bigtazz53
@bigtazzGOLF
Most approach shots are 85-165. The 145-165 is my weak area that I have to work on.
145 to green is usually not an issue.
Full swing vs. Short game vs. Putting: where do we lose more strokes?
Most approach shots are 85-165. The 145-165 is my weak area that I have to work on.
145 to green is usually not an issue.
Fourputt
Head Rules Official
This is something that a lot of statistical reports don't show well. A bad tee shot isn't just a fairway missed. It's not really a bad tee shot in a statistical sense unless it causes at least a dropped stroke. A missed green is more likely to cause a dropped stroke than a missed fairway, unless the player is so wild that he regularly leaves himself with no reasonable second shot.
A missed green means that a chip is the best next shot, with a pitch over a bunker or playing from a bunker also a likely possibility. Any amateur that can get up and down 50% of the time is in elite company. The average Tour player last year scrambling from 10-20 yards had less than a 65% success ratio, and #184 was less than 50%. Any of us who thinks that he should be more skilled than even the lowest player on Tour is a bit of a dreamer. So even with a very optimistic expectation of 50%, that means that for every 2 greens missed, you will at least bogey one of them. And this doesn't take bunker play or misses longer than 20 yards into consideration. The best pro from outside of 30 yards had less than a 50% success rate. Add in sand save rate and the amateur falls off quickly. Even the best pros are under 65% - only save about 6 out of 10.
That means that hitting greens, or hitting as closely as possible to greens in regulation is the real key to scoring. You can only do that if your ball is in play off the tee (or second shot on a par 5) - not necessarily in the fairway, but still with a decent shot to the green.
If you think you are losing more strokes to short game, then I have to ask how often you typically have to depend on your short game to score. If your GIR is under 50% then that's actually costing you more strokes than your short game is. You need to find out why you are missing greens - poor tee shot or setup for the approach, or poor approach shots. It's not your short game that's causing you to miss greens.
Last edited:
BigTex
Well-known member
I actually did an analysis on my game to see, and I would say my iron game is my weakest point. Followed closely by the tee. And that flips back and forth.
I did not do the traditional GIR, fairways hit and putts per rounds to get this. After reading Every Shot Counts, I start looking at how each shot affected the next one and related that to my score on the hole. For example, if I hit a decent drive in the fairway, missed the green, had to chip and putt on a par 4 I would be par on tee shot and putts, but +1 on the iron shot. I could have saved par getting up and down, but the pros only do that less than 70% of the time. So it is less than 50/50 I should be able to. If I had been up and down, I would be par on drive, +1 on iron, and -1 short game/putting.
It gets a little subjective deciding if the reason you 3 putt is because you hit a bad putt. Or you 3 putted because you started 30 feet from the hole. The odds of an armature 3 putting from over 25 feet goes up tremendously. So from if I hit an iron to 30, I would say I am par on putts but +1 on the iron shot. Just counting putts would not really give me the picture of what created the 3 putt.
Do the same with drives. Obvious if I hit OB or in a hazard. But if I hit into an area I had to punch out and then hit an approach shot, if I made bogey it would be because I am +1 on the tee shot but par or better on the rest of it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I did not do the traditional GIR, fairways hit and putts per rounds to get this. After reading Every Shot Counts, I start looking at how each shot affected the next one and related that to my score on the hole. For example, if I hit a decent drive in the fairway, missed the green, had to chip and putt on a par 4 I would be par on tee shot and putts, but +1 on the iron shot. I could have saved par getting up and down, but the pros only do that less than 70% of the time. So it is less than 50/50 I should be able to. If I had been up and down, I would be par on drive, +1 on iron, and -1 short game/putting.
It gets a little subjective deciding if the reason you 3 putt is because you hit a bad putt. Or you 3 putted because you started 30 feet from the hole. The odds of an armature 3 putting from over 25 feet goes up tremendously. So from if I hit an iron to 30, I would say I am par on putts but +1 on the iron shot. Just counting putts would not really give me the picture of what created the 3 putt.
