Aiming at the center of the green

golf-forums.net
Promoting golf discussion.

Main

Date: 23 Aug 2006 06:38:41
From: Larry Bud
Subject: Aiming at the center of the green

I average 50% girs. Last night on my league it was pretty windy, and I
decided to run a little test, just try to hit the ball in the dead
center of the green, both distance and direction instead of flag
hunting

I hit 7/9 girs. I missed one par 3 that was a crazy right to left wind
to the left, and another on the fringe that was long (apparent
misclub).

I had 1 birdie, 6 pars, 2 bogies. I didn't get up/down on either
missed green. Ok, I lied, the birdie putt I didn't hit to the center,
but short since the pin was on a lower tier and it's dead if you go
above it.

While I had no 3 putts, I had left myself with some monsterous putts.
I had 3 of them over 30 feet, and one was probably 50 feet. However,
the contention is that it's better to have a 50 footer than to
shortside yourself.

Date: 23 Aug 2006 10:22:22
From: Larry Bud
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Date: 23 Aug 2006 18:12:04
From: muk
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

On 23 Aug 2006 10:22:22 -0700, "Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com > :

>
>muk wrote:
>> On 23 Aug 2006 06:38:41 -0700, "Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com> :
>>
>> >I average 50% girs. Last night on my league it was pretty windy, and I
>> >decided to run a little test, just try to hit the ball in the dead
>> >center of the green, both distance and direction instead of flag
>> >hunting
>> >
>> >I hit 7/9 girs. I missed one par 3 that was a crazy right to left wind
>> >to the left, and another on the fringe that was long (apparent
>> >misclub).
>> >
>> >I had 1 birdie, 6 pars, 2 bogies. I didn't get up/down on either
>> >missed green. Ok, I lied, the birdie putt I didn't hit to the center,
>> >but short since the pin was on a lower tier and it's dead if you go
>> >above it.
>> >
>> >While I had no 3 putts, I had left myself with some monsterous putts.
>> >I had 3 of them over 30 feet, and one was probably 50 feet. However,
>> >the contention is that it's better to have a 50 footer than to
>> >shortside yourself.
>>
>> Is a GIR with a 50 foot putt better than being off the green 10 feet
>> from the pin? (Hopefully not in 6 inches of rough!)
>
>It's going to depend on how good one is at lagging from 50 feet. My
>up/down % is 42% this year... I can't believe I'll three putt 58% of
>the time from 50 feet, however.
>
>It will certainly depend on the difficulty of the greens, as well.

forgot to mention that i am usually 10 feet off the green AND 50 feet
from the pin :P

off to play golf in 40 minutes! maybe i should fire myself for being a
lazy worker.

Date: 23 Aug 2006 12:18:52
From: Rude Dog
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

"muk" <mukhp@NOSPAMhotmail.com > wrote in message
news:4h6pe2h2hitr1odq4di85qtbgms5b5jgra@4ax.com...
> On 23 Aug 2006 10:22:22 -0700, "Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com> :
>
>>
>>muk wrote:
>>> On 23 Aug 2006 06:38:41 -0700, "Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com> :
>>>
>>> >I average 50% girs. Last night on my league it was pretty windy, and I
>>> >decided to run a little test, just try to hit the ball in the dead
>>> >center of the green, both distance and direction instead of flag
>>> >hunting
>>> >
>>> >I hit 7/9 girs. I missed one par 3 that was a crazy right to left wind
>>> >to the left, and another on the fringe that was long (apparent
>>> >misclub).
>>> >
>>> >I had 1 birdie, 6 pars, 2 bogies. I didn't get up/down on either
>>> >missed green. Ok, I lied, the birdie putt I didn't hit to the center,
>>> >but short since the pin was on a lower tier and it's dead if you go
>>> >above it.
>>> >
>>> >While I had no 3 putts, I had left myself with some monsterous putts.
>>> >I had 3 of them over 30 feet, and one was probably 50 feet. However,
>>> >the contention is that it's better to have a 50 footer than to
>>> >shortside yourself.
>>>
>>> Is a GIR with a 50 foot putt better than being off the green 10 feet
>>> from the pin? (Hopefully not in 6 inches of rough!)
>>
>>It's going to depend on how good one is at lagging from 50 feet. My
>>up/down % is 42% this year... I can't believe I'll three putt 58% of
>>the time from 50 feet, however.
>>
>>It will certainly depend on the difficulty of the greens, as well.
>
> forgot to mention that i am usually 10 feet off the green AND 50 feet
> from the pin :P
>
> off to play golf in 40 minutes! maybe i should fire myself for being a
> lazy worker.

