Does Drive for Show and Putt for Dough really hold true today?

[AndyL0711]

Lots of analytics going on here. For me the only thing I can really control is distance. Around the green I am a feel player...probably not the best thing but it is what it is.

so if I can work on length, that is what I do....

 

[Parrot]

Both are incredibly important to good scores.

My putting has improved considerably this year. Most of the time, I'll tell you that I'm a better putter than I am a driver of the ball. But I've had my best scores when I've driven the ball well. When I'm not driving the ball decently, I put more pressure on other parts of my game and I'm not to the point where that can hold hold up. So, at least for me, I'd say driving the ball is more important. And my scores show me that I need to work on my approach shots to get the ball closer to the hole sooner.

 

[Doubleb21]

Great discussion in this thread. Both are obviously super important to your game. Is there really a wrong answer between the two probably not.

 

[goalie]

I still think that the worse your game is off the tee, the less putting is a huge factor.

I've yet to putt poorly enough to get a penalty, let alone do it a few times on a hole......

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk

 

[Misike]

I just tested out my new Epic Flash driver yesterday and was piping drives. I haven’t been this excited to get a club on the course in awhile. So, last week I said putter. Today I say driver. I’m fickle like that.

 

[Supperman]

I'm definitely in the "putt for dough" camp but leaning to a strong wedge game too. In my opinion there are more opportunities to make up strokes around the green.

 

[rollin]

I'm definitely in the "putt for dough" camp but leaning to a strong wedge game too. In my opinion there are more opportunities to make up strokes around the green.

I of course get what you mean but (and not just asked to you) but asked to anyone that uses the term "make up for strokes".
Its a common response and ideology form many and I don't know where or how this misguided thought that we make up for strokes ever came to be.

I mean if we chunk a 150 yrd approach and it flips 5yrds and have to rehit from 145, how can we make up for that? We can actually hole out that next 145 yrd approach and still that doesn't make up for the stroke we used and lost for the chunked 5 yarder we just screwed up. That stroke still exists. Same for a ball one hits into the woods from the tee or a chip/pitch that someone blades across the green and into a bunker. or whatever. Nothing ever makes up for any used strokes. There is no such thing. And thinking anything otherwise is imo although very common, a misguided ideology.

I feel (IMO) that's where people get it wrong. And so in my exaggerated (but possible) example above holing out the 145 yarder we got the bird but we still lost that stroke in which we mishit the first approach attempt with a 5ydr chunk and had to rehit. The ideology that we "make up" for that or any lost stroke is simply not true. You cant think of it in terms of competition or the fact that you still scored well on the hole. The fact remains that a lost stroke is still an extra stroke we took and it doesn't go away. And if one plays his/her game where there are a significant number of such lost strokes (much like many mid and certainly majority of higher cappers do) every one of them is added to your score. We don't make up for them just because we use relevance to par and did well on the hole after that. They are still strokes and they are extra ones regardless we par or bird or bogey or whatever.

This is why imo it can only really be about wherever it is that one is costing themselves the most extra strokes. Remove the extra strokes by trying to fix them and also try not to add any more via not being good as you can getting the ball on and in the hole. Its not that being good in that area ever makes up for any those extra strokes prior, but is much more that we simply wouldn't be adding any more extra strokes to them. It all has the same importance and weight.

 

[Supperman]

I of course get what you mean but (and not just asked to you) but asked to anyone that uses the term "make up for strokes".
Its a common response and ideology form many and I don't know where or how this misguided thought that we make up for strokes ever came to be.

I mean if we chunk a 150 yrd approach and it flips 5yrds and have to rehit from 145, how can we make up for that? We can actually hole out that next 145 yrd approach and still that doesn't make up for the stroke we used and lost for the chunked 5 yarder we just screwed up. That stroke still exists. Same for a ball one hits into the woods from the tee or a chip/pitch that someone blades across the green and into a bunker. or whatever. Nothing ever makes up for any used strokes. There is no such thing. And thinking anything otherwise is imo although very common, a misguided ideology.