Do the same with drives. Obvious if I hit OB or in a hazard. But if I hit into an area I had to punch out and then hit an approach shot, if I made bogey it would be because I am +1 on the tee shot but par or better on the rest of it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'd say those stats from the USGA fit my game almost exactly other than my average tee shot(with my 2 wood mostly) is about 260 and my fairways hit is more like 75%. My putts per round is more like 31.5 now and improving that to 30 is the easiest way for me to improve and would get me back down to a +1 or better. This game really is about short game and how good your misses are.
ntanygd760
Well-known member
Just get a spreadsheet that does strokes gained super easy. Just record distance and surface for every shot.
Say 400 yard hole with drive in rough 137 out but playable you hit green 45 feet away and 2 putt.
You enter 400 and T for off tee
137 and R for rough
45 and g for green (use feet for putts)
then putt your second putt distance but not really important besides you needed a second putt.
Comes out to -0.15 for tee shot, +0.05 for approach and +.09 for the putting.
Here is a link for an online one. Be warned don't click back of refresh or you will lose everything. One little weird thing is shots inside 10 yards off the green you need to just put 10 down.
x is for recovery which is like a punch out tree trouble type shot and penalty stokes you put a 1 or 2 in the far right column. That was a solid book and you are going down a good path but being a little more accurate never hurts.
http://strokesgainedcalc.com/strokes-gained-calculator/
a pro makes <20% of 10 ft putts? i don't think that's correct.
i can't verify this website as the link is no longer on pgatour.com, but supposedly based on 2010 shotlink stats, the percentage is more like 38% one putt for 10 footers as a pro.
http://thesandtrap.com/forums/topic/51757-pga-tour-putts-gainedmake-percentage-stats/
ntanygd760
Well-known member
There are some older strokes gained spreadsheets floating around that say pros make like 20% from 9-12 feet but the suffer from an awful sample size which I think is the issue. The best putter from last year in putts from 10 feet was 67% worst was 17%. The sample size for that is still a bit thin.
Last year on putts from 10-15 feet the best was 45% and worst was 19%. Those number have enough of a sample size to feel good about using them to draw conclusions.
Last year on putts from 10-15 feet the best was 45% and worst was 19%. Those number have enough of a sample size to feel good about using them to draw conclusions.
Fourputt
Head Rules Official
Here's a telling stat: Average distance of putts made last year on tour: #1 is 4.7'; #184 is 3.5'. This includes 1" tap-ins and 50 foot bombs, yet even the pros need to be inside of 5 feet to be in a comfortable position. An amateur who misses a 5-10 footer has no real reason to get too upset, since he is good company.
Aside: PGA Tour stats have some issues. I was just checking on some of the putting stats and it says that the average distance of putts made last year for Jordan Spieth is 78' 9". That seems to be about 74 feet too high for an average.
Aside: PGA Tour stats have some issues. I was just checking on some of the putting stats and it says that the average distance of putts made last year for Jordan Spieth is 78' 9". That seems to be about 74 feet too high for an average.
rollin
"Just playin golf pally"
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2012
- Messages
- 12,639
- Reaction score
- 1,119
- Location
- planet earth, milky way galaxy
- Handicap
- 15.7
Interesting as I look at the stats page....using last years totals and guestimating the middle ground for an average which will not be exact but should be reasonably close.
they are about 82% from 5' and about 40% from 10' and about 60% from 5-to-10' combined which makes pretty good sense but amazingly it drops to about 30% from 10-to-15'. I mean..wow...one would never think off the top of thier head that they miss 7 of 10 putts from 10-to-15 feet. of course this then drops further with more distance. Even at 10' flat are missing 6 of 10. Just a little surprising to me when ya think about it.
cnosil
Active member
I would have thought higher, but he is T20. The stat is total feet and inches made over a round and the higher the number the better.
