You vs Tour Players - Scrambling #Own125

[rollin]

It's not really a jump to conclusions. Every time something comes up about short game, people jump on it that it doesn't seem to really matter.

As for my personal scores this year there is no way I could have done it without my short game. You can ask anyone I've played with and I think just about all of them would say the same thing. My short game is well above the rest of my play. I don't hit many greens and I don't hit many fairways even, but I can get up and down for par from most places. It's a huge benefit for me and it makes me more confident with the rest of my game knowing I have that skill in my pocket. It allows me to never say die on any hole. To me, short game (including putting) is by far the most important part for amateurs.

I don't think anyone should say short game doesn't matter. But it just depend where one is within his own game that determines just how important one aspect is over another at the current state of his game.

What that chart indicates is also something I and some others mention. The longer stuff holds more value as the caps get higher because that's where many lose a ton of strokes. But once those mid and longer parts are more consistent, then the short game begins to mean more and more. Its not that it meant less to a higher capper but just that the longer parts were so very detrimental. You said in your post above -- "I don't hit many greens and I don't hit many fairways even, but I can get up and down for par from most places." and the fact that you can get up/down for par tells me that your mid and longer game is already respectable and fairly efficiently intact. The reason I say that is because if it wasn't you would never ever be in position to get up/down for par with the short game in the first place. Your getting on or near enough to the greens in general in a very respectable amount of strokes. Basically 2 on par4's and 3 on par 5's. You say you don't hit many fairways or many greens but you must end up near the greens in just a couple strokes or getting up/down for par or even for bogey simply wouldn't be possible.

Even though you don't hit many Fir or Gir your mid and long games are still efficient, decent, just straight enough and long enough even if not real good and that gets you in position for the up/down. Your not an 8/9 cap because you cant get off a tee box or make a decent approach shot. Your an 8/9 cap because you can move from tee to green respectfully enough first , and then you also play at least a decent or good short game on top of it. I doubt you can be an 8/9 cap without a at least a decent short game (you would simply have to have one to get that low imo) but you would also not be one if you were not getting close enough to greens quick enough. Sitting near enough to greens in 4 or5 or even worse amount of strokes (in the case of many higher cappers) is kind of a moot point as for what is more important because in their case its every bit as important. They just cant get to or near a green in a couple strokes.

My cap actually dropped its lowest ever this season. Started almost 17 and gone down to 12.9 and now back up to 15. That 12.9 was lowest ever by far my whole life, The main reason honestly was that my long and mid play were at their most consistent ever. This past month or two my cap climbed again and it was mostly because my mid and long games lost their consistency again. Just too errant and far too stroke costly. Now I do believe if I ever want to get lower than 12.9 I would only do so with a much improved short game. but I also must have my better mid and long games too. So here again I say what I mention earlier. I think the short game becomes more important as one gets better. I think long and mid parts of the game are vital to get ones cap moving lower first. It just has to be consistently decent enough to become sort of a given. Consistently decnt enough doesn't have to mean Firs and girs but simply just good enough to get near greens in respectable amount of strokes. Then imo the short game is what takes you lower to the next levels. And imo never get there without it.

 

[arydolphin]

No need to be rude to me. I am basing his comments on quotes from Rory about not worrying about a short game (as someone who hits a majority of the greens in a round). That is simply irrelevant opinion for an amateur. If he wanted to reference an actual useful amateur statistic or quote from the piece, I would gladly read it as well. I didn't ignore any of his comments in this thread and you know that.

That said, every sport has fancy stats. I see the same conversations about hockey and they tend to make some ridiculous claims in comparison to what is experienced first hand. That article probably doesn't consider appropriate tee selection, and how irrelevant the distance factor is when people tee it forward.

It takes a bit more critical thinking that reading an article like that to consider what the best course of action for an amateur golfer is. You can tout it as though it were the finite solution, but I'm all but certain it's nonsense, and I've got plenty of first hand samples from MANY handicap ranges to confirm my suspicions that improving the short game is the sure fire way to improve a handicap.

