All Things Being Equal…..

[JonMA1]

Am I wrong?

No. But how this applies to improvement is contingent on potential and goal - something that is unique to every golfer.

Using the distance is king argument to discuss which club a specific golfer pulls on a specific tee shot is a different discussion than what’s the best area a specific golfer should work on if dropping x amount of strokes is the goal.

My opinion is that working on more distance for an older golfer (who is already a bit longer than average both by age and by HC) looking to get from a 22 to a 17 when his biggest issue is keeping the ball inside the ropes is not the right answer. I completely understand the factor of pulling less for subsequent shots. But IMO, advancing the ball without the dispersion can be more important.

It’s not unlike the gir is king argument. Should someone devote most of their practice time on approach shots in an attempt to obtain an unachievable goal of 10 gir per round? Or accept their potential of 6 or 7 and put some of that practice time towards scrambling skills?

Yes, we should all put some effort towards improving or maintaining distance. But for some of us, there’s a limit and the lack of distance is not the biggest thing holding us back from improvement.

 

[MonroeBob1955]

The trick is that if you can hit a 220 yard drive into the woods, you can also dial it back and hit a 200 yard fairway finder with a 5w. The guy who's maxed out with a 200 yard drive doesn't have that option. Distance can be converted into accuracy.

True. And I was forever the guy maxed out at 200. And I was competing and sometimes beating guys 220 plus Who were not converting their distance to accuracy. I agree it is true that pure distance does present the opportunity for lower scores for reasons you and others have shared. But as I mentioned earlier. Nobody has said they hit the ball 20 yards further and also reduced their handicap. Have read where a number of guys through lessons and hard work increases their distances xx yards and lowered their handicap. But in that case it’s not all things equal because they also likely improved their approach, short game and putting.

 

[TxAggie2018]

True. And I was forever the guy maxed out at 200. And I was competing and sometimes beating guys 220 plus Who were not converting their distance to accuracy. I agree it is true that pure distance does present the opportunity for lower scores for reasons you and others have shared. But as I mentioned earlier. Nobody has said they hit the ball 20 yards further and also reduced their handicap. Have read where a number of guys through lessons and hard work increases their distances xx yards and lowered their handicap. But in that case it’s not all things equal because they also likely improved their approach, short game and putting.

Do you hit your 7 iron better than your 6 iron or 5 iron? Do you find it easier to hit greens from 130 yards than from 150 yards?

If those are true, then this new driver is probably going to lower your cap. It's pretty simple.

This isn't even an an apples to oranges ballstriking comparison, it's apples to apples with you as the same golfer. More distance is more better, and if you're hitting 70% of fairways, I wouldn't even worry about the extra yardage getting you into penalty trouble.

 

[MonroeBob1955]

Do you hit your 7 iron better than your 6 iron or 5 iron? Do you find it easier to hit greens from 130 yards than from 150 yards?

If those are true, then this new driver is probably going to lower your cap. It's pretty simple.

This isn't even an an apples to oranges ballstriking comparison, it's apples to apples with you as the same golfer. More distance is more better, and if you're hitting 70% of fairways, I wouldn't even worry about the extra yardage getting you into penalty trouble.

I’d say I hit my 7and 6 fairly close to each other accuracy wise. 5H not as accurate.

 

[cmon man]

The same concept can be simulated by moving 10-15 yards in front of the usual tees for an extended period. Tee shots are "longer" as they are closer. Pretty sure that over a variety of golf courses the vast majority of golfers will see a HC reduction. That is why course ratings vary by distance right? I know for sure that I am more accurate into the green with 10 to 15 yards less.

 

[MonroeBob1955]

The same concept can be simulated by moving 10-15 yards in front of the usual tees for an extended period. Tee shots are "longer" as they are closer. Pretty sure that over a variety of golf courses the vast majority of golfers will see a HC reduction. That is why course ratings vary by distance right? I know for sure that I am more accurate into the green with 10 to 15 yards less.

That would be difficult to do over an extended period as I play with others and they’d be why the heck you teeing it up in front. And likewise competitions, which happen to mirror each other between 23 and 24.
my competitive events play @6000 yards. And in preparation for those events I play a lot of split tee rounds. My home course gold tee front and white tee back gives me hole lengths commensurate with my tournaments. Yet still allows appropriate handicap calculation.

