10 Golf Myths

Have you actually read that article? Did you notice that it refers to putts over 30ft? Did you notice that all my comments in this thread about giving the ball a chance refer to putts inside 20ft? Do you actually pay attention to anything that people post? Wasting my time trying to help you out, just do it your way. Good luck.
I don't see a difference between 20 feet and 30 feet personally. I would treat them the same way. Maybe 8 feet and in is what I'd consider makeable. (Makeable not really the right word, I mean like a good chance of making.)
 
I watched a bit of TGL the other day and noticed Theegala had EIGHT sponsors logos on his shirt. Each sleeve, collar, chest and 2 on his back.

A lot of golfers now have 4+ logos. Looks worse than most football shirts, similar to an F1 driver. The Nike players look more elegant in comparison, sporting just the simple swoosh.
I 100% agree with you I think majority of players look a shambles with their shirt sponsors everywhere it’s like watching Roy McEvoy in Tin Cup!

I’ve no issue with the materials of the football shirts as they’re often made of wicking material. I wear a lot of Castore shirts made of similar material. But a simple small logo on the breast and brand names in small font on back of the neck, Very similar to the Nike stuff.
 
So I walked into the lounge with my golf cap on. (I am bald by the way)

"You can't wear a hat in here."
"I'm not wearing a hat."
"Well what's that on your head?"
"Its a wig."
"It looks like a golf cap to me."
"Thank you. Its a wig that's been made to look like a golf cap."
"You must be joking."
"No. I got the idea from Jim who wears a golf cap that looks like a wig."
 
What’s the difference between options 2 and 3 in your scenario then?

As you state, it really depends on the green speed. On my course you can have a fast downhill putt which only just trickles past the hole and then rolls on another 4 feet.

Option 2 is your target being 3 feet past, option 3 is your target being 4.5 feet past so even your shortest putts are at a speed to go 1.5 feet past.

Context always matters, there can be a general rule, but there will always be exceptions to it in certain circumstance. The other point worth noting is that in the real world the difference between targetting exactly the hole and less than 2 feet past is likely to be very small. Given the distribution is a circle, not a hole width rectangle the misses are not all due to pace alone. If you leave one short that was bang online, yes more pace would have made it drop, and vice versa if you smash one that hits the hole and lips out, but if it's not online missing long or short doesn't change the outcome.
 
Some myths are very persistent: today I was sent this article about the "usefulness" of the 3 wood. In the article the author writes that 3 wood is a very versatile club and finds fairway 3-5% more than driver...concluding that 3 wood is a great club for most golfers. Whereas in fact, 3 wood is hard to hit off the fairway for most, and the trade off of a few extra fairways (+/- 4 more in 100 shots than driver) for the distance lost makes it a poor proposition for most golfers. I thought this was well known by now, and the main reason that most recreational golfers have a 5 wood instead nowadays. That club finds a significant higher percentage of fairways than a Driver, and is easier to use throughout the course. In fact, 3 woods can be had for quite a bargain on used club sites!

Here's the article: https://www.golfmonthly.com/features/how-far-does-the-average-amateur-golfer-hit-their-3-wood
 
Some myths are very persistent: today I was sent this article about the "usefulness" of the 3 wood. In the article the author writes that 3 wood is a very versatile club and finds fairway 3-5% more than driver...concluding that 3 wood is a great club for most golfers. Whereas in fact, 3 wood is hard to hit off the fairway for most, and the trade off of a few extra fairways (+/- 4 more in 100 shots than driver) for the distance lost makes it a poor proposition for most golfers. I thought this was well known by now, and the main reason that most recreational golfers have a 5 wood instead nowadays. That club finds a significant higher percentage of fairways than a Driver, and is easier to use throughout the course. In fact, 3 woods can be had for quite a bargain on used club sites!

Here's the article: https://www.golfmonthly.com/features/how-far-does-the-average-amateur-golfer-hit-their-3-wood
I find my 3-wood to be one of the least played clubs in my bag. It does not surprise me, if I have a round with it not played at all.
One summer I went without it all year and my next club after driver was a 16° hybrid. Worked quite well.

At my Ping fitting in October I was recommended a 17° 4-wood as my 2nd club in the bag. So later this year, I might have no 3-wood again.

When playing with vintage clubs, I have sometimes had 1, 2, 4, 5 woods in the bag. A choice of 2 from the tee and 2 from the fairway.
 
Some myths are very persistent: today I was sent this article about the "usefulness" of the 3 wood. In the article the author writes that 3 wood is a very versatile club and finds fairway 3-5% more than driver...concluding that 3 wood is a great club for most golfers. Whereas in fact, 3 wood is hard to hit off the fairway for most, and the trade off of a few extra fairways (+/- 4 more in 100 shots than driver) for the distance lost makes it a poor proposition for most golfers. I thought this was well known by now, and the main reason that most recreational golfers have a 5 wood instead nowadays. That club finds a significant higher percentage of fairways than a Driver, and is easier to use throughout the course. In fact, 3 woods can be had for quite a bargain on used club sites!