Got it....your experience in watching golfers that you've played with trumps the research that people have done with thousands of amateur golfers. We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one because our views on this are so far apart from one another.

But hey, Cleveland must be happy, they get the most active thread of the day out of this one.

 

[Canadan]

I'd also like to add, I am not sitting here making claims that all golfers will follow this mindset that improving the short game will improve their handicap -- Just that on average, that presents itself to be the primary fault of amateurs I play with on a regular basis.

I've got samples where the long game is the weakest element and that would be the primary goal of their improvement. I've got samples of that exact issue except these people need to smarten up and Tee it forward to improve their caps dramatically as the distance will never come.... But again, they are MUCH smaller in number than the ams who would make BIG handicap gains by acquiring short game lessons and practicing around the green and from inside let's call it 100 yards.

The one thing that's interesting about the long game, is that many have a very consistent miss. I see cut fades ALL the time -- Seems to be a very common amateur mistake, and something that can easily be played into a round. What they can't adapt to, is fatted wedges, or 40+ putts.

 

[Canadan]

Canadan - The responses that are comical are the ones like "thread derailed" or "effing quality". What exactly does that bring to the table?

And you are 100% right that a lack of tone through written text it's tough to discern. I've been to one THP event and I don't think anyone there thought I was "snarky". I actually had a blast with Danny Lee of UST, TexasHacker, Nihhthawk and others (even with my poor playing ability).

And as a high handicapper I've shot anywhere from 88 to 117 this year. My low rounds come when I'm staying in play and/or in good positions off the tee.

If those posts bother you, get on that report feature. We've got a great set of mods that will support the community! I think what's important to consider here, is that we are all different golfers with different strengths. I am simply offering my opinion based on playing with hundreds of golfers and seeing where their game falters -- With the majority being inside 100 yards. Heck, even though I haven't bothered including myself, if my putter is hot, my scores are always solid. I am sure that study has plenty of viable data to utilize, but I'm not going to throw away what I've seen first hand as a majority just because it's published. I also respect that you're reacting the same, with your own personal experiences in mind.

 

[Canadan]

Got it....your experience in watching golfers that you've played with trumps the research that people have done with thousands of amateur golfers. We're going to have to agree to disagree on this one because our views on this are so far apart from one another.


But hey, Cleveland must be happy, they get the most active thread of the day out of this one.

I think we have every right to decide what's most important. Some focus on stats, others focus on experience and opinion. Here's a sample from Rotella where he talks purely about the short game and how important it is to play great golf. I'm sure if I actually spent some time looking, his opinion about the importance of the short game as a priority isn't the only one. I also acknowledge that this doesn't note the short game being MORE important than the long game --- But the long game isn't even mentioned so I have to think it's of greater priority.

Spoiler

The more I watch the best golfers in the world, the more I'm convinced that what separates the great from the merely excellent is not the length of their tee shots. It's their proficiency with the scoring clubs. Skill with the scoring clubs is the biggest difference between players who shoot in the 80s and those who shoot in the 70s. It's the biggest difference between pros and amateurs.


What are the scoring clubs? They're the ones you use to attack holes, to try to sink the ball. That means, for most players, the clubs from the 8-iron through the wedges and the putter. There's no substitute for falling in love with these clubs and practicing with them until they become precision instruments for you. A player has to know how to control the distance, trajectory and spin of every shot hit with them.


Recognize that short shots are an integral part of the game you love. Stop berating yourself when you miss a green. Missing a green only means you've got a chance to make a birdie or par the adventurous way. Players with good attitudes about their short games don't get upset. They figure that everyone's going to miss some greens, and skill at recovering from those misses is one way they can separate themselves from the competition. Instead of worrying about a bogey, think of how much fun it will be to chip in, or save par, and how devastating it will be for your opponent, if it's match play. Nothing deflates opponents more than losing a hole they'd mentally put in the pocket.

You may lean towards fancy stats, but I'll lean towards guys like Rotella and Pelz any day.