You may be very right in that you are more accurate with 10-15 yards less on approaches to the green. And that’s what I’m trying to prove or disprove. My belief if that within our amateur games, that a difference of only 10-15 yard will make a negligible difference if any at all. That’s just one club. A 9 vs an 8. GW vs PW. 7 vs 6. Over the long term looking at your approach data may indicate a measurable difference within each club. And will that disparity result in a handicap change over an extended period?

My hypothesis is that as a 10ish handicap, it won’t make a difference. We are simply not accurate enough over a long period. My garmin watch/app stores all my shots data with every club. And there really isn’t a significant difference looking a a single club change, I.e. 8 vs 7 etc. Two club or 3 club difference, yes a more significant disparity.
It’s all in fun and requires no work on my part really. Since I’m seeing a measurable difference in my driver distance, will that in and amongst itself result in a handicap change?

All I have to do is play my game and in 8 months look at where my handicap is and see if there’s any difference. Play my typical 150-200 rounds and look back at the end. then I’ll see if, in my case, “All things equal, does a longer drive really make any difference scoring wise.”

 

[Sean]

Golf is still about how many, not how far. But you wouldn't know it in today's distance obsessed environment. Over the years I have learned that for many golf is just as much about their fragile egos as anything else. Many golfers could gain instant distance if they moved up a tee box or two. Instead of hitting fairway woods and hybrids into par 4's they would be hitting irons. However, many are afraid to move up because they worry about what others might say. This baffles me. Occasionally when I play, a golfer who is playing further back, will move up and join me. They ALWAYS walk off 18 saying they had a lot more fun. They are reaching par 4's in regulation they could never reach before. They are hitting irons on par 3's that used to be a wood or hybrid.

I learned to leave my ego at home when I first asked myself: do you want to play ego, or do you want to play golf? This game is difficult enough as it is, bringing ego into the game exponentially adds to that difficulty.

 

[blugold]

Golf is still about how many, not how far. But you wouldn't know it in today's distance obsessed environment. Over the years I have learned that for many golf is just as much about their fragile egos as anything else. Many golfers could gain instant distance if they moved up a tee box or two. Instead of hitting fairway woods and hybrids into par 4's they would be hitting irons. However, many are afraid to move up because they worry about what others might say. This baffles me. Occasionally when I play, a golfer who is playing further back, will move up and join me. They ALWAYS walk off 18 saying they had a lot more fun. They are reaching par 4's in regulation they could never reach before. They are hitting irons on par 3's that used to be a wood or hybrid.

I learned to leave my ego at home when I first asked myself: do you want to play ego, or do you want to play golf? This game is difficult enough as it is, bringing ego into the game exponentially adds to that difficulty.

Goes to show how important distance is.

 

[JonMA1]

My belief if that within our amateur games, that a difference of only 10-15 yard will make a negligible difference if any at all. That’s just one club. A 9 vs an 8. GW vs PW. 7 vs 6. Over the long term looking at your approach data may indicate a measurable difference within each club. And will that disparity result in a handicap change over an extended period?

My hypothesis is that as a 10ish handicap, it won’t make a difference. We are simply not accurate enough over a long period. My garmin watch/app stores all my shots data with every club. And there really isn’t a significant difference looking a a single club change, I.e. 8 vs 7 etc. Two club or 3 club difference, yes a more significant disparity.
It’s all in fun and requires no work on my part really. Since I’m seeing a measurable difference in my driver distance, will that in and amongst itself result in a handicap change?

Bob, I think it's great when folks actually experiment for themselves instead of simply buying into the significance of distance. That's the nice thing about tracking our own stats as opposed to working on something that may not apply to our games as much as some folks believe. I did a similar year-long test in another area of golf that is commonly over emphasized and learned quite a bit more about the game... knowledge I wouldn't have gained had I simply listened to the masses. I look forward to reading what kind of results you come up with at the end of this year.

