The great drive for dough putt for show debate thread.

[Imurg]

I must say I have found a similar problem to Jimaroid with shotscope. We have a long par 3 at 220 yds both on the measured course and according to the watch but when I was hitting the middle of the green it was recording distances of around 170yds. I stopped using it after that as I realised there were other unnoticed but significant errors.
I still like it as a GPS but I am slightly sceptical of the data coming out.
No idea what Arccos is like.

GPS is accurate to about 3 to 5 yards most of the time but can be as much as 8 yards out.
When you consider that the distances recorded by Shotscope and Arccos include roll - which can vary from a negative amount with a wedge to 70 or more yards in firm, windy conditions - I can't get excited about the numbers.
I constantly hear of people having to edit shots....are all bad numbers found.? Are they all corrected accurately?
Carry is the only distance measurement that matters, it's the only one you, sometimes, have any control over.
None of these give you carry.
I've tried all the shot trackers - I don't use any of them now.

 

[Deleted member 25575]

I’m trying to wrap my head around this, it’s just a convoluted way of generalising dispersion as a Polar coordinate?

It’s interesting how different coordinate systems can introduce different observational errors. Without a common origin, Polar coordinates are impossible to compare except in magnitude of distance. So if you had a large database of polar coordinates lacking a common origin it would look like distance is a more imoprtant variable.

Interesting indeed.

I’m
Certainly no expert on polar coordinates, so this won’t be able to comment much on that side of things.
But in the example above if you hit a ball a certain distance at a certain on a certain directional path, then it will end up a certain distance from its intended original target, for the purposes of this debate let’s assume that target is the middle of the fairway. You can draw 2 lines, one directly to the point in the middle of the fairway at the distance you’re talking about, and the other at the angle offline for the same distance, and measuring between the 2 points to get to your distance offline.
I don’t know how the relates to polar coordinates.

Finally, having thought somewhat about this, I think I and others have been getting a bit drawn into short versus long. Short in the instance we have been talking about has absolutely zero advantage, any advantage the shorter player gets is from direction not being shorter.
So if I offered you a golf ball and you could choose to put that ball anywhere between 225 and 295 yards from the tee in any direction, you would more than likely place the ball at or near the 295 range assuming no water/bunkers etc. it is that logic where I am coming from when I say shorter will never ever be an advantage, however, accuracy can have an advantage over wildness. But I’m sure we’d all take 295 dead centre over 225 dead centre, much the same as we’d take 225 dead centre of OB left, or we’d take 295 in the trees over 225 in the trees assuming the same lie/path out.

 

[Whereditgo]

How to make big improvements over a period of time...
... hit it further, hit it better.

How to make the best score on the day or your best score of the year...
... hole them putts, matey!!!

"I'm never gonna hit it like Jack and Arnie, but I can putt" (15 years later, 7 birdies in last 10 holes to win 1978 Masters)

"You're in a good position after 2 rounds Colin. What do you think you will have to do to capture that first major?"
"Tee to green, I don't think I can be any better, I just need to hole more putts"

Agree with your first paragraph.

To win on tour it has to be a good week in every department, good off the tee, good approach shots and good putting.

Sinking lots of putts for double and triples is not really likely to give you your best score of the year.

 

[clubchamp98]

I wonder if the really big hitters on the tour would be up there every week without ball spotters.

We have a lad off +1 hit it miles but almost every time he cuts a dog leg where we can’t see the ball land he loses his ball.
So he reigns it in and hits irons off the tee.

You don’t see many pros on tour going back to the tee.

 

[Voyager EMH]

Agree with your first paragraph.

To win on tour it has to be a good week in every department, good off the tee, good approach shots and good putting.

Sinking lots of putts for double and triples is not really likely to give you your best score of the year.

Two putting every green when the rest of your game has been solid won't do it either.
"You gotta hole them putts, matey." No question about it. That is what turns a good score into a winning score.

 

[Backsticks]

What data shows the scope for accuracy improvement is small?