- Thread starter
- #61
This is essentially my point. If you're 10' from the hole you can't count on making those. You need to make 3 footers and about 75% of putts @ 4'.
This is why getting your GIR is so important. That gives you the best opportunity to score. Then you can lag putt that first one to inside of 3'. If you're hitting a short pitch onto the green for your up and down, that has to go within 5' for you to have a decent chance at par. But that's not easy to do.
ntanygd760
Well-known member
You really should never miss from 3 feet, especially on the courses most people play, don't give away the hole and jam it in.
rollin
"Just playin golf pally"
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2012
- Messages
- 12,639
- Reaction score
- 1,119
- Location
- planet earth, milky way galaxy
- Handicap
- 15.7
Many people would argue that hitting a lot of greens is not realistic since the pro average is about 65%. The logic is if that's the best in the world than how can we expect to even be close to that. So therefore they claim is why you have to then place more of our practice time on practicing shorter chipping/pitching and putting vs striking irons. While I cant really argue that logic totally I can (with that same mindset) argue another side of it.
With similar thoughts I would then also say that its also not realistic for us to make many 10 foot putts since they only average about 40% or 4 of 10. With the same logic we shouldn't expect to be close to that just like we cant expect to be close to 65% Girs. So then if one says we should spend more time putting vs iron striking I'd have to question....why? I mean if the answer is that its not realistic to hit many greens.....well then its also not realistic to hit too many putts from 10'. Even much less than that from 15'. So with this all said...it seems (with this logic) the most time of all should then be spent on greenside chipping/pitching and then about the same amounts on putting as iron striking. But then arguably hitting greens (striking irons) and putting just may be where more time should be spent. Hit more greens and also putt much better and you may not have to be the best chipper/pitcher. of course you cant fail badly at it, but being reasonably respectable at it might do the job if your doing the other two things a lot better. However, with that said most people (including me) don't practice chipping/pitching quite enough vs the other things anyway and as a result often struggle to even be reasonably decent. And something I am working on this year. I just have to boost up my consistency with it.
But it all goes back to the fact that whatever and wherever one has deficiencies in their game, it means they must then place more emphasis at other parts in order to compensate. Whatever doesn't work well has to then require something else to work exceptionally well. Its all tied to each other and all important. A satisfying happy medium for being pretty good with everything would work and be wonderful too imo. But how many of us are usually completely satisfied with our total good golf in all areas of play. We most all always want to be better at all of it I think. Its part of what keeps us driving and desiring it.
JMN57
New member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2014
- Messages
- 1,515
- Reaction score
- 0
- Location
- PHL & Northern Tuscany
- Handicap
- In flux
This thread draws us all down the path of how hard it is to be good off-the-tee, approach shots, scrambling and putting and how all of that is difficult and looking at pro stats makes it seem impossible.
My reaction to that is that it is easy to lose sight of the fact that, as Bob Rotella puts it, "Golf is not a game of perfect" and that playing golf is as much about being resilient and positive as it is the technical aspects of a swing, etc. It's easy to dwell on the stats and how hard they tell us the game is but many people shoot good scores in spite of those stats and learning how to do that is a big part of the game.
My reaction to that is that it is easy to lose sight of the fact that, as Bob Rotella puts it, "Golf is not a game of perfect" and that playing golf is as much about being resilient and positive as it is the technical aspects of a swing, etc. It's easy to dwell on the stats and how hard they tell us the game is but many people shoot good scores in spite of those stats and learning how to do that is a big part of the game.
cnosil
Active member
I think he also goes on in the book to say good swings can end up with bad results and bad swings can end up with good results. Once the ball leaves the face of the club you have done all you can and just have to accept the results and play the next shot. I however, don't think it means you shouldn't look at the stats and figure out where you need to practice to maximize the number of good swings you can make.