I feel (IMO) that's where people get it wrong. And so in my exaggerated (but possible) example above holing out the 145 yarder we got the bird but we still lost that stroke in which we mishit the first approach attempt with a 5ydr chunk and had to rehit. The ideology that we "make up" for that or any lost stroke is simply not true. You cant think of it in terms of competition or the fact that you still scored well on the hole. The fact remains that a lost stroke is still an extra stroke we took and it doesn't go away. And if one plays his/her game where there are a significant number of such lost strokes (much like many mid and certainly majority of higher cappers do) every one of them is added to your score. We don't make up for them just because we use relevance to par and did well on the hole after that. They are still strokes and they are extra ones regardless we par or bird or bogey or whatever.

This is why imo it can only really be about wherever it is that one is costing themselves the most extra strokes. Remove the extra strokes by trying to fix them and also try not to add any more via not being good as you can getting the ball on and in the hole. Its not that being good in that area ever makes up for any those extra strokes prior, but is much more that we simply wouldn't be adding any more extra strokes to them. It all has the same importance and weight.

You know, you're right. It's not like we can deduct a stroke once it's lost. I guess the terminology is not accurate. Perhaps a more accurate way to express it would be to call it "salvaging a score on a hole" or something like that. Often times I'll hit a bad drive or fairway shot that will cost a stroke, and has the potential to add even more strokes to that hole, but if I can manage a good approach shot and a one-putt I feel like I'm salvaging a half decent score on that hole

 

[PapaJohick]

Sooo for people in the putt for dough camp,

did you know that rory won the fed ex cup while only gaining basically half a stroke putting. But he was top 4 in tee to green, off the tee, around the green and was 7th I believe in approach.

Putting he was 11th. Still very good, but it was his tee driving and wedge play that helped him the most.

 

[Parrot]

You know, you're right. It's not like we can deduct a stroke once it's lost. I guess the terminology is not accurate. Perhaps a more accurate way to express it would be to call it "salvaging a score on a hole" or something like that. Often times I'll hit a bad drive or fairway shot that will cost a stroke, and has the potential to add even more strokes to that hole, but if I can manage a good approach shot and a one-putt I feel like I'm salvaging a half decent score on that hole

I think of saving strokes around the green but it's the same as salvaging a score. It's about stopping the bleeding.

Whether it's putting or driving the ball, being able to rely on one of them takes some pressure off the other aspects of one's game. For me, being in the fairway with a good drive gives me a chance to be more aggressive than I would be if I was hitting a second shot to get back into position.

 

[leapin llama]

i think it takes more practice to be consistent off the tee than working on the green. the mechanics of putting are the same to me compared to shaping woods or long irons off the tee.

 

[fuffle master]

You know, you're right. It's not like we can deduct a stroke once it's lost. I guess the terminology is not accurate. Perhaps a more accurate way to express it would be to call it "salvaging a score on a hole" or something like that. Often times I'll hit a bad drive or fairway shot that will cost a stroke, and has the potential to add even more strokes to that hole, but if I can manage a good approach shot and a one-putt I feel like I'm salvaging a half-decent score on that hole

I agree that a good approach/chip/putt could save the hole. But, for me, instead of I just saved a hole, it's damn I could have shot par or bird.

Maybe I am too much a glass half empty kind of guy. I remember the bad shots during the round, and the good shots after.

 

[bassing33]

For me it’s drive for dough and putt for dough. On any given day if any part of my game is really off my score reflects it. I’m normally strong off the tee and just a so so putter. But on a bad driving day everything is harder. If I can’t get it to the green I can’t putt it. On the flip side I have have many rounds where I was killing the ball and keeping it play but ended up with pretty average scores overall cause the putting was just not there. The goal is to be an all around golfer. Don’t duff it or hit in the water and don’t 3 putt every hole either.

 

[Et Tu Brute?]

The only way a chip, putt or hole-out can "save" something is if it's the final shot of a closely contested competition. If your opponent is already in the hole with par and you make a 20-footer for your par you "saved" a hole. Or if you need birdie on the last hole to win a tournament and chip in for birdie, that "saved" the win.

But other than that, a shot is a shot and they all count the same. Making a 10-footer for double bogey after chili-dipping two chip shots "saves" the same amount (one stroke) as making a 10-footer for eagle after driving the green on a Par 4.

Being a bad driver and a good putter is better than being a bad driver and a bad putter. But the putting doesn't "make up" for the balls hit in the woods or OB. Similarly, if you don't putt well it's better to drive it good than drive it bad but you can't erase a 3-putt by hitting a really good tee shot on the next hole.

