I absolutely agree that closer will result in lower scores.

But a 3W or even hybrid pulled from long distance can be met with disastrous results way more often than a 7-iron layup may.

So I don't personally adhere to the closer is better by any kind of automatic decision to try to do just that. I gotta weigh the likelihood for my hitting a decent to good shot considering the scenario.

Although I'm a decent player and have hit away with 4W or hybrid plenty in the past, that approach this season has led to some inflated par-5 scores. Whereas laying up has all but solidified par and offered many chances and realized successes for birdie.

It's all relative. If someone trusts their longer clubs more than I, absolutely go for it. But when unsure if a shot can be pulled off, lay up.
 
I absolutely agree that closer will result in lower scores.

But a 3W or even hybrid pulled from long distance can be met with disastrous results way more often than a 7-iron layup may.

So I don't personally adhere to the closer is better by any kind of automatic decision to try to do just that. I gotta weigh the likelihood for my hitting a decent to good shot considering the scenario.

Although I'm a decent player and have hit away with 4W or hybrid plenty in the past, that approach this season has led to some inflated par-5 scores. Whereas laying up has all but solidified par and offered many chances and realized successes for birdie.

It's all relative. If someone trusts their longer clubs more than I, absolutely go for it. But when unsure if a shot can be pulled off, lay up.


I’m in this camp as well, if I‘m hitting my longer clubs well that day I’ll try to get as close as possible, but if I’m struggling with my 3w, I’m better off keeping it in play vs slicing it OB.
 
I shoot lower 18 hole scores when I lay up; either off the tee box on short par 4's or for my par 5 second shot.
 
I agree to a degree with this, but if my 3w is acting up with me during the round I am pulling 5w instead to help with confidence. I’ll give up 20-25 yards to not risk chunking or completely messing up my 3w shot.
 
It's all relative. If someone trusts their longer clubs more than I, absolutely go for it. But when unsure if a shot can be pulled off, lay up.

^^^^ This nails it as far I'm concerned. It's not like getting closer to the hole is automatic, and it's not like each of us has the same balanced game.

I don't think the "experts" give amateurs enough credit for recognizing strengths and weaknesses. I consider my intermediate wedge game one of the better parts of my game, and I've seen better players post that they struggle the most with partial shots. That doesn't mean I don't fail half the time, or that I believe the best part of my game is as good as the worst part of their game.

And if I have more confidence using my 5w (with a decent lie) than I do my long irons, all that means is that I have to address that weakness through practice. Same as if I had zero confidence in my partial distances with the wedges. But until those improvements are made, I try to play to my strengths, not what the stats indicate.

We use what we know about our games to make decisions. In the end, most of us care less about ego than we do about scoring lower.

I'd challenge anyone who makes blanket strategy statements to please caddy several rounds for me. I'd love to be wrong and to gain even a few strokes simply by making different decisions. I'd gladly admit I was wrong.
 
^^^^ This nails it as far I'm concerned. It's not like getting closer to the hole is automatic, and it's not like each of us has the same balanced game.

I don't think the "experts" give amateurs enough credit for recognizing strengths and weaknesses. I consider my intermediate wedge game one of the better parts of my game, and I've seen better players post that they struggle the most with partial shots. That doesn't mean I don't fail half the time, or that I believe the best part of my game is as good as the worst part of their game.

And if I have more confidence using my 5w (with a decent lie) than I do my long irons, all that means is that I have to address that weakness through practice. Same as if I had zero confidence in my partial distances with the wedges. But until those improvements are made, I try to play to my strengths, not what the stats indicate.

We use what we know about our games to make decisions. In the end, most of us care less about ego than we do about scoring lower.

I'd challenge anyone who makes blanket strategy statements to please caddy several rounds for me. I'd love to be wrong and to gain even a few strokes simply by making different decisions. I'd gladly admit I was wrong.