JMN57
New member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2014
- Messages
- 1,515
- Reaction score
- 0
- Location
- PHL & Northern Tuscany
- Handicap
- In flux
I absolutely agree with you about practice to maximize the good swings. My comments were just because it seemed to me that there is a thread of this thread that seems a little "down" on how hard the game can be and I thought a little perspective my be useful.
But don't pros only make GIRs at like 63% rate? To me that's part of the equation - short game a easier AND it gives us the chance to recover from the prior stroke so we really should make sure we are as good as we can be there.
rollin
"Just playin golf pally"
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2012
- Messages
- 12,639
- Reaction score
- 1,119
- Location
- planet earth, milky way galaxy
- Handicap
- 15.7
To be honest, don't we really know what parts of our games struggle the most even without keeping stats? I mean we play our rounds and during and after the round we should easily know what we struggled with. I just don't think we need stats at all in order to tell us. especially for those who play even just once per week, that is more than enough golf to make determinations for where we struggle the most and remember. I mean we just know whether or not we been struggling from the tees, or with putting, or chipping, or iron striking, bunkers, or any combo, etc... I just don't see how we can not know what our weakest area/s are. As a matter of fact stats are not even 100% telling anyway and laso can be misleading. There are variables and other factors and are often skewed. Many of the basic stats need to be broken down further in order to truly benefit from them.
Things like Putt (PPR). nothing in the stat tells us what distance we putted from. One may have higher than desired PPR but if a large portion is due to the fact that your often putting from 40,50 feet its not going to be such a bad thing to have a lot more 2poutts and even more 3putts adding to that total.
GIR doesn't truly reflect iron play but only a combo of tee and iron play. And It forgets the iron approach shots that came after a recovery shot (now hitting 3) due to a poor tee shot. It also forgets iron shots that are second attempt approaches due to misfired first ones and even third attempts. It forgets all the iron shots on par5's unless they are all for par. So it doesn't really tell your full iron story.
Scrambling is only in relation to par. Up/down forgets the tons of times your chipping/pitching for other than par. Screw up a tee shot and/or an approach where as your sitting 3 or 4 or whatever at 10 yards out and that doesn't go in the scramble stat. Most bogey amateurs (especially mid and higher cappers) are scrambling for other than par possibly more often than they are for par. One wants to know how well they are chipping/pitching they need to count all of them (not just the ones for par). I don't care if its for a double or a triple. Also what about things like hitting approach from 150 and chunking one 10 yrds and then hitting another one really good and close from 140 and then putting it for par? That is a scramble made or not made yet its ridiculous because what it really was is a sign of a great iron shot or not (which of course is one of those that are often overlooked in the GIR stat) . I mean if ones primary reason to view scramble percentage is to see how well your doing at chipping/pitching than those shots need not be counted in the scramble stat. They just don't work for telling you what your looking for. They often skew the numbers.
What about hitting a great drive where you wanted and intentionally just off the fairway for a better angle at the pin(or green). That's yet another skewed stat for how well one is driving in the fairway. The list can go on and on.
So its all very subjective and the stats are often skewed. And if one truly wants to gain info from the stats to see whats going on and where its just not the best way unless one took the time to really break things down much further or unless one is pretty darn good at golf overall where the amount of skewed stats is a whole lot less to be concerned with. And even in that case it should be even easier for such a player to know which parts he needs more work on anyway. I think self kept stats are fun but they need to be taken with the grains of salt they come with. Not only don't we need them to tell us what we have to work on, but can also be misleading to rely on them for that. Imo any avid player should have a real good "feel and understanding" for where he needs the most work without relying on the stats and is probably the better way to go about it.
BigTex
Well-known member
Oh sure, but they are better in all aspects of the game. Their proximity to the hole on GIRs would also be a whole lot better. So even when they miss a green, they will be closer than when we do. Statistically speaking, whether it be putts or chip shots, the way to make it more likely to have 2 shots instead of 3 on or around the green is to be closer to the hole after your approach shot.