Regarding your point of how insignificant distance may be for some of us, here's an interesting stat of mine. This is for the entire 2023 season from 50-150 yards and in. In my uneducated opinion, it's a strong argument against devoting too much practice time towards gaining a couple yards off the tee...




... and instead using some of that time to improve how poorly I hit shorter clubs.

 

[Jason89er]

Golf is still about how many, not how far. But you wouldn't know it in today's distance obsessed environment. Over the years I have learned that for many golf is just as much about their fragile egos as anything else. Many golfers could gain instant distance if they moved up a tee box or two. Instead of hitting fairway woods and hybrids into par 4's they would be hitting irons. However, many are afraid to move up because they worry about what others might say. This baffles me. Occasionally when I play, a golfer who is playing further back, will move up and join me. They ALWAYS walk off 18 saying they had a lot more fun. They are reaching par 4's in regulation they could never reach before. They are hitting irons on par 3's that used to be a wood or hybrid.

I learned to leave my ego at home when I first asked myself: do you want to play ego, or do you want to play golf? This game is difficult enough as it is, bringing ego into the game exponentially adds to that difficulty.

I get this. For me it’s about accomplishing a goal I set for myself. I can break 80 from 5400 yards. Not that hard. But from 6400 that’s another story. And why? Cause I need 1000 more yards over 18 holes to reach the greens. So my goal is gaining the distance and skills to accomplish that goal. I love the chase and the challenge of it. Makes achieving it that much better.

 

[MonroeBob1955]

Regarding your point of how insignificant distance may be for some of us, here's an interesting stat of mine. This is for the entire 2023 season from 50-150 yards and in. In my uneducated opinion, it's a strong argument against devoting too much practice time towards gaining a couple yards off the tee...

Interesting data results. Leads to all kinds of questions as to reasons for basic flatline. And yes, looking at that data, driving distance adds no value. Would love to see your putting strokes per hole during the test. I don’t necessarily agree with your practice provide no benefit statement. The first thing that pops out to me is you either have difficulty chipping or putting. Or both. A little work in those areas could potentially see immediate lower scores.
that said I’m not big on practice. I like hitting balls, but bore quickly. Rather hit balls on the course. I rarely practice chipping or putting.

 

[Daddio]

Congrats on finding those extra yards. That's substantial IMO. The replys are certainly interesting too and I'm looking forward to learning what your own investigation will reveal. We're all different, but an additional 16 yards would make a positive impact on my own scoring based upon a couple studies I conducted in the past. Wouldn't cut my handicap in half or anything that drastic but I'm pretty certain the benefits would be tangible and noticable. I could throw a couple supporting graphs up but wasn't sure you wanted 'your thread' muddied up with 'my studies'?

 

[MonroeBob1955]

Congrats on finding those extra yards. That's substantial IMO. The replys are certainly interesting too and I'm looking forward to learning what your own investigation will reveal. We're all different, but an additional 16 yards would make a positive impact on my own scoring based upon a couple studies I conducted in the past. Wouldn't cut my handicap in half or anything that drastic but I'm pretty certain the benefits would be tangible and noticable. I could throw a couple supporting graphs up but wasn't sure you wanted 'your thread' muddied up with 'my studies'?

Throw them up. We all learn from studies, tests we’ve individually done. Group studies/test muddy the water and lead to bad decisions by individuals because it lumps data together. An example is that according to data collected from some dang company, a slow swing golfer needs as high a driver launch as they can get, coupled with more backspin. Supposedly to help the ball stay in the air. Like in the area of 2800-3200. So put them in a 12* head with a high spin super light weight shaft. All supposedly data based.
My old 10.5 Rogue was a high flyer and because of it, was drop and stop in the fairway. Rarely more than 10 yards rollout. Has a 45g shaft and swapped in a 55g because I couldn’t feel the head thru the swing.
And the new QI10 is 10.5 turned down 8.5 with a 50R shaft. Launch monitor work I’ve done indicated too much backspin. On course I saw a decent launch but the ball ballooned, especially into the wind. So I clicked and tried one notch at a time till I saw the flight “I liked”. The heck with the data. The flight based on my eye.
In the resulting two round my distance jumped an additional 10 yards. Up now to 223. Of course we’ve finally had a week of dry weather so the course is drying out from all the spring rain. That’s why, in my opinion, I have to run long term. Too many variables can taint the data short term. Should likely average out over a longer period.
Another factor I do not know how to account for is “Let ‘er rip factor. As I’m finding this driver almost stupid easy to hit fairways. And as such, I’m really freewheeling the thing. Trying to find the limit speed versus control. I suspect it’ll settle down when, as we all do, I arrive at the course with nothing that resembles a golf swing.
And, as a why I don’t do short term tests reason, my typical early spring handicap increase has showed up. Up 1.5 already to 11. Apparently, more distance cant help hitting fat shots in the mud. Lol