Yes and no. Consider that when Tour pros are asked about common amateur play faults the most common response is "they select the wrong club for the shot".
Specifically, amateurs tend to swing 7-iron when a 6 or even 5 iron would be the more sensible play. And amateurs tend to try and play a fairway wood from a lie that dictates a wedge or short iron is the most sensible play.
As for the "lay up or not" debate the reality is that golf courses typically have a fairly wide landing area at lay up distances ( for example off a short par 4 tee box or par 5 second shot lay up landing area). Playing from these large landing areas makes the shot relatively routine, easy. Conversely , playing over or thru a landing area means trying for a more narrow target surrounded by rough, trees, bunkers, water etc... I think the only way a player will know for certain which strategy results in lower scores is if he/she plays several rounds each way and then reviews the scoring.
 
Laying up sucks. I can miss with any club, best to be as close as possible where that miss has less room to go wrong.

this 100%
 
Laying up sucks. I can miss with any club, best to be as close as possible where that miss has less room to go wrong.

I subscribe to this theory. I like to be as close as possible. In addition, many times when I try to lay up, I fail to execute the shot.
 
Yes and no. Consider that when Tour pros are asked about common amateur play faults the most common response is "they select the wrong club for the shot".
Specifically, amateurs tend to swing 7-iron when a 6 or even 5 iron would be the more sensible play. And amateurs tend to try and play a fairway wood from a lie that dictates a wedge or short iron is the most sensible play.
As for the "lay up or not" debate the reality is that golf courses typically have a fairly wide landing area at lay up distances ( for example off a short par 4 tee box or par 5 second shot lay up landing area). Playing from these large landing areas makes the shot relatively routine, easy. Conversely , playing over or thru a landing area means trying for a more narrow target surrounded by rough, trees, bunkers, water etc... I think the only way a player will know for certain which strategy results in lower scores is if he/she plays several rounds each way and then reviews the scoring.
Please don't take this response as "I know more than you about golf". I don't and it's not even close @DG_1234 . But I think it's human nature to apply one's experiences to everyone else.

A tour pro's biggest reference to why things happen is their own experience. That experience includes being a kid with incredible talent... far different than a no-talent @$$hat (like me) taking up the game at 50. They see amateurs miss the green short and assume the correction is to grab a longer club. In their world, that would be the solution. Perhaps they are out of touch with the reality that others have no where near the ability to execute with little variance.

When I miss a green short, it's for one of two reasons. 1) short was the safe miss, or 2) what we have here is failure to execute (said in my best warden's voice from Cool Hand Luke). Not saying I don't on rare occasions fail to consider elevation, or wind or a bad lie.

Grabbing a longer club is not the solution to hitting more targets. I know this because I spent the 2019 season grabbing more club on almost every iron shot. Guess what... same if not worse results than previous seasons.

When I grab a 7i, I'm not planning on a pure strike that'll get me 10 or 20 yards more than I need. I'm planning on "ok" contact which will provide the distance needed to get me nearest the target. I have data to support what that distance is the majority of the time. Taking a longer club brings about more risk. There's an even greater chance for a mis hit, my dispersion increases, and there's always the possibility I will pure the shot which in most cases brings about more trouble long than hitting too short.

I don't normally disagree with someone who plays this game at your level and I'm aware of how foolish that appears. I can only repeat that I'd love to be wrong about this.
 
Anything 275 yards and in is go time, as long as I’m not in a bunker or in the rough with trees directly in front of me. The closer the better, because I’m solid from 40-125 yards out.
 
To me, It depends on the course and weather...If it is wet, or a course that damp, i will play to a number. If ti is dry season and i can pimch the ball without a chance of the club chunking or spot in the round, i am hitting all i got in the bag.
 
Grip it and rip it, I say. I didn't just crush a drive so I could hit 9i - 9i into a par 5. That being said, when I am going at green on a Par 5 that I can't reach ( not many ), then I plan for my best miss based on course layout and conditions ( weather, temps, etc ). Take a look around the green, see where there is trouble and see where I have the most flexibility for the next shot into the green. Then play for that miss. The goal is to hit your target spot but knowing you now have flexibility left or right, long or short to make sure you have a clean 3rd. That's only when I can't reach it ( more that 250 out ) of course. :cool:
 
I agree with a lot of the POVs in here.