 

[MWard]

100% spot on. If players were capable of fixing their swing there would be far fewer 30 yard shots (20% up & down).

To play a little devil's advocate, If they also learned how to manage their games a little better, they'd not leave themselves many 20-30yd shots.

To kinda coincide with that, if they practiced those shots inside 125 yards more, they'd be able to handle those shots.

 

[JMN57]

You're exactly right, as usual.

Bogey golf to 12 handicap is a pretty easy fix.

IMO the reason golf instructors push the short game is because they're incapable (not all the instructors fault) of fixing their client's full swing. They take the easy way out.

I can see how one can come to that conclusion but I can also see that instructors may focus on short game as it is a good way to teach the importance of clean strike, how to handle the club and how to release the clubhead with a smaller, more focused swing that is easier to learn. From that basis, it is a short jump to lengthening it out to a full swing and arrive at one with a better foundation, more control and a better tempo. The elements of the full swing are found in the short game and much easier to access there.

 

[MWard]

IMO the reason golf instructors push the short game is because they're incapable (not all the instructors fault) of fixing their client's full swing. They take the easy way out.

Making a big change to your swing isn't easy. How often have you heard of someone taking a lesson and hitting a large bucket of balls, and thinking they all of a sudden have it all figured out? Then what happens? They go on the course and start taking full swings with their new move and expect it to be able to handle full speed swings. It's like having your knee replaced and expecting to be able to run at full speed again a week after surgery.

By practicing the short game when making a full swing change, you let the person build confidence, reduce excess movement in their swing (hopefully anyway, and let the person work on the change in the area that's incredibly important: hip height to hip height. If you can get that area right, all you do then is start to lengthen the swing.

IMO, it's not the easy way out but the quicker way for someone to do something right. Oh yeah, and maybe get a better short game as a nice added benefit.

 

[Paladin]

IMO the reason golf instructors push the short game is because they're incapable (not all the instructors fault) of fixing their client's full swing. They take the easy way out.

How often does a student walk into a lesson, knowing he's paying money for it, and ask to improve his short game, though? Even if, a) the client's game off the tee is as good as it's going to be, and b) improving his short game would be the easiest way for him to improve his scores? Simply because someone convinced a golfer to take lessons doesn't mean he's been convinced to take the right kind of lessons. In the interest of fairness, I totally understand that a golfer who can't keep the ball in play off the tee consistently doesn't really care about his short game all that much, but that doesn't make his game inside 125 yards any less important in terms of lowering scores.

I could just as easily argue that coaches push short game improvement because learning to do the things that make your short game swing better, like staying connected and accelerating through the ball, also apply throughout your bag, and are most evident when you have a wedge in your hand. You can get away with being a bit heavy on a full swing 6 iron, because a bogey golfer is just happy to get on the green from 150 yards-plus, but if you fat a shot where you're already trying to control distance, say a 60 yard pitch you're trying to get to spin on, it's plain as the nose on your face.

Purely anecdotal, but my biggest improvements to my overall swing comes when I'm drilling my wedges more consistently, because they are the least forgiving clubs in my bag from a CG placement perspective, and because I'm doing more conceptual application, that is, seeing a low shot or a high shot in my head, and then applying it. And when it's good, it's good, and when it's not, it's very obvious.

 

[sickyspider]

In my personal experience the majority of amateurs would benefit from working more on their short game and putting. The reasons for this are many. Teaching the short game and putting is easier than teaching about the full swing and ball striking. Learning the short game and putting is easier than learning about the full swing and ball striking. The results are very quickly noticed and this breeds confidence - shots come off the scorecard quickly. Lack of time and money, lack of motivation, lack of athletic ability and poor quality teaching are some of the reasons why the long game/full swing is harder to improve quickly. This is my experience and I have been generally very disappointed in the quality of instruction aimed at amateurs. Many instructors I have met play very good golf but have no idea how to teach or understand biomechanics. I taught myself about spine tilt and hitting past my chin which have helped me strike the ball better. Most of golf is over complicated and instruction is a classic case and sometimes I think a few instructors are justifying their own existence at the expense of the amateur golfer. This maybe controversial but it's what I think! Anyway I digress, how often do you see someone at the range with the latest equipment but they can't hit the golf ball for toffee? They thrash about cussing and swearing and get frustrated when they can't hit the shot they want. Technique is way more important than equipment but the manufacturers fool the gullible or lazy into thinking otherwise. There are no quick fixes in golf - apart from the short game and putting!