Here's the article: https://www.golfmonthly.com/features/how-far-does-the-average-amateur-golfer-hit-their-3-wood
We are marching dangerously back into DECADE principles vs old-school thinking again, just as we were with the putting. 😁

I believe them when they say 3 woods are no more accurate off the tee than driver, so when there's space, you go with driver and send it as far as possible. No point giving up 20-30 yards for no reason. Totally on board with that. There are caveats though:
  • there are three par 4s at my course where I hit 3 wood off the tee - all of them are short, and driver potentially brings in more trouble that 3 wood is unlikely to reach, or 3 wood would be in better shape if I did hit the same bad shot with it, and to use driver you'd have to be inch perfect whereas 3 wood gives a little margin for error.
  • all 3 woods are not equal - back in the day I tried a 13.5° 3 wood and couldn't really hit it properly. Nowadays I have a 16° one though, and the different is night and day. You need to find one that works for you or there's no point having it in the bag. Otherwise, yes a 5 wood is the way to go.
 
You raise some good points, and looking at your signature, it looks to my like you are someone that might add a bit of loft with the woods anyway (a 9 degree driver indicates that to me). So, essentially your 3 wood can be considered a 5 wood almost (in dynamic loft). If I were playing at your course, I would hit my 5 wood on the holes you mention, and can hit that thing around 190 yards (total). It has 18 degrees of loft and a pretty predictable draw shot shape. The mishit is overdrawing, so I usually just aim righthand side of the fairway.
 
I have a three wood that's a pretty reliable fairway finder and only about 10yds or so behind my driver. I can go a number of rounds without using it but if my driving goes to pot, out it comes. It's also useful on longer par 3 holes, depending on the length of course.

I rarely use it on a fairway, off tees only.
 
Option 2 is your target being 3 feet past, option 3 is your target being 4.5 feet past so even your shortest putts are at a speed to go 1.5 feet past.

Context always matters, there can be a general rule, but there will always be exceptions to it in certain circumstance. The other point worth noting is that in the real world the difference between targetting exactly the hole and less than 2 feet past is likely to be very small. Given the distribution is a circle, not a hole width rectangle the misses are not all due to pace alone. If you leave one short that was bang online, yes more pace would have made it drop, and vice versa if you smash one that hits the hole and lips out, but if it's not online missing long or short doesn't change the outcome.

Option 3 is nonsensical, why would anyone aim to hit a putt 4.5 feet or more past the hole?

Also, my distribution is not a circle
 
Option 3 is nonsensical, why would anyone aim to hit a putt 4.5 feet or more past the hole?

Also, my distribution is not a circle

Why do people think marmite tastes delicious? (and of course the people who do wonder why those that find it disgusting think that way.) People do all kinds of weird things!

The circle was just a simplification for illustrative purposes, it will be an elongated oval of differing shape depending on the players skill level, but it won't be a hole sized rectangle where the only reason for a miss is pace which was the point. A putt missed short and left of the necessary line won't have a greater chance of going in if it rolls just past the hole left of the necessary line.

I think the point has already been made, and is backed up by thorough research, which is less easy to pick apart than my oversimplified rough example for forum purposes, so I'll leave it at that.
 
We are marching dangerously back into DECADE principles vs old-school thinking again, just as we were with the putting. 😁

I believe them when they say 3 woods are no more accurate off the tee than driver, so when there's space, you go with driver and send it as far as possible. No point giving up 20-30 yards for no reason. Totally on board with that. There are caveats though:
  • there are three par 4s at my course where I hit 3 wood off the tee - all of them are short, and driver potentially brings in more trouble that 3 wood is unlikely to reach, or 3 wood would be in better shape if I did hit the same bad shot with it, and to use driver you'd have to be inch perfect whereas 3 wood gives a little margin for error.
  • all 3 woods are not equal - back in the day I tried a 13.5° 3 wood and couldn't really hit it properly. Nowadays I have a 16° one though, and the different is night and day. You need to find one that works for you or there's no point having it in the bag. Otherwise, yes a 5 wood is the way to go.
I wonder if the growing popularity of the mini driver changes this at least somewhat. The 70% larger club head would be a lot more forgiving than a normal 3 wood, so maybe it does become a statistically more viable option off the tee for tight holes? Especially in the examples you provide where the driver would go too far.

Would be interesting to see a large data set comparing the distance and accuracy of driver, mini driver and 3 wood off the tee.
 
I wonder if the growing popularity of the mini driver changes this at least somewhat. The 70% larger club head would be a lot more forgiving than a normal 3 wood, so maybe it does become a statistically more viable option off the tee for tight holes? Especially in the examples you provide where the driver would go too far.

Would be interesting to see a large data set comparing the distance and accuracy of driver, mini driver and 3 wood off the tee.
Maybe, but the flipside is that most amateurs would probably struggle hitting mini-driver off the deck. So it's whether they want two specific tee-clubs in the bag. Or sacrifice driver length altogether by only having the mini.
 
It stays in 95% of the time, unless I've not holed a putt all day then I take it out in a vain attempt to change my fortunes.
Fair enough......when I'm playing crap I'm often looking for an animal sacrifice or something..... The problem crops up where you are playing well for the last 3 months and you refuse to change your underwear....just in case.
 
Top