I'm just glad you're not MY dor ... I'd never get an appointment! ;)

Date: 23 Aug 2006 17:02:10
From: muk
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

On 23 Aug 2006 06:38:41 -0700, "Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com > :

>I average 50% girs. Last night on my league it was pretty windy, and I
>decided to run a little test, just try to hit the ball in the dead
>center of the green, both distance and direction instead of flag
>hunting
>
>I hit 7/9 girs. I missed one par 3 that was a crazy right to left wind
>to the left, and another on the fringe that was long (apparent
>misclub).
>
>I had 1 birdie, 6 pars, 2 bogies. I didn't get up/down on either
>missed green. Ok, I lied, the birdie putt I didn't hit to the center,
>but short since the pin was on a lower tier and it's dead if you go
>above it.
>
>While I had no 3 putts, I had left myself with some monsterous putts.
>I had 3 of them over 30 feet, and one was probably 50 feet. However,
>the contention is that it's better to have a 50 footer than to
>shortside yourself.

Is a GIR with a 50 foot putt better than being off the green 10 feet
from the pin? (Hopefully not in 6 inches of rough!)

Date: 23 Aug 2006 22:30:50
From: pete z
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

fiveiron@webtv.net wrote:
> >Is a GIR with a 50 foot putt better than being
> >off the green 10 feet from the pin? >(Hopefully not in 6 inches of
> rough!)
> =======
> overall? yes.
>
> >mho
> >v fe
>
> > "d R i V e L e $ s"

You are full of crap. Unless you are in heavy rough, even a decent 20
handicapper can
get down in two from 10 ft. Not so from 50, i don't care if you are on
the green or not.

Date: 24 Aug 2006 09:55:15
From: Mike Dalecki
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

pete z wrote:
> fiveiron@webtv.net wrote:
>
>>>Is a GIR with a 50 foot putt better than being
>>>off the green 10 feet from the pin? >(Hopefully not in 6 inches of
>>
>>rough!)
>>=======
>>overall? yes.
>>
>>
>>>mho
>>>v fe
>>
>>> "d R i V e L e $ s"
>
>
>
> You are full of crap. Unless you are in heavy rough, even a decent 20
> handicapper can
> get down in two from 10 ft. Not so from 50, i don't care if you are on
> the green or not.
>

Pete, I guess I don't understand this. "Decent 20 handicapper" is an
oxymoron; there is no such animal (apologies to 20 handicappers; it's
not personal).

Such a player has significant holes in their game, including their short
game. In fact, I've read in more than one place that a good way to play
for a high handicapper is to ensure putts, not short-game shots, because
they are going to be better, over time, putting than chipping/flopping/etc.

A 20-handicapper doesn't, by definition, have a good short game. I
can't imagine expecting a 20-handicapper to get up and down to a close
pin from 10' away, unless the ball is puttable (at which point we're
comparing what is essentially a 10' putt with a 50' putt.

I'd expect a 20-handicapper to get up and down from off the green, 10'
away, maybe 25 percent of the time. The exception would be if the shot
off the green were puttable, at which point I might bump the percentage
up to 40 or 50 percent.

How often will the same 20-handicapper 3-putt or more from 50 feet? I'd
guess they'd do that at least 3 out of 4 times, which is the same,
essentially, as getting up and down from 10 feet only 25 percent of the
time.

So I see no particular advantage to the 20 handicapper in missing the
green closer. If you get down to someone who is high single digits,
sure. But not a 20.

Mike

PS: No offense to those of you who are a 20. You know what I'm saying,
and it's not putting you down. It's pointing out reality.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
RSG-Wisconsin 2006 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/pics/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 24 Aug 2006 12:43:37
From: sfb
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

You are ignoring reality when you think you'll never grow old. There are
lots of us older guys who lost their length, but still like to play the back
tees that play to a very decent 20.

"Mike Dalecki" <mike@dalecki.net > wrote in message
news:4l5sujFe611U1@individual.net...
>
> Pete, I guess I don't understand this. "Decent 20 handicapper" is an
> oxymoron; there is no such animal (apologies to 20 handicappers; it's not
> personal).
>
> Such a player has significant holes in their game, including their short
> game. In fact, I've read in more than one place that a good way to play
> for a high handicapper is to ensure putts, not short-game shots, because
> they are going to be better, over time, putting than
> chipping/flopping/etc.
>
> A 20-handicapper doesn't, by definition, have a good short game. I can't
> imagine expecting a 20-handicapper to get up and down to a close pin from
> 10' away, unless the ball is puttable (at which point we're comparing what
> is essentially a 10' putt with a 50' putt.
>
> I'd expect a 20-handicapper to get up and down from off the green, 10'
> away, maybe 25 percent of the time. The exception would be if the shot
> off the green were puttable, at which point I might bump the percentage up
> to 40 or 50 percent.
>
> How often will the same 20-handicapper 3-putt or more from 50 feet? I'd
> guess they'd do that at least 3 out of 4 times, which is the same,
> essentially, as getting up and down from 10 feet only 25 percent of the
> time.
>
> So I see no particular advantage to the 20 handicapper in missing the
> green closer. If you get down to someone who is high single digits, sure.
> But not a 20.
>
> Mike
>
> PS: No offense to those of you who are a 20. You know what I'm saying,
> and it's not putting you down. It's pointing out reality.
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
> RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
> RSG-Wisconsin 2006 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/pics/
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 24 Aug 2006 22:27:00
From: Mike Dalecki
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

sfb wrote:
> You are ignoring reality when you think you'll never grow old. There are
> lots of us older guys who lost their length, but still like to play the back
> tees that play to a very decent 20.