Having said this, your short game and putting prowess will only take you so far! At some point, if you really want to be a good all round golfer, you will have to face your demons and tackle the full swing!

My conclusion, practice every aspect of your game but amateurs like me would benefit from spending a little more time on the stuff 100 yards and in. However, the quality of this practice and its effectiveness is a whole other subject!!

 

[emart2173]

When I went to see my new instructor this year he asked what my goal was. I was a 15 hdcp when I went in. I told him I wanted to get to single digits. I knew I had swing flaws that affected my tee game and my approach shots from any distance. He said that he was going to do a full game analysis and then we would come up with a plan. After about 10 full swings he pointed out my issues and then we went out to the short game area to first do some putting drills and then chipping. Based on his observations he gave me some techniques and thoughts for chipping and some drills for putting. He told me with short game practice and the putting drills my scores would come down and I could get to my goal.

While my swing was not great he felt that it was good enough to shoot mid 80s and with the short game work the scores would be lower than that and mid 80s were going to be my bad days.

with the practice I put in on putting and chipping sure enough those scores came down. I play with guys who aren't lomg off the tee and hit some wayward shots but their ability to minimize their shots to 2-3 inside 125 keeps them from being higher than where they are.

Each person can feel/think,what would help them score better whether it's long game or short game but I am sure that putting in time on 125 and in they would see the most dramatic and quickest drop in scores

 

[Nate]

CRW, my fellow Texan, the ONLY issue I had was that it only took 10 posts after the initial post/video was made for someone (you) to post about how incorrect that was and that the long game was the way to go to improve ones game. I think we can both agree that most THP'ers here are smart and know that to be a better golfer one has to work on their entire game and focus on where their weakness lies. Why couldn't we just ride the Pelz wave here and try to let people examine their own game from the information he was giving?

I think it's common sense to know that if one is struggling off the tee or with long irons that they need to work on them. But here is my $.02 and I don't have any research to back what I'm about to say. But from my experience I've seen more people improve their golf games with the short game or the #Own125 theory than improving their long game. Why? Probably many reasons from not wanting to overhauling ones swing to physical ability limitations. However, the short game is one area that someone can improve on right away with the right practice and effort and usually take less time than the long game fix. Again, personal opinion and I don't have millions of $$$ in research to back that.

I think we can all agree that the short game (inside 125) is just as important if not more important than anything other part of the golf game. Whether he intended to or not, Ary's post on the breakdown of the game in percentage just about proved that. Shots inside 125 yards are about 50-65% of ones game. Cleveland Golf posted that up awhile back. Pelz is a short game guru. Let's just listen to his short and quick message (in a 2 minute video none the less) about why maybe we should look at our own #UpAndDown game to see if it's where it needs to be.

 

[ddec]

Pretty sure I made a couple of doubles and a triple yesterday from being in the fairway at 125. #OwnIt

 

[-CRW-]

CRW, my fellow Texan, the ONLY issue I had was that it only took 10 posts after the initial post/video was made for someone (you) to post about how incorrect that was and that the long game was the way to go to improve ones game.

What I said was that short game was important but his ranking system wasn't in line with reality. Then people became upset with me. Even though the stats prove otherwise and Pelz is quoted as saying so in the article I linked (though he does say he thinks it's harder for most amateurs to fix long game versus short game).

 

[rtparty]

I always find it odd to see high handicaps or people who struggle constantly say that short game isn't as important...yet lower handicaps or people who are better at short game say it's one of the most important factors. Maybe someone arguing against it should step back and ponder that for a second. Not trying to throw stones here, as I have been in the trying to break 100 camp before. But the biggest thing that took me from trying to break 100, to 90, to 80 was almost all short game.