I'm in InTheRough's camp on raising the floor for a mishit by being closer to start, and WMac19's on evaluating the consequences of a mishit with a long club second shot as opposed to a shorter one. Every hole and person's game is different. All things equal, closer seems better, but you have to consider all factors.
 
I thin k its just like any par4. Hit the longest shots within our means considering the layout, stance and obstacles, conditions, vs our ability. Its always the longest shot with respect to all factors which imo is the very essence of playing the game itself. I never believe in playing to a number. I believe in playing to what the layout gives me vs my ability while considering all the factors of the shot.

I mean how or why would one play to a number if that part of the hole (landing zone) is narrow, and or heavily slopped and or well protected and also while the stance and shot your taking is far less than ideal as well?

The very same reasons I may or may not use a driver on a par 4 or par5 are the same reasons I may or not use a 3w or whatever for the second shot par5. Every hole is different and even playing the same hole multiple times leaves multiple scenarios based on the days conditions and also success of the first shot anyway. And who to ever sayu your second shot will get to the exact place and yardage you wanted anyway? I mean then what? All kinds of stuff. Imo just try to execute the best shots I can the longest i can within my means vs the scenario Im faced with. Id rather be 40 yrd closer if i have the choice. If i could be 60 out vs 100 thats always going to be better most the time. Or 20 vs 60, or 100 vs 140, etc,etc... Unless the scenario at any those yardages is poorer or anything about the shot to get there is a poorer scenario.
 
Closer is always better for me except in the rare case of rock hard greens tucked pin almost sloping away. I get the ball closer from 45 yards then 80 yards. No real debate in my mind.
 
80-120 should get SW, GW, or PW in my hands. I'm fine with that. Depending on how I'm hiring it that day, I might lay up to that range or I might go for it. I have laid up with a 7i before, but if I'm using less than that to get me to a good distance, I feel like I should just go for it.
 
I heard a data analyst on Michael Breed say that the better play on a close to reachable par 5 for a player is to get as close to the green as possible with your second shot (avoiding any hazards, etc) rather than laying up to a specific yardage for the third shot.

I can (usually) comfortably hit my 3W off the deck out to about 235-40. If I’m say 280 out, I’m going to try to get close to the green. Much more than that and I’m trying to get the ball about 100-110 out.

What says THP?

Depends on your skill level and how well you're swinging that day. While it's true that getting closer to the green usually leads to better scores, you have to take into account the margin of error with a 3-wood. A poorly hit 3-wood can go WAY offline, putting you OB or in deep trouble. A 7-iron and a 9-iron is less likely to result in disaster.

For the low-handicapper, more often than not, they should probably do it. For the high-handicapper, a much more careful decision is required.
 
I'd definitely rather be at 100 and have a full GW to the green than say 70 yards and in between clubs and trying to take something off my swing to compensate.
 
I am absolutely trying to get as close to the green as I safely can every single time, and for a couple of reasons.

Firstly, I'm not good enough to accurately hit to a set layup distance.
Secondly, I'm not good enough to have a set layup distance that I am confident in!
Thirdly, I have just as much chance of making a cod of a layup than going for it so might as well get as far down as possible.

I clearly need practice....
 
Prefer a shot of 85 - 105 into a greens than 25 - 45. Therefore, it I know that there is not possible way to reach the green in 2, I will usually opt for a middle iron to lay up to those distances.
 