If you only hit 35% compared to 50% GIR, your up and down percentage has to be about 57% to shoot the same score. In other words, PGA when you considered their miss will be closer to the hole as well. That's also assuming a 40% up and down percentage. And still does not account for if your proximity to the hole on GIRs averages over 25', you are going to have more 3 putts even if you do hit the green.
So to make up those 2 strokes, I can improve my ball striking with my irons and hit 2 more GIRs and/or make my misses closer to the hole. A 25% increase in GIRs (8 instead of 6) and hopefully a closer proximity to the hole. Or, increase my up and down percentage by 50% (up and down 6 times instead of 4) from a distance that I may have to be near PGA level when proximity is included.
For me, hitting my irons closer makes sense. But I definitely need to get better at both. Hitting pitch shots helps in that regard, since I am improving contact off the deck. Most important thing for both iron and wedge shots. So two for one for me. Then there is the tee shot....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
A couple of rounds this summer I started measuring distances of putts. What I noticed is shots that I thought were close really weren't, or at least weren't close enough. It taught me - for my game - that birdies are going to mostly be a function of luck; I should be happy with GIR's, learn how to lag putt really well, etc. It is HARD to stick approach shots inside 6' (the place where pros are 50% to make)
BigTex
Well-known member
Full swing vs. Short game vs. Putting: where do we lose more strokes?
Totally with you on that. I am really just trying to make pars, and limit the damage to a bogey instead of a double plus. Which means I need to hit more greens, or when I miss not be in trouble. And keep tee shots out of the houses. I have days where my biggest issue is off the tee. And always have that aberrant shot somewhere in the round. My short game/putting is generally more consistent. I have my bad holes there also, and could definitely tighten up my putts inside 10'. But, just look at my stats to see where my priority should be.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Totally with you on that. I am really just trying to make pars, and limit the damage to a bogey instead of a double plus. Which means I need to hit more greens, or when I miss not be in trouble. And keep tee shots out of the houses. I have days where my biggest issue is off the tee. And always have that aberrant shot somewhere in the round. My short game/putting is generally more consistent. I have my bad holes there also, and could definitely tighten up my putts inside 10'. But, just look at my stats to see where my priority should be.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
rollin
"Just playin golf pally"
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2012
- Messages
- 12,639
- Reaction score
- 1,119
- Location
- planet earth, milky way galaxy
- Handicap
- 15.7
One might say that even making pars is really a dream for most of us too. What I mean is that by saying that all your really trying to do is make pars its the same as saying all your really trying to do is be a scratch player. Surly its an unrealistic chance for most of us play to the levels of a tour pro and also meet their percentages in the given stats categories. But due to so very many reasons so is playing to scratch. Extremely few people (tiny percentage) ever get even close to scratch. I don't really think about score when on a tee. I most usually just think about what shot I want to make within my means that will still offer me a good spot for a second shot. sometimes it forces me to push the means a little bit now and then but many times its there for the taking without doing anything extra. Basically take my shots one at a time trying to be smart about the decisions for those shots and whre I want to be with them and if I then execute them (not even perfectly) but simply near enough to the plan for the shot, the pars and also birdies will come. And if I screw up somewhere (even if from the tee shot) I then just play the next best means of finishing the hole. basically just deal with the next shot and the new scenario and even with a bit of a screw up pars can still sometimes come. I just find that when you think par its till thinking about scores and usually bad things tend to happen. Just play and the scores will fall where they may if you play to your strengths and the pars and even some birds will fall. of course that's assuming we do make shots. We cant be hacking up the course and still score well. But point is all we can do is only take the next shot and most of the time (as long as our ball striking is ok) it will work out without ever thinking about paring every hole.
