The great drive for dough putt for show debate thread.

[sweaty sock]

Smiffy is playing a 450yrd par 4.
He hits it 240 carry into the rough and finds an awful lie.
Hacks it out 100 yards forward, wedges on to 6 feet and misses the putt.

What caused the bogey?

Agree with this, any shot (except maybe the wedge!) could have caused the bogey and improvement in any area is improvement. If you improve your putting you will improve. But, theres a limit, and most people are actually pretty good at putting in comparison to how many strokes they lose against the best.

 

[Deleted member 29109]

Smiffy is playing a 450yrd par 4.
He hits it 240 carry into the rough and finds an awful lie.
Hacks it out 100 yards forward, wedges on to 6 feet and misses the putt.

What caused the bogey?

The cumulative effect of all of the shots!

If a player has only hit their tee shot 240 on a 450 hole. The most likely outcome is a bogey or higher, even if they hit the fairway.

If they had holed the putt then I would say the wedge shot would have been the biggest contribution.

Again I think people are making the mistake of looking at shots/holes/rounds in isolation rather than the longer term.

 

[bobmac]

If you can increase your swing speed without having a detrimental affect on your swing path, clubface direction at impact, angle of attack and your ability to find the sweet spot then go for it.

My dad once told me to ''hit it as hard as you can but no harder''
What does a 10 year old make of that?

 

[Deleted member 1147]

If you can increase your swing speed without having a detrimental affect on your swing path, clubface direction at impact, angle of attack and your ability to find the sweet spot then go for it.

My dad once told me to ''hit it as hard as you can but no harder''
What does a 10 year old make of that?

I had a lesson last week and at the end of the session we looked at how hard I should be hitting the ball.
The trackman details showed that contact wasn't so good when I swung at 83mph, and my dispersion was bigger when I swung up at 87 mph. 85mph was my optimum in terms of distance and dispersion.
Not that it's easy to swing at a given speed.

 

[NeilV]

I like the "Lowest Score Wins" take on this debate.

Paraphrasing as I don't have the book with me, it's something like "Assuming no glaring weaknesses in your game, distance is always better. Unless there is a very pressing reason not to hit the ball as far as you can off the tee, such as bunkers either side of a tight fairway very close to your landing area".

It's worth bearing in mind that smashing the ball 300yds into a forest in a different postcode twice a round is also a glaring weakness.

From experience and my own stats from Arccos, fixing a glaring weakness with my putting (40+ putts) dropped me sub-100. Sub 90 only came when I could reliably send it a decent distance into, or close to, the fairway. I'd still rather hit a 9 iron approach out of the second cut than a 5 iron out of the middle of the fairway, and I know what would give me a better proximity to the hole consistently.

 

[garyinderry]

I can add a final line to this contentious phrase that throws chipping into the mix.

Drive for show, putt for doh, but you make your living off the toe.

This emphasises the importance of short game. Driving it 300 plus is great. Holing putts is fantastic but if you dont get up and down when you miss the green then it's all lost.

Heres zinger to explain.

 

[Deleted member 25575]

Again I think people are making the mistake of looking at shots/holes/rounds in isolation rather than the longer term.

This is exactly right.
Some days you will score a birdie with the 240 drive, some days you’ll make double with a 260 drive. But overall over the long term your average on this hole will be lower hitting it 260. It may move from 5.1 say to 4.9 but it will in the long run go downward

 

[bobmac]

The bottom line is 260 on the fairway is better than 240 on the fairway.
But is 260 in the rough better than 240 on the fairway.
I know what my money is on.... 240 on the fairway

 

[Deleted member 25575]

The bottom line is 260 on the fairway is better than 240 on the fairway.
But is 260 in the rough better than 240 on the fairway.
I know what my money is on.... 240 on the fairway

Again you’re looking at a single outcome.
Every 240 drive won’t be in the fairway and every 260 won’t be in the rough. Statistically speaking 50% of both will hit the fairway give or take.
Over the long run the 260 will win.
As I say there are days when the 240 will win out maybe by 3 shots, but over the course of time the 260 will win

 

[Backsticks]

The bottom line is 260 on the fairway is better than 240 on the fairway.
But is 260 in the rough better than 240 on the fairway.
I know what my money is on.... 240 on the fairway

No, 260 in the rough is better.
Which isnt quite true for a one of case, but in terms of strategy which is the real question, it is clear that if you can hit it 260, hit it 260. While you might pay some limited penalty for the extra number of shots you will play from the rough (and it isnt very many actually), you will gain far more from all those 260 yarders in the fairway, than you will lose.
So you do need to approach it with a 260 yards, even if in the rough, mindset.

 

[bobmac]

I've said my piece.
I'm out

 

[Orikoru]

The bottom line is 260 on the fairway is better than 240 on the fairway.
But is 260 in the rough better than 240 on the fairway.
I know what my money is on.... 240 on the fairway

Often it is, provided you still have line of sight to the green. Depends how far away you are of course, but I'd rather be hitting my 8 iron at the green than my 6 iron. Even if it is from the rough.

 

[Backache]

The biggest thing that makes me highly suspicious of pure statistical analyisi in things like this .Is that rough is very very variable and you have to take into account the type of rough when assessing the practicalites . The rough in any position is no use if you can't find the ball there.

 

[Voyager EMH]

I'm still waiting to hear from someone who won a comp and reduced their handicap even though they took 42 putts.

 

[King Julian]

Do you know why you are waiting for this? King Julian does not understand.

 

[Deleted member 29109]

I'm still waiting to hear from someone who won a comp and reduced their handicap even though they took 42 putts.

Has anyone said you can be terrible at putting and still score well?

 

[D-S]

Has anyone said you can be terrible at putting and still score well?

But there appear to be people who think you can hit the ball miles and necessarily score well.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Has anyone said you can be terrible at putting and still score well?

No.
And waiting to hear someone say that as well.

"Drive for show, putt for dough" is not about length of drives, it is about winning (dough) in comps.

 

[Lord Tyrion]

I wonder if those who think putting is the most important think that the key to a lower handicap is just making more birdies

I think I saw the stat you are referring to the other day. Very, very enlightening.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Do you know why you are waiting for this? King Julian does not understand.

Yes and yes.