 

[Daddio]

Mud incoming. FWIW I'm a straight short hitting old timer too @MonroeBob1955, turned 69 earlier this week. Would've been 65 and cap was a few strokes lower when I did these studies. To me both suggest finding an extra 16 yards would likely impact my scoring in a good way.

First study was focused on my approach shot proximity. It was small, only 10 rounds, but one of the angles I looked at was to break results out into 15 yard buckets from <50y out to >200y. My GHit%(green), proximity(purple), %inside 8'(red) and %inside 16'(blue) basically trend as expected.


Second study was looking into my own results in regards to another often repeated mantra 'ams should hit more club into greens'. It was a little larger, 25 rounds of approach shot data. It also included a scoring component because 'long misses are worse than short' always comes up when discussing 'hit more club' and I wanted to investigate if that had merit in my own game. One angle I looked was by club used for each approach. To me, the 2 graphs below show my GHit% and Strokes Remaining to Hole Out (similar to @JonMA1 graph above) both basically trended as expected, (except long iron to hybrid).

 

[MonroeBob1955]

Mud incoming. FWIW I'm a straight short hitting old timer too @MonroeBob1955, turned 69 earlier this week. Would've been 65 and cap was a few strokes lower when I did these studies. To me both suggest finding an extra 16 yards would likely impact my scoring in a good way.

First study was focused on my approach shot proximity. It was small, only 10 rounds, but one of the angles I looked at was to break results out into 15 yard buckets from <50y out to >200y. My GHit%(green), proximity(purple), %inside 8'(red) and %inside 16'(blue) basically trend as expected.
View attachment 9254978

Second study was looking into my own results in regards to another often repeated mantra 'ams should hit more club into greens'. It was a little larger, 25 rounds of approach shot data. It also included a scoring component because 'long misses are worse than short' always comes up when discussing 'hit more club' and I wanted to investigate if that had merit in my own game. One angle I looked was by club used for each approach. To me, the 2 graphs below show my GHit% and Strokes Remaining to Hole Out (similar to @JonMA1 graph above) both basically trended as expected, (except long iron to hybrid).
View attachment 9254981
View attachment 9254983

That’s quite interesting actually. Lots of terrific information. A few significant things stand out to me though, which actually supports Jon’s earlier statement. Between 125 and 185 (1sr graph) there’s not really a significant drop off. I would expect this to contain7-hyb. When I look at similar data for me from my garmin app, I see quite similar results, including the uptick with the hybrids. Wedges higher GIR%. Slow but more significant drop offs each iron. flatline to uptick with hybrids. The big difference is what conclusion you and I draw from the data. You suggest the data supports a roughly 5% increase 10-15 yards, in driver distance would result in lower scores, hence lower handicap. My take is there would likely be a minuscule change. That’s primarily due to the volatility of our game based on current handicap levels.
As already distance challenged, the majority of our approach shots are mid to long clubs. And with nearly all those sub 50% green hit rates, a single digit % change one club to the next doesn’t effect much. You’d have to hit a 7 iron versus a 6, ten times in a single round to hit one more GIR Based on my interpretation of your data. And that’s the broadest % gap. .
I believe it would take closer to 30 or more yard increase in driving to see a marked change in scoring and handicap. And it seems to me your and Jon’s tests support that hypothesis.
A 30 yard difference can very easily be tested. My home course white tee versus gold tee is 550 yards. Basically 30ish yards per hole. And I play both tee sets over the course of a year. The 3 club difference in approaches does result in 3-4 more GIR and thus a 3-4 stroke change per round. Even GHIN course handicap differences for those tee boxes at my home course supports that difference.
And is precisely why I’m doing this little test. I could be totally wrong. Wouldn’t be the first nor last time.