110% this

It's always the high cappers arguing against this theory. Yet, almost every single low capper on here will tell you to better your short game.

I currently play to about a 4 hdcp. I shot even par, 1 over or 2 over for 18 at least 60% of the time this year. My short game saved my butt way more than good driving. Any golfer knows that to shoot in the low 70s or high 60s the ENTIRE game has to be on. Not one area can be atrocious.

No one has ever birdied a hole because of a good drive. It's not possible. You MUST hit a good approach and sink the putt. It's not even an automatic bogey if you hit a crappy drive. For example, hit a drive offline, punch out to safety, hit a good wedge and sink the putt. That's a par. Of course, there are extremes here (hitting OB, going into a hazard, etc.) but I'm not looking at them because they're not the average for me.

I saved many, many rounds because of my short game. From 125 and in you will either go lower or at least stop the bleeding. That's a fact.

 

[-CRW-]

...No one has ever birdied a hole because of a good drive. It's not possible. You MUST hit a good approach and sink the putt. It's not even an automatic bogey if you hit a crappy drive. For example, hit a drive offline, punch out to safety, hit a good wedge and sink the putt. That's a par. Of course, there are extremes here (hitting OB, going into a hazard, etc.) but I'm not looking at them because they're not the average for me.

But people eagle par 5's only when a good drive allows it. See the dichotomy in your statement?

And you've successfully pointed out the disconnect between the low and high handicappers..."they're not the average for me". They are the average for most amateurs roughly 18-20+ in handicap.

 

[Awkward silence]

But people eagle par 5's only when a good drive allows it. See the dichotomy in your statement?

And you've successfully pointed out the disconnect between the low and high handicappers..."they're not the average for me". They are the average for most amateurs roughly 18-20+ in handicap.

The idea you are using to support your thoughts is on line man and I agree with you 100%. I think the point of the campaign is to focus AM's on how important the short game is to US though. When they show us how pro's are at or around 60% that is huge. When you are that good you need to focus on getting yourself into such situations where you can utilize that skill. For AMs we suck off the tee and in the short game (relative to the pros) So it seems to reason that the scoring clubs should be easier to hit and that for an AM they play a larger role in determining the outcome for a hole.

Just to further agree with you. I believe there have many studies on whether going for it on par 5's is smarter than laying up. From what I rmemeber the closer you are to the hole the higher chance you have of making a better score. So we are not discounting the long game at all, but I believe this campaign makes a solid argument for AM's to focus on the 125 and in to help bring those handicaps down.

 

[JMN57]

I'm going to crawl out on a limb here and make some big generalizations but I think there is a seed of truth behind it.

High cappers have lots of bad things happen right off the tee. I think that psychologically it's easy to grasp onto the notion that if that bad thing hadn't happened, if the tee shot had just been good, that the hole would have gone well. From that notion, it's easy to get fixated on the idea that if one can just get off the tee well, have a good long game, that one would score well. They look at low cappers and see them hitting long and straight and say, geez, if I could do that, I'd be a low capper.

People are fixated on tee shots and the driver. I think it is because they view it as a litmus test of being a "golfer". And when you get off the tee with a dribbler, it's embarrassing and hard to say that you are a golfer. So, high cappers spend a lot of time on the range hitting driver and working on hitting it long. Nevermind the range is 100's of yards wide, anywhere out there on the range it good. Wherever it landed, that's where I aimed. Taking that approach to the course, the ball goes all over - trees, water... and the big #'s follow. Damn that driver, if it had just been as good as on the range, I would have scored.

Sure, high cappers lose a lot of strokes on the long game. Heck, they lose a lot of strokes on all facets of the game. The question is which area is most responsive to working on and getting back some of those strokes. For me, it's the short game. First of all because of the actual strokes lost in the short game. Second, is when you develop a good short game, your longer game, in many ways, comes along for a ride.