I'd definitely rather be at 100 and have a full GW to the green than say 70 yards and in between clubs and trying to take something off my swing to compensate.
I hear this and similarly said stuff often. But I would like to see if it actually holds true for the majority of folks who say it. I mean hit 100 shots each from both 100 and from 70 and see just which one leaves you with more greens hit and also closer to the hole.
And besides, whos to say the choice will always be 100 vs 70? I mean do we hit that exact on second shots to truly know we will get to 100 or 70? What if the 100 ends up being 120 or 130 or 85? Or what if the 70 ends up being 80 or 50? I mean how often are we hitting to an exact yardage in the first place? even a better player lower capper isnt always right in the desired yardage especially when not talking approaching the green. A bounce one way or another in the fairway or a shot taken not as good as attempted or perhaps one taken much purer than expected. etc,etc.

Im not suggesting this would hold true to everyone at all but I will bet that majority of amateurs would do better to a green and pin from 70 vs from 100, Or from 50 vs 80, or from 100 vs 130 regardless their own feelings that they wouldnt.
 
But I would like to see if it actually holds true for the majority of folks who say it
It's not that hard for me to believe. While some of those who make this claim may be incorrect, I would suggest @greg19 knows his game better than anyone else.

Now if someone is making that statement based on what they hear on the Golf Channel....

For me, a partial swing is easier than a full swing and being closer to the hole offers a larger margin of error with both distance and dispersion. But everyone is different. It's not that my partial swing is good, it's that my full swing is just that poor. To some, the full swing is easier and more repeatable. Ask them to "take something off" and it becomes a difficult task both mechanically and by feel.

Here's an example @rollin, one exception to "closer is better" for me is that I struggle with a flop shot or opening up the club face, and with my 60° wedge in general. So if I have a bunker in front of flag, I'd rather be a bit further out because of that weakness. From a little further out, I can swing a bit harder with a sand wedge and get the higher flight I need for a softer landing. It's a weakness that is holding me back, but it is real none-the-less.

Of course, if I took 100 swings with that 60° wedge, I'd probably start improving.:unsure:
 
ne else.

A tour pro's biggest reference to why things happen is their own experience. That experience includes being a kid with incredible talent... far different than a no-talent @$$hat (like me) taking up the game at 50. They see amateurs miss the green short and assume the correction is to grab a longer club. In their world, that would be the solution. Perhaps they are out of touch with the reality that others have no where near the ability to execute with little variance.

Well, the reason Tour pros suggest amateurs play 7-iron instead of 8-iron is because they've noticed that the amateur usually mishits the iron a bit, so "playing for a mishit" makes sense. Also, selecting longer clubs helps breed good swing rhythm and tempo.
That said, I appreciate what you wrote , especially the part about you spending 2019 choosing more club , but not seeing a benefit. Yesterday morning one of the guys in my group was a 13 handicap who missed greens short all day long. The issue was not his club selection, he just has an inconsistent swing and seriously mishits lots of iron shots.
Tour pros also talk about their pro am partners playing too long of a club from a less than ideal lie. For example, if the ball lay on a sloped lie in the fairway high handicap amateurs typically grab a long shafted club such as a fairway metal or hybrid and swing away. But most often a long club from a sloped lie results in a crooked shot, which then leaves the player out of position (trees, rough, awkward bunker 60 yards from the green) etc.) for his next shot, and this is how double bogey or worse happens.
So a major difference between Tour players and high handicaps is club selection, where the Tour player is always thinking about positioning his/her ball for the next shot.
Specifically, from a sloped, grassy, or other less than ideal lie the Tour pro usually favors a shorter shafted club and plays for accuracy, while the amateur does not know (or think about) how the lie may affect a long shafted club shot.
 
Tour pros also talk about their pro am partners playing too long of a club from a less than ideal lie.
I thought your entire post was spot on.
The quote above was interesting. I know better than to use a fairway wood from anything but a good lie, and with even an iron or hybrid, I never expect to hit my normal distance from a ball in a divot or in the rough. Learning to hit from a bad lie is definitely something I have to get better at. Other than punching out, I never thought about using less club. Makes me think I should learn to take my medicine and play for an easier next shot instead of trying for the hero shot.
 
I have always tried to get as close to the green as I can. I am more likely to make birdie from there. These days I can’t really reach many par 5s in two but I am pretty good from inside 80 yards.
 
Back
Top