- Thread starter
- #73
One of the things that can really help golfers make pars is the "tee it forward" program that unfortunately hasn't received much acceptance. It would also help with the pace of play. For this you need to take your AVERAGE drive, not the fact that you nailed one 270 yds once and that means you should play from the 6600 yd tees. I nailed one 269 yds once, and another 266 yds (the conditions were firm and dry), and have hit a couple over 240 but my average drive according to Game Golf is 219. This tells me I should be playing the 5600 yd tees. I'm too long for the ladies tees on most courses since most are 4700 - 5200, so I should play from the senior tees which are typically at 5500 - 5800 yds. I have the most fun on 5600 yd courses.
According to Trackman.com, the average male golfer has a 93.7 mph SS and hits their drives about 220-225 yds total distance. About 206 yds carry. Given the fact that the white tees at most golf courses are 6200 yds, they're playing tees too long. They should be playing 5600 - 5800 yds. This will allow you to hit 7 or 8 irons into most par 4 greens instead of 5 irons and hybrids. Suddenly the game changes. Your shot dispersion into the green changes. It gets tighter.
Now Trackman also says that this is caused by angle of attack and if guys would hit up on the ball like the LPGA players with similar SS, they'd gain 20 yds carry distance and another 20 yds off the tee which would allow you to play the 6200 yd tees.
Basically what the PGA is saying is that you should hit 7 or 8 irons into green complexes. They're more accurate clubs than 5 irons or hybrids. The game will be more fun, but you'll still have a challenge. A 140 yd shot with an 8 iron is not a sure thing.
According to statistics I read somewhere, and I can't remember off the top of my head, a person who gets about 4 GIR per round should be shooting in the upper 80s. This is how difficult the game is. According to my own Game Golf statistics, I'm getting this and I'm not scoring like that due to penalties and a few missed putts.
The closer I get to the green on my miss the better my chances of landing my chip or pitch close to the hole. The better my chances for a one putt. If I miss my target (center of the green) by more than 25 yds, the chances of an up and down go way down.
According to Trackman.com, the average male golfer has a 93.7 mph SS and hits their drives about 220-225 yds total distance. About 206 yds carry. Given the fact that the white tees at most golf courses are 6200 yds, they're playing tees too long. They should be playing 5600 - 5800 yds. This will allow you to hit 7 or 8 irons into most par 4 greens instead of 5 irons and hybrids. Suddenly the game changes. Your shot dispersion into the green changes. It gets tighter.
Now Trackman also says that this is caused by angle of attack and if guys would hit up on the ball like the LPGA players with similar SS, they'd gain 20 yds carry distance and another 20 yds off the tee which would allow you to play the 6200 yd tees.
Basically what the PGA is saying is that you should hit 7 or 8 irons into green complexes. They're more accurate clubs than 5 irons or hybrids. The game will be more fun, but you'll still have a challenge. A 140 yd shot with an 8 iron is not a sure thing.
According to statistics I read somewhere, and I can't remember off the top of my head, a person who gets about 4 GIR per round should be shooting in the upper 80s. This is how difficult the game is. According to my own Game Golf statistics, I'm getting this and I'm not scoring like that due to penalties and a few missed putts.
The closer I get to the green on my miss the better my chances of landing my chip or pitch close to the hole. The better my chances for a one putt. If I miss my target (center of the green) by more than 25 yds, the chances of an up and down go way down.
rollin
"Just playin golf pally"
- Joined
- Aug 28, 2012
- Messages
- 12,639
- Reaction score
- 1,119
- Location
- planet earth, milky way galaxy
- Handicap
- 15.7
I think we should hit a fair mixture of clubs into greens. I think we should hit from tees which when we make good contact on our drives we have a mix of short and mid and even a couple longer irons (or whatever one uses). I think the majority should be about 7, 8 ironish but also a handful shorter and a few long. But notice I said good contact. That doesn't mean based on the best drives but only based on the average of all except the badly mishit ones. You cant base tee distance when including tee shots that you scribbled or duck hooked or popped up, chopped and flopped but all the ones you made decent contact with. And again that is still going to be far from only the best ones but simply that you must throw out the real bad ones. It also means you shouldn't have to use driver on every par4. There should also be some holes where less than driver can get you to very makeable approach distance. Basically of you need to use driver on every hole and after your decently hit shots you are still a long club away, then your playing too long. But finding yourself with mostly only short iron (or wedges like pw gw) to the green after decent drives than I would say your playing too short. It has to be a nice mix imo.