 

[Daddio]

That’s quite interesting actually. Lots of terrific information. A few significant things stand out to me though, which actually supports Jon’s earlier statement. Between 125 and 185 (1sr graph) there’s not really a significant drop off. I would expect this to contain7-hyb. When I look at similar data for me from my garmin app, I see quite similar results, including the uptick with the hybrids. Wedges higher GIR%. Slow but more significant drop offs each iron. flatline to uptick with hybrids. The big difference is what conclusion you and I draw from the data. You suggest the data supports a roughly 5% increase 10-15 yards, in driver distance would result in lower scores, hence lower handicap. My take is there would likely be a minuscule change. That’s primarily due to the volatility of our game based on current handicap levels.
As already distance challenged, the majority of our approach shots are mid to long clubs. And with nearly all those sub 50% green hit rates, a single digit % change one club to the next doesn’t effect much. You’d have to hit a 7 iron versus a 6, ten times in a single round to hit one more GIR Based on my interpretation of your data. And that’s the broadest % gap. .
I believe it would take closer to 30 or more yard increase in driving to see a marked change in scoring and handicap. And it seems to me your and Jon’s tests support that hypothesis.
A 30 yard difference can very easily be tested. My home course white tee versus gold tee is 550 yards. Basically 30ish yards per hole. And I play both tee sets over the course of a year. The 3 club difference in approaches does result in 3-4 more GIR and thus a 3-4 stroke change per round. Even GHIN course handicap differences for those tee boxes at my home course supports that difference.
And is precisely why I’m doing this little test. I could be totally wrong. Wouldn’t be the first nor last time.

Thanks. It's all interesting for sure. I guess it all points to differing perspectives and expectations? You are correct in interpreting the net differences in my data. When I do the math, looking accross my whole range, 16 yards (@1.33 clubs) should result in an average of only 0.91 more GIR and just 1.23 fewer strokes needed after the 14 approaches I'd expect to play on P4s & P5s. Depending upon expectations that could certainly be considered miniscule? or considered tangible? I've (over)analyzed many facets of my own golf game for decades and from experience I'd consider that a tangible positive result ... but no, it's not game changing.

 

[MonroeBob1955]

Thanks. It's all interesting for sure. I guess it all points to differing perspectives and expectations? You are correct in interpreting the net differences in my data. When I do the math, looking accross my whole range, 16 yards (@1.33 clubs) should result in an average of only 0.91 more GIR and just 1.23 fewer strokes needed after the 14 approaches I'd expect to play on P4s & P5s. Depending upon expectations that could certainly be considered miniscule? or considered tangible? I've (over)analyzed many facets of my own golf game for decades and from experience I'd consider that a tangible positive result ... but no, it's not game changing.

It is a positive. Any movement in that direction is a positive. Then there’s the intangibles. My short drives now are equal to my longer drives with old driver. The big smile effect. Chest puffing out a bit as you walk down the fairway. Even though you’re 30 yards behind your buddies. At least it’s not 40. Lol

 

[cmon man]

That would be difficult to do over an extended period as I play with others and they’d be why the heck you teeing it up in front. And likewise competitions, which happen to mirror each other between 23 and 24.
my competitive events play @6000 yards. And in preparation for those events I play a lot of split tee rounds. My home course gold tee front and white tee back gives me hole lengths commensurate with my tournaments. Yet still allows appropriate handicap calculation.

You may be very right in that you are more accurate with 10-15 yards less on approaches to the green. And that’s what I’m trying to prove or disprove. My belief if that within our amateur games, that a difference of only 10-15 yard will make a negligible difference if any at all. That’s just one club. A 9 vs an 8. GW vs PW. 7 vs 6. Over the long term looking at your approach data may indicate a measurable difference within each club. And will that disparity result in a handicap change over an extended period?