The data below.
And just to note that while the discussion has widened into the also interesting topics of accuracy versus distance (rather than putting versus distance), and, into which area a given golfer might find more fruitful for their efforts to improve, the original debate of the thread was whether putting or driving mattered most.
The distance versus handicap correlation is very strong and unarguable at this stage. It governs whether you are a 30 hc or plus 5. Putting, covering a similar handicap range: 25-scratch has a 4 shot difference. So the average 25HI, improving his putting to that of a scratch player, will become a 21. Scratch overall is still oceans away. On accuracy, while a peripheral rather than core discussion see also. Fairways hit is not correlating at all strongly to handicap, the data either noise, or taken at face value, could be argued tells us it is better to be inaccurate and miss more fairways! But from the distance data, we know what is happening is that any loss of accuracy is more than recouped by the distance factor. And with irons, accuracy is almost flat from 36HI down to single fingure. Nobody significantly in that range is shifting their handicap needle by accuracy. Below 10 they are....but only as distance increases (not at all below 125yds), and more so with increasing distance.

Rather than criticise this data (and much similar data telling the same story widely available by our friend google), can anyone actually post any data saying putting is more important than driving ?

 

[Voyager EMH]

Looking at all the graphs and tables above, I'm trying to work out the best way that I can win (dough) tomorrow.

1. Increase my driving distance - how on earth to do that overnight?
2. 1-putt more often than my average - at least that is a possibility.

 

[Backsticks]

Looking at all the graphs and tables above, I'm trying to work out the best way that I can win (dough) tomorrow.

1. Increase my driving distance - how on earth to do that overnight?
2. 1-putt more often than my average - at least that is a possibility.

As mentioned, thread wasnt really about how you can improve - let alone over night ! - but which mattered to playing good golf.
Bottom line...you are probably going to lose your dough...


But on the more serious note, the mistake you, and amny in this thread are making is that you do consider it possible to improve your putting by a stroke quickly. You might take a putt fewer today - and even win ! - but you still havent improved your putting. Improving putting by a stroke is improving your putting handicap by 5 or 6 effectively. Not so easy at all.

 

[Voyager EMH]

I'm not thinking about improving overnight, I'm thinking about trying to win tomorrow.
Each time, before playing, my thoughts are going to be the same, "What do I have to do to win?"
I will have to putt well, if I want to win (dough).
I know this.
I have known it for a long time.
I will continue to putt for dough. I will not not-do-it.

 

[Deleted member 25575]

So the only rebuttal to all that data showing the importance of distance is…..
A quote from years ago and what someone thinks when they go out.
Good work everyone

 

[Deleted member 15717]

So the only rebuttal to all that data showing the importance of distance is…..
A quote from years ago and what someone thinks when they go out.
Good work everyone

personal anecdotes are alllllllways more substantial in proof than actual stats from a number of different sources

/s

 

[Deleted member 25575]

personal anecdotes are alllllllways more substantial in proof than actual stats from a number of different sources

/s

This is very true

 

[Barking_Mad]

Where you putt from is a result of the shot, or shots, you hit previously. Nobody would choose to hit every first putt from 30 feet rather than 10 feet.

Equally nobody would choose to be hitting approach shots from 150 yards rather than 120 yards.

It's also true that the best golfers in the world are rarely the best putters. What they do however is hit the ball far enough to give themselves enough chances to hole makeable putts. Statistically this gets them the most birdies.

Putting is the cherry on the cake. It finishes it off, but it's only really good if your cake is tasty

 

[Deleted member 25575]

Let’s take a look at the PGA strokes gained putting and we find ….
Scotty Scheffler leading money earner (dough) down in 162 in the putting stats
Jon Rahm second leading money earner down in 37
Viktor Hovland 3rd money earner down in 54
And on and on and on
Xander down in 10th on the money list with a grand total of 0 wins last season is the first player on the list to be ranked higher putting than his place on the money list

What about strokes gained off the tee I hear you ask..
Why number one on that measure just so happens to be none other than Scotty Sheffler, who….hang on let me scroll back up… ah yes, who was number 1 on the money list (dough).