 

[tequila4kapp]

You vs Tour Players - Scrambling #Own125

CRW - i'd like to check on something and ask you a question. Am I remembering correctly that you are the poster who has talked about hitting driver off the tee instead of a lesser club because that's real golf? If I remember that correctly then it's probably fair to say you've been in the "long game "camp for a couple of years now. Honest question: how has it worked for you? Where is your handicap today in relationship to a couple of years ago?

Edit - tone doesn't always come across properly so I want to make clear this post / question is not meant to be a jab at CRW or anyone else.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[-CRW-]

CRW - i'd like to check on something and ask you a question. Am I remembering correctly that you are the poster who has talked about hitting driver off the tee instead of a lesser club because that's real golf? If I remember that correctly then it's probably fair to say you've been in the "long game "camp for a couple of years now. Honest question: how has it worked for you? Where is your handicap today in relationship to a couple of years ago?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thats me and I've only been playing for two years. It's taken me from a 36 to a 22 currently and dropping. I just need to get more rounds in to have my most recent 20 rounds effected in a positive way. I'm on track to be a 15 by the end of the calendar year.

Ive taken roughly 35-40 lessons during that time from multiple instructors with tour experience and all have focused on full swing. I've taken two short game lessons from two of the instructors and both said I shouldn't focus on it. Specifically that it may not always help my score but it isn't hurting it like other areas (yet). Maybe I'm the exception to the norm, but the stats back up what I've experienced.

Again, I don't have a problem with working on short game. But I think the video gives the majority of amateurs the wrong idea.

 

[rtparty]

But people eagle par 5's only when a good drive allows it. See the dichotomy in your statement?

And you've successfully pointed out the disconnect between the low and high handicappers..."they're not the average for me". They are the average for most amateurs roughly 18-20+ in handicap.

You didn't read my post entirely or I missed getting my point across.

An eagle is a total extreme for pros, let alone amateurs. My last eagle started with a good drive but my approach was far more important than that good drive. My putt was even more important than the previous two shots. If I miss the putt, my drive and approach are completely wasted. Again, to shoot low the ENTIRE game must be working. That's my point. The entire game must be on to shoot your lowest possible score.

To counter your point of "the extremes are average for most high cappers" I'll use my friend as an example. He can't hit a drive more than 180-200 but he's almost always in the fairway. He plays a slice and controls it well enough. His second shot is usually up by the green within 50 yards depending on the hole. Then all hell breaks loose and it can take him 6 more shots to get in the hole because he has ZERO short game.

Your stats, say the long game is killing him but it isn't true. Could he be an outlier? Sure. Is he in my experience? No, I've played with a boat load of high cappers who shoot 6s and 7s when they could easily limit that to 5s with a better short game.

Again, I don't think any one area is the most important for ALL golfers. I think each golfer is different and has to learn their own weaknesses in the game. If yours is the tee game, fix it. If someone else's is 125&in, they should fix it.

 

[JB]

But people eagle par 5's only when a good drive allows it. See the dichotomy in your statement?

And you've successfully pointed out the disconnect between the low and high handicappers..."they're not the average for me". They are the average for most amateurs roughly 18-20+ in handicap.

One can hole out from 125 from anywhere on the course for an eagle...Sine you are discussing high handicappers, using extremes such as eagles, is unique in my opinion.

 

[-CRW-]

One can hole out from 125 from anywhere on the course for an eagle...Sine you are discussing high handicappers, using extremes such as eagles, is unique in my opinion.

I agree, I used that example since he said the driver doesn't set you up for par.

 

[JB]

I agree, I used that example since he said the driver doesn't set you up for par.

I read his post and dont see anywhere where he said that. In fact I dont see where he said anything of the sort.

 

[rtparty]

One can hole out from 125 from anywhere on the course for an eagle...Sine you are discussing high handicappers, using extremes such as eagles, is unique in my opinion.

True story...of my last 4 eagles, 3 of them were from off the green. One from 60 yards, one from a bunker (35y) and one from the fringe probably 20 yards.