My hypothesis is that as a 10ish handicap, it won’t make a difference. We are simply not accurate enough over a long period. My garmin watch/app stores all my shots data with every club. And there really isn’t a significant difference looking a a single club change, I.e. 8 vs 7 etc. Two club or 3 club difference, yes a more significant disparity.
It’s all in fun and requires no work on my part really. Since I’m seeing a measurable difference in my driver distance, will that in and amongst itself result in a handicap change?

All I have to do is play my game and in 8 months look at where my handicap is and see if there’s any difference. Play my typical 150-200 rounds and look back at the end. then I’ll see if, in my case, “All things equal, does a longer drive really make any difference scoring wise.”

Interesting hypothesis and maybe correct for you as an individual. The data are out there to find and review. Good luck, have fun and see if you are an outlier.

 

[MonroeBob1955]

Since we have a rainy/rumbly Monday, I’ve been looking at the data for this year so far. Although difficult to draw hard conclusions this early in the test, what I’m seeing is very interesting (at least to me). Based on 21 9 and 18 hole rounds in last two months.

Typical for early season, I saw an increase in handicap from 9.5 to 11.0. That increase has been consistent since I’ve been using GHIN. I typically attribute the uptick to wet conditions, dormant greens And multi layers of clothing.

Atypical though has been the sooner than normal correction of winter/early spring handicap uptick. Handicap has crashed to an all time low, for me, of 7.1. Last years low wasn’t hit till October At 7.8.

Can‘t really attribute it to the weather variance, as this spring is quite normal for here (very wet). About a third of the last 21 rounds have been in CPO conditions.

So, is it the driver distance thats the biggest factor so far this season? It’s appearing that way. At least to this point. All other clubs are averaging my typical distances. And I’ve made no club changes to my bag over the last year.

Here’s what the driver (distance) has done. My typical tee shot over last several years (springtime) has been right at 200-203 yards. This spring I’m currently seeing (last ten rounds) 224. A massive improvement. FIR is the same as last year at 75%.

GIR has stayed fairly close to last year, although here’s the one asterisk of note when comparing this year to last. I’m playing the men’s tees this year mostly as opposed to senior tees last year. At my home course and other courses I play, that’s a roughly 600 difference.

To draw an end to this way too long update, I’d say at this stage, the increase in driver distance has had a positive impact on my handicap. Early in my year long test, but significant none the less.

Cheers!!

 

[rollin]

Golf is still about how many, not how far. But you wouldn't know it in today's distance obsessed environment. Over the years I have learned that for many golf is just as much about their fragile egos as anything else. Many golfers could gain instant distance if they moved up a tee box or two. Instead of hitting fairway woods and hybrids into par 4's they would be hitting irons. However, many are afraid to move up because they worry about what others might say. This baffles me. Occasionally when I play, a golfer who is playing further back, will move up and join me. They ALWAYS walk off 18 saying they had a lot more fun. They are reaching par 4's in regulation they could never reach before. They are hitting irons on par 3's that used to be a wood or hybrid.

I learned to leave my ego at home when I first asked myself: do you want to play ego, or do you want to play golf? This game is difficult enough as it is, bringing ego into the game exponentially adds to that difficulty.

But even if ones choice is ego driven, its what they want to do and so in that sense its more fun for them because its less of a good feeling moving up. And if they were to play a little better (its not going to be very significant for most) they may feel ...."well, but I played from closer" and that may not sit well with them inside.

One thing Im not a fan of is evrey once in a while someone who is longer or long enough will tell us of how they played up (for whatever the reasons, sometimes to try and prove some noble point) and then brag with emphasis about what an absolute blast they had and how much fun it was. Well then I say , if it was such a blast why arent they still doing it?

 

[Sean]

But even if ones choice is ego driven, its what they want to do and so in that sense its more fun for them because its less of a good feeling moving up

I don't think "fun" drives the ego, but rather ego is a protection from our fears and serves as a protection our self-worth. And sure, it's probably less of a good feeling moving up. For example, some golfers don't move up a tee box or two because they are afraid of what others will think/say. Chuck Quinton, who developed the Rotary Swing, had this to say about ego: "The ego (self-consciousness) is one of the most destructive mental obstacles necessary to overcome to play golf consistently at your potential. It is always monitoring its status and always acting on its behalf to either protect itself from damage or boost itself to increase its sense of worth."