 

[DG_1234]

But the putting doesn't "make up" for the balls hit in the woods or OB. .

Remember that from the tee box a player has options. If a player is wild with the driver but wants to shoot lower scores, he has the option of leaving the driver at home and playing tee box shots with fairway metal, hybrid, 6-iron, or whichever club he can hit consistently straight.
On the green a player does not have options. He needs to know how to properly use one club, the putter.

 

[rollin]

Remember that from the tee box a player has options. If a player is wild with the driver but wants to shoot lower scores, he has the option of leaving the driver at home and playing tee box shots with fairway metal, hybrid, 6-iron, or whichever club he can hit consistently straight.
On the green a player does not have options. He needs to know how to properly use one club, the putter.

But that's not a real answer as for why putting would be more important. In fact if one has to lose 30,40,50,60 yrds in order to keep the ball in play via using shorter clubs then that is a problem and is a big important one. Its one that's more important than putting. And whos to say one cant screw up and be penal with a number of those shots as well anyway. I mean heck,....many mid and certainly high cappers are costly with not just their tee game but also their approach shots too. Hence my points and the whole notion that one should place importance on their most costly parts of their game in the first place.

I mean how in the world does the choice to leave driver in the car make putting more important? What if 3w or 5w is often enough errant too? They should choose to leave those in the car too? What about chunking or blading a 140 yrd approach too often? Should they choose to leave their 8iron or 9 iron whatever in the car? Your notion makes no sense as for putting being more important. In fact it does the opposite and it suggests that it should be a priority to get better with all those clubs one has the choice of leaving in the car trunk. I mean at some point its like whats the sense of even playing the game.

Sorry but what your describing is simply not relevant as for whats more important. Those who struggle with consistent ball striking have the choice of leaving those clubs in thier car and so that's why putting is more important? You just cant use that type of analogy for the purpose your using it.

 

[fuffle master]

Here are my stats on the matter, which confirm my intuition that putting is much more important to my scoring:

I know a lot of others use the Grint App, and I have been reading the replies and tried to correlate those that posted favoring the putting versus those that favor off the tee or distance.

I have two questions: One, those using the Grint App do you find the data has helped during your practice sessions? The user interface looks very friendly. (I know not really part of this discussion, but I am curious as to what some think)
Two, and more in terms of the discussion here, I have noticed those that lean toward the putting side seem to be lower handicap individuals and those that lean on the off the tee and distance side have mid to higher handicaps. That leads me to think, as some have said, we all pick what is harder for our games when thinking about this discussion. Lower amateur handicap players are generally good off the tee and see themselves as needing to improve in the short game area like putting. While higher handicap players tend to be poor at driving and approach shots, therefore, they need to improve with distance and off the tee to lower their scores.

What do you think? Does handicap play more into your bias versus what you truly think is a more important section of golf?

 

[PapaJohick]

Remember that from the tee box a player has options. If a player is wild with the driver but wants to shoot lower scores, he has the option of leaving the driver at home and playing tee box shots with fairway metal, hybrid, 6-iron, or whichever club he can hit consistently straight.
On the green a player does not have options. He needs to know how to properly use one club, the putter.

which is arguably the easiest thing in golf to do

 

[NoGoal]

You can always play a different set of tees if you can’t drive it as far. Putting is the most important part of golf.

And what happens if the long player off the tee wants to play you for money from the black tees, which is usually close to 6800 yards?

 

[NoGoal]

I know a lot of others use the Grint App, and I have been reading the replies and tried to correlate those that posted favoring the putting versus those that favor off the tee or distance.

I have two questions: One, those using the Grint App do you find the data has helped improve your game in either area off the tee or putting? (I know not really part of this discussion, but I am curious as to what some think)
Two, and more in terms of the discussion here, I have noticed those that lean toward the putting side seem to be lower handicap individuals and those that lean on the off the tee and distance side have mid to higher handicaps. That leads me to think, as some have said, we all pick what is harder for our games when thinking about this discussion. Lower amateur handicap players are generally good off the tee and see themselves as needing to improve in the short game area like putting. While higher handicap players tend to be poor at driving and approach shots, therefore, they need to improve with distance and off the tee to lower their scores.

What do you think? Does handicap play more into your bias versus what you truly think is a more important section of golf?