Someone should tell Scotty that he’s “got to hold them putts… Matey”

 

[Voyager EMH]

So the only rebuttal to all that data showing the importance of distance is…..
A quote from years ago and what someone thinks when they go out.
Good work everyone

Before I go play tomorrow, how can I add significant distance to my drives?
What thoughts about adding more distance to my drives should I have when I approach the first tee?
Will either of those help me win (dough) tomorrow?

"Drive for show, putt for dough" was never about making long term improvements, it has always been about thinking about what to do on the day to win.
Any thread that has the phrase in it's title will, for me, be about what to do on the day to help you win - NOT LONG-TERM AND SUSTAINED IMPROVEMENTS.

Start another thread, if you like, about lasting improvements. "Hit it further, hit it better."

The truth of the original phrase referenced in the title remains for what it is.

 

[Deleted member 25575]

Before I go play tomorrow, how can I add significant distance to my drives?
What thoughts about adding more distance to my drives should I have when I approach the first tee?
Will either of those help me win (dough) tomorrow?

"Drive for show, putt for dough" was never about making long term improvements, it has always been about thinking about what to do on the day to win.
Any thread that has the phrase in it's title will, for me, be about what to do on the day to help you win - NOT LONG-TERM AND SUSTAINED IMPROVEMENTS.

Start another thread, if you like, about lasting improvements. "Hit it further, hit it better."

The truth of the original phrase referenced in the title remains for what it is.

Except that it isn’t!
As I posted earlier re Scotty he has an appalling putting record and still wins.
Drive for show, putt for dough is about more than what can I do today to win (dough), it’s about which facet of the game is more important for winning.
The stats show that you can be average at putting and still win.
You don’t have to add 30y to your drives overnight, more that if you drive as well as you can (accurately and distance) you will give yourself a better chance of winning than if you putt as well as you can (realistically, not holding every single putt).

 

[Deleted member 29109]

Before I go play tomorrow, how can I add significant distance to my drives?
What thoughts about adding more distance to my drives should I have when I approach the first tee?
Will either of those help me win (dough) tomorrow?

"Drive for show, putt for dough" was never about making long term improvements, it has always been about thinking about what to do on the day to win.
Any thread that has the phrase in it's title will, for me, be about what to do on the day to help you win - NOT LONG-TERM AND SUSTAINED IMPROVEMENTS.

Start another thread, if you like, about lasting improvements. "Hit it further, hit it better."

The truth of the original phrase referenced in the title remains for what it is.

I must have said a dozen times. This thread is about the benefits of distance over putting and the fact old stats don’t ring true anymore.

How do you improve your putting significantly overnight to help you win tomorrow?

 

[Deleted member 25575]

I must have said a dozen times. This thread is about the benefits of distance over putting and the fact old stats don’t ring true anymore.

How do you improve your putting significantly overnight to help you win tomorrow?

Apparently you just go out and play and think “got to hold them putts…. Matey” and it magically works.
Maybe could try thinking “Gotta hit this further…. Old chap” on every tee??

 

[Voyager EMH]

1. I must have said a dozen times. This thread is about the benefits of distance over putting and the fact old stats don’t ring true anymore.

2. How do you improve your putting significantly overnight to help you win tomorrow?

1. Then it needed a title that did not reference the famous phrase attributed to Bobby Locke.

2. I don't.
But putting far better than your average on the day is a possibility and one can keep one's mind open to this.
Driving significantly longer than your average on the day is not such a possibility.

 

[Voyager EMH]

1. Apparently you just go out and play and think “got to hold them putts…. Matey” and it magically works.
2. Maybe could try thinking “Gotta hit this further…. Old chap” on every tee??

1. It is not magic. Putting much better than your average does happen on some days.
2. Driving distance much better than your average is far more unlikely to happen than putting better than your average, whatever your thought process.