I've witnessed more than a few times older golfers saying they had a blast moving up. One senior, for example, who always played the blues was super excited after our round. He told me it's the lowest score he ever shot, and the first time he's hit irons into the majority of the greens, as opposed to fairway woods/hybrids. He also said it was the most fun he had playing golf. Before the round he asked me, "Are you really playing the senior tees?" When I said yes, he decided to join me. The other two seniors in our group stated they always play the blues, and barely broke 100. They seemed to be more frustrated than not throughout the round.

The game is difficult enough as it is, especially when you get to be a senior. Others may disagree, but I don't see the point of making the game that much harder than it already is.

In any case, perhaps we view the role of the ego differently.

 

[rollin]

I don't think "fun" drives the ego, but rather ego is a protection from our fears and serves as a protection our self-worth. And sure, it's probably less of a good feeling moving up. For example, some golfers don't move up a tee box or two because they are afraid of what others will think/say. Chuck Quinton, who developed the Rotary Swing, had this to say about ego: "The ego (self-consciousness) is one of the most destructive mental obstacles necessary to overcome to play golf consistently at your potential. It is always monitoring its status and always acting on its behalf to either protect itself from damage or boost itself to increase its sense of worth."

I've witnessed more than a few times older golfers saying they had a blast moving up. One senior, for example, who always played the blues was super excited after our round. He told me it's the lowest score he ever shot, and the first time he's hit irons into the majority of the greens, as opposed to fairway woods/hybrids. He also said it was the most fun he had playing golf. Before the round he asked me, "Are you really playing the senior tees?" When I said yes, he decided to join me. The other two seniors in our group stated they always play the blues, and barely broke 100. They seemed to be more frustrated than not throughout the round.

The game is difficult enough as it is, especially when you get to be a senior. Others may disagree, but I don't see the point of making the game that much harder than it already is.

In any case, perhaps we view the role of the ego differently.

I dont at all disagree with anything you said.
I understand ego and i also understand the possible better scores one will see an overage when they are not really long enough for the tees they currently play from. That certainly could lead to one feeling better in the end.
Yet still....as they begin each round and step to each tee box, they feel better teeing from where they are. Even if for egotistical wrong reasons.

On another note fwiw....even most those who are long enough for the tee box they currently play from would also score better from a closer one via being closer on each average approach shot. By all rights of this discussion they could also swallow their ego's and for better scores play up too. Moving up works the same ideology at all levels.

Now sometimes there is also the anomaly of courses or holes that actually works the advantage of those who are plying just a little too far back because it can take normally reachable hazards (from the tee) out of thier reach and one who suffers from very dispersed tee game may actually benefit in that regard.

Im not suggesting one shouldnt move up. I think many would benefit from it.

What i dont appreciate is when so many out there who advocate that others should move up only pitch it because they think it will solve pace issue. Oh they use the "you will score much better" idea (which is not untrue) as the reason as though they are being noble (and some are) but vry many when in reality are being selfish as they think it will solve the pace issue while it is about the least detrimental thing to pace among the reasons for it.

 

[JonMA1]

When I’m playing well, I enjoy erring on the side of playing a bit longer (still under 6k). When I’m playing poorly, moving up does absolutely nothing for my enjoyment, score or pace of play. I planned on moving up a little based on what I (mistakenly) perceived to be a drop in driver distance this year. It’s been terrible so far.
If moving up a set of tees is the same thing as gaining distance, and gaining distance equals better scores, then I must be the exception to those rules.
Distance only matters when the rest of the game isn’t a dumpster fire. There are so many ways to suck at this game. To look at distance or moving up a set of tees as the end-all, cure-all to better, more enjoyable golf (and I’m not saying anyone here is saying that) is just foolish from my perspective.

 

[Sean]

others should move up only pitch it because they think it will solve pace issue.

I agree with you about pace. A slow player will play slow regardless of what tees he plays from. The exception might be a very high HI golfer who sprays the ball all over the place.