and sometimes 6 irons is the play. Is easy to see that on easy holes, but holes like this: you need to crunch the numbers to find the best strategy.

There are plenty of amazing things people are doing every single day, but if other people don't care about it, nobody is going to notice. LPGA is not popular that popular, so despite the great achievement, is not getting any attention and is going to be forgotten very soon. On the other side, if tiger farts louder than normal we are definitively going to know about it because tiger is popular.

Though start, bad design. For me.. I would tee it up and hit the biggest club face in the bag that don't airmail the green. Also hit a fade that is a lot easier for me to hit up on the air. 180/190.. it should be a high cut with 3 Wood with a tee 1 inch above the turf.

I'm on the side of thinking that something is not right here and should be reviewed. Let say that their course rating is pretty low, so their index is higher than it should be. But if they always play at their home course they are probably going to play bad away from home so it should even that advantage out or at least lower it down. Also you can say that they are amazing players under pressure and very skilled in match play format, but at the end of the day variance and luck is always going to play a big role between 2 players of similar handicap. Let's assume that player A have 75% chance of winning a match over player B that only have 25%, there is no way that a player's skill in match play can make such a difference in a match outcome but I prefer to use a number that is hard to argue. (For me.. 60/40, or 65/35 at most) The odds of winning 21 straight matches with that generous odds are less than 1% (or 1 in 420). Is this proof that they are "cheating" or something, of course not but is evidence enough to note that something is not right and should be reviewed further.

Are legal to compute for handicap?