I also use the Grint app. I hit about 55% of fairways (ave 280-300 yards off the tee), 50% of greens and average 31 putts a round. IMO, it’s the Grint % which is more important as I am in the 65-68%. It tells me when I miss the fairways, I can still hit the green. If I hit a fairway and miss a green, I get up and down about 40-50% of the time. I average less than 2 putts per hole. If I hit those marks, I will shoot in the 70’s.

What is most important to my game for scoring well distance off the tee and scrambling after I miss the green. If I miss the green and can pitch/chip within 4 feet of the hole. I’ll score well!

With that said, if I want to become a scratch golfer. I need to make more putts from 8-20 feet to save par or make birdies.

 

[NoGoal]

Agree 100%.

Brodie's stats and conclusion may be accurate in that the majority of amateurs lose or gain more strokes with the driver when compared to those of equal indexes. But if the majority is 51/49 (not saying it is), that leaves an awful lot of folks out there where it does not apply.

We all use personal experiences and anecdotal evidence to form our opinions. That doesn't mean it's useless information. I played 27 holes last night and this morning where the driver cost me almost no strokes - maybe 3 or 4 total in punch outs or shorter-than-average drives. This morning in 9 holes I hit 5 greens in regulation and 3-putted 4 of those 5... and none required long lag putts.

I'm not saying those are my normal rounds (my putting is consistently poor, however), and it certainly doesn't apply to everyone else, but it tells me that Brodie's argument is close to being a pissing contest and in some cases just isn't accurate.

I played yesterday. Hit only 3 fairways, hit 9 greens, had 30 putts and still scored a 76. Scrambling!!!!! Is what keeps a score down which also skews the putting numbers, because I’m putting from within 4 feet to save par.

 

[CBaker]

It’s both. The player that wins most weeks on the PGA tour are from the short list of guys who have good tee games, and it’s which one putted better that week. Rory is an average putter at best compared to most guys and look at his career. He wins when his putter gets hot however. Same thing with DJ, Brooks, Tiger, JT...all of them great distance players, but only seem to win when they putt well.

Soo...both is needed on tour for the vast majority of tournaments. And if a shorter guy wins, he will typically have had to have his approach game on fire and putter really hot.

 

[DG_1234]

which is arguably the easiest thing in golf to do

Maybe yes, maybe no.
For example, everybody can easily recognize a topped tee shot or a duffed iron shot. But players mishit putts all day long and it's not as obvious of a problem as the missed full shots.
Absolutely yes putting should be easier, but the reality is that the putting stroke is more susceptible to nervous twitch problems than any other golf shot. So plenty of players, including some Tour pros, find that putting is the worst part of their game.

 

[JonMA1]

I played yesterday. Hit only 3 fairways, hit 9 greens, had 30 putts and still scored a 76. Scrambling!!!!! Is what keeps a score down which also skews the putting numbers, because I’m putting from within 4 feet to save par.

I read an interesting story about a pro (not sure which level) who had won a tournament by shooting his personal best on the last day. His putting stats were ridiculous - like low 20's (sorry, I can't remember the details).

Anyway, it would be easy to see those stats and assume his lights-out putting was what won the tournament. But in his own words it was his iron play that was unbelievably good. He was hitting approach shots so tight to the pin that it allowed for that many one-putts.

The point of the story and his opinion was that tour players are the best ball strikers in the world. While their putting is very good and most hit long off the tee, those two skills are not what separate them from the best amateurs.

I have no way of knowing if this opinion is true. All I know is that I want my game to be balanced. Whatever level of bad I'm playing, I want it to be equally bad or, hopefully someday, equally better. I don't want to work hard on my strengths while neglecting my weaknesses. It's one reason I don't leave the driver at home. When my driver is costing me strokes, that's often when I want to use it the most.

 

[PapaJohick]

Maybe yes, maybe no.
For example, everybody can easily recognize a topped tee shot or a duffed iron shot. But players mishit putts all day long and it's not as obvious of a problem as the missed full shots.
Absolutely yes putting should be easier, but the reality is that the putting stroke is more susceptible to nervous twitch problems than any other golf shot. So plenty of players, including some Tour pros, find that putting is the worst part of their game.

I’ll agree with that for sure. Smaller stroke so any type of nerves or mis hit and you miss where as margin of error with the full swing is much more forgiving.