/**/

Collapse

Announcement

No announcement yet.
Collapse

Long game is more important than short game

X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Long game is more important than short game

    Originally posted by low fade View Post
    I've seen lots of great short game players win with crumby long games, but I've never seen a single instance of a great long game player win with a crumby short game.
    seen this many times too...including myself in that example. I outdrove my playing partner by 80 yards consistently, yet several occasions he beat me by about 8 strokes. For most amateurs we should stop trying to get a hard on from obsessing over "ball flight".

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Long game is more important than short game

      The greatest pros have both.

      Seve Ballesteros comes to mind as possibly one exception.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Long game is more important than short game

        LowFade - your comment sounds like what most players "think" but at the pro level that statement does not jive with stats.
        Hank - I think more players should be more focused on their ball flight.

        The attachment has a few stats to back this up. Troll has it right: 175-250 is a critical zone.
        Last edited by NickStarchuk; May 7, 2014, 08:15 PM.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Long game is more important than short game

          An interesting article with stats to back it up.

          "Danger Zone Play (shots from 175-225 yards)

          What I uncovered was that Danger Zone Play has the strongest correlation to success on Tour than ANY other part of the game, including putting and driving effectiveness."


          With the PGA Tour’s season winding down to the final tournament of the year, there will be a faction of golfers fighting to make the top 125 on the Money List in order to keep their Tour Card for 2013.  I have personally worked with a few PGA Tour players, their caddies and instructors on […]
          It's not the wand. It's the wizard.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Long game is more important than short game

            Rich is a superb golf statistician.
            My chart comes from Mark Broadie a professor at MIT who created the strokes gained stat.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Long game is more important than short game

              I think that when people traditionally emphasize short game at the pro level, they are referring to the difference between those on the PGA tour and everyone else at the elite playing level. There are probably many that don't make it at Q school who are excellent ball strikers. How many of them are PGA tour level when it comes to putting 5' from a side hill lie with a stimpmeter in the double digits?

              It would be interesting to see some real stats on that, though.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Long game is more important than short game

                Originally posted by NickStarchuk View Post
                LowFade - your comment sounds like what most players "think" but at the pro level that statement does not jive with stats.
                Hank - I think more players should be more focused on their ball flight.

                The attachment has a few stats to back this up. Troll has it right: 175-250 is a critical zone.
                Thanks for posting the chart. Looking at it, I'm not so sure it disproves my statement. Every single guy listed gains strokes on the field in the short game, thus are good short game players (with the exception of 3 putting stats that are almost average). I'd like to see a chart of guys who lose shots on the field via short game and see if a great Long game is sufficient to overcome the bad short game.

                Sorry if I'm skeptical of statisticians in general-- the only one I trust blindly is Nate Silver!

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Long game is more important than short game

                  i've heard this a few times,


                  drive for show
                  putt for gold.


                  short game is where you save par or boggie and not put up a big number on your scorecard.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Long game is more important than short game

                    Easy question to answer actually. Look at the top 20 golfers and numbers 200-220.

                    What stats set them apart?

                    Gir? Driving accuracy? Sand saves? Total putts?

                    Moneyball time!

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Long game is more important than short game

                      I'd say I lose a lot of my strokes off the tee, hitting ob, 3 from the tee etc. If driver was straight as an arrow then a flubbed chip or 3 putt isn't as penal as hitting 3 from the tee
                      MEMBER OF THE 2008/2011/2014/2016TGN/OGF RYDER CUP CHAMPS!

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Long game is more important than short game

                        Originally posted by The McCleery Crow View Post
                        An interesting article with stats to back it up.

                        "Danger Zone Play (shots from 175-225 yards)

                        What I uncovered was that Danger Zone Play has the strongest correlation to success on Tour than ANY other part of the game, including putting and driving effectiveness."


                        http://www.golfwrx.com/48333/the-bli...-tour-players/
                        You beat me to it. I was going to ref. that article.
                        Driver: Callaway BB Epic 13.5, Veylix Alpina 673S - WILDEYE!
                        16.5* 4W: Ping G25, Fujikura Pro Wood 63R
                        20* 3H: Callaway Apex, Accra CS1 HB-M4
                        4-A: Callaway Apex Combo, Project X LZ 5.5
                        Wedges: TM TP 54/60-ATV, DG Spinner Wedge
                        Putter: SC Sqaureback No. 1
                        Bench: Ping Anser UST VTS TourSPX Hybrid Silver 75R
                        RCGA Factor: 11.6 (75 up to....)

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Long game is more important than short game

                          Originally posted by Cowboy View Post
                          You beat me to it. I was going to ref. that article.
                          The comments have a lot of good discussion. Is the bottom line that guy who can reach green from the danger zone will have two putts to make a score where as the guys that miss greens from the danger zone will have more up and downs to make. Over an entire season, I'd take the guy making two putts over someone making up and downs.
                          It's not the wand. It's the wizard.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Long game is more important than short game

                            While the stats may be relevant for the tour pros who are the best 125 players in the world All tour players must have an elite short game to make it to the show The average joe like me who is just trying to win their club championship is trying to get a better and sharper short game
                            Last edited by dlam; Oct 16, 2013, 08:49 PM.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Long game is more important than short game

                              Originally posted by NickStarchuk View Post
                              Rich is a superb golf statistician.
                              My chart comes from Mark Broadie a professor at MIT who created the strokes gained stat.
                              Pretty soon Nick you will be posting Six Sigma articles
                              Adams XTD Ti 12.5* / TightLies 2 Ti / Super 9031 Tour / Ping WRX i20 Irons
                              Ping WRX Tour Gorge / YES Natalie Putter B-CG / Leupold GX-4 Rangefinder
                              Personal Best: 79, hoping for another sub 80 round before the Twilight Zone

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Long game is more important than short game

                                Unfortunately I think most have been biased by the common cliche of the short game that it will take something more than a genius at MIT with numbers from 10,000,000 over 8 years to convince.

                                Remember, this is at the tour level, and it does not include putting.

                                A great long game and good short game will beat a good long game and great short game all day.

                                This part is my opinion - I think amateurs would benefit even more from a long game than a short game. If we remove OB shots, hazards, and shots with terrible contact, the score will come down MUCH faster than working on short game.

                                If you haven't read Rich Hunt (richie3jack) Golf Synopsis, I recommend it Highly.
                                Your Step Into the Foray of the Meaningless World of Golf Blogging.

                                Comment

                                Collapse

                                Latest TGN Reviews


                                Collapse

                                PGA Leaderboard


                                Collapse

                                Today's Birthdays


                                Working...
                                X