as for course total yardage? That is often a misleading stat. It may be all we have to go buy but none the less can be very misleading. Total yardage is often skewed by a number of things. All it takes to skew that is a couple/few oddball sized holes, or an extra par3 , or extra par5. Elevations play their roll as well. Another thing that skews it is doglegs. How many there are and how sharply they turn. Two courses near me are very similar at about 7000 tips and 6400 from one set in. One of them is most all mid bending doglegs while the other is mostly all straight holes. On a decent tee day (ball striking wise) the one with a lot of doglegs can play a lot shorter via slightly cutting or hugging the corners. The one that has mostly straight holes plays a lot longer with those very same drives. Another course in my county is the shortest of all 5 county courses by nearly 500 yards and yet has the longest par5 of them all and also 2 of the longest par4's. But has an extra par 3 and 2 of the shortest par4's. So total yardage is not always as telling as it seems and can often be misleading.
Last edited:
Fourputt
Head Rules Official
Here's another little tidbit. The typical amateur player can't even gather statistics about how he does from 5 feet or 10 feet, because he doesn't actually have any idea what that is. Distance estimates tend to be all over the place, in my experience. Most electronic DMD's aren't accurate from close in.
Take this test. Take a tape measure to the practice green with you and put a ball down where at where you think 15 feet is, then go 90 degrees from there and put one down at 10 feet, and the same at 5 feet. Measure them and see how far off you are. I've known guys to think they were at 5 feet, but were actually about 3.5. And what they think is 10 feet can vary anywhere from 7.5 to almost 15 feet. Beyond 15 feet it can become rather comical.
I'm pretty good at estimating from about 15 feet in, but beyond that is mostly just a good guess. I could waste the time pacing them off - I learned how to do that pretty accurately when I worked for the forest service back in the 60's and we had to be able to measure distance over rough ground to find our way in to fires in the back country. We learned how long our stride was as part of the training - how many steps was a rod, a chain (I was about 26 steps to a chain, and there are 80 chains in a mile so about 2080 steps to a mile. the hardest part was keep track of how many chains you had paced off).
Thankfully, most golfers just guess at that. When I get stuck with someone pacing off putts, I know it's going to be a slow round.
Most people don't estimate distances like these as well as they think they do, and that will skew any attempt at keeping putting or approach stats, or comparing them with anyone else. If you are good at it, then great, but that's pretty rare unless you've practiced making those estimates with a tape measure to check yourself.
Take this test. Take a tape measure to the practice green with you and put a ball down where at where you think 15 feet is, then go 90 degrees from there and put one down at 10 feet, and the same at 5 feet. Measure them and see how far off you are. I've known guys to think they were at 5 feet, but were actually about 3.5. And what they think is 10 feet can vary anywhere from 7.5 to almost 15 feet. Beyond 15 feet it can become rather comical.
I'm pretty good at estimating from about 15 feet in, but beyond that is mostly just a good guess. I could waste the time pacing them off - I learned how to do that pretty accurately when I worked for the forest service back in the 60's and we had to be able to measure distance over rough ground to find our way in to fires in the back country. We learned how long our stride was as part of the training - how many steps was a rod, a chain (I was about 26 steps to a chain, and there are 80 chains in a mile so about 2080 steps to a mile. the hardest part was keep track of how many chains you had paced off).
Thankfully, most golfers just guess at that. When I get stuck with someone pacing off putts, I know it's going to be a slow round.
Most people don't estimate distances like these as well as they think they do, and that will skew any attempt at keeping putting or approach stats, or comparing them with anyone else. If you are good at it, then great, but that's pretty rare unless you've practiced making those estimates with a tape measure to check yourself.