A very decent 20? C'mon, man--what does that mean?

I'm sorry, but I don't really agree. If you're playing so far back that
your scores balloon to the point that you're a 20, well, either you're
playing 9000-yard courses, or you're kidding yourself about your abilities.

We have guys here who are in their 60s who are not particularly long,
but they stay out of trouble, have a good short game, and score in the
70s. Their handicaps are in the 9-12 range.

Further, none of this invalidates my arguments. If you're a 20, you
virtually never have a good short game, period. If you did, you'd
simply choose to hit the ball down the middle, get it close in
regulation, and then let your short game take over.

Mike

PS: My argument was not about age, it was about the relative merits of
missing the green versus putting it on in the middle of the green, 50'
away.

>
>
> "Mike Dalecki" <mike@dalecki.net> wrote in message
> news:4l5sujFe611U1@individual.net...
>
>>Pete, I guess I don't understand this. "Decent 20 handicapper" is an
>>oxymoron; there is no such animal (apologies to 20 handicappers; it's not
>>personal).
>>
>>Such a player has significant holes in their game, including their short
>>game. In fact, I've read in more than one place that a good way to play
>>for a high handicapper is to ensure putts, not short-game shots, because
>>they are going to be better, over time, putting than
>>chipping/flopping/etc.
>>
>>A 20-handicapper doesn't, by definition, have a good short game. I can't
>>imagine expecting a 20-handicapper to get up and down to a close pin from
>>10' away, unless the ball is puttable (at which point we're comparing what
>>is essentially a 10' putt with a 50' putt.
>>
>>I'd expect a 20-handicapper to get up and down from off the green, 10'
>>away, maybe 25 percent of the time. The exception would be if the shot
>>off the green were puttable, at which point I might bump the percentage up
>>to 40 or 50 percent.
>>
>>How often will the same 20-handicapper 3-putt or more from 50 feet? I'd
>>guess they'd do that at least 3 out of 4 times, which is the same,
>>essentially, as getting up and down from 10 feet only 25 percent of the
>>time.
>>
>>So I see no particular advantage to the 20 handicapper in missing the
>>green closer. If you get down to someone who is high single digits, sure.
>>But not a 20.
>>
>>Mike
>>
>>PS: No offense to those of you who are a 20. You know what I'm saying,
>>and it's not putting you down. It's pointing out reality.
>>
>>--
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
>>RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
>>RSG-Wisconsin 2006 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/pics/
>>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
RSG-Wisconsin 2006 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/pics/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 25 Aug 2006 07:41:45
From: long&left
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Mike Dalecki wrote:
(snip)
> We have guys here who are in their 60s who are not particularly long,
> but they stay out of trouble, have a good short game, and score in the
> 70s. Their handicaps are in the 9-12 range.
>

so, they would be "decent 9 - 12's" then?
;-P

Date: 25 Aug 2006 10:49:34
From: Mike Dalecki
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

long&left wrote:

> Mike Dalecki wrote:
> (snip)
>
>> We have guys here who are in their 60s who are not particularly long,
>> but they stay out of trouble, have a good short game, and score in the
>> 70s. Their handicaps are in the 9-12 range.
>>
>
> so, they would be "decent 9 - 12's" then?
> ;-P

I'd consider them decent players. But in the end, the index indicates
something about the skill of the player. A player who is a 20 cannot
have a good short game, unless they're truly clueless about how to play
tee to green, and how to course manage.

When my back was bothering me, my short game went to hell. No touch, no
feel. Putting, too. When you hurt you tighten up (at least I did), and
that is, for me, what prevents the smooth execution of short-game shots.

So I didn't play to what my index is now. I played more like a 14.
Was I a decent 14? No--I was just a 14.

Now I'm a 7 again. Decent? No--just a 7.

Mike

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
RSG-Wisconsin 2006 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/pics/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 25 Aug 2006 09:52:22
From: long&left
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Mike Dalecki wrote:
(snip)
>
> Now I'm a 7 again. Decent? No--just a 7.
>
> Mike
>

my point exactly, hence the ;-P You can't qualify a handicap with an
adjective IMO
Dave

Date: 24 Aug 2006 10:56:24
From: nativetexan_1
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

"Mike Dalecki" <mike@dalecki.net > wrote in message
news:4l5sujFe611U1@individual.net...
> PS: No offense to those of you who are a 20. You know what I'm saying,
> and it's not putting you down. It's pointing out reality.

No offense taken. You're just accurately facing the facts. MAYBE we hit
the ball properly, but MAYBE we hit the ground 6" behind the ball moving the
ball only a few inches, blade the ball all the way across the green, or
skull it 6". We ain't 20 handicappers for nothing.

Date: 24 Aug 2006 10:08:31
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 09:55:15 -0500, Mike Dalecki <mike@dalecki.net >
wrote:

>
>PS: No offense to those of you who are a 20. You know what I'm saying,
>and it's not putting you down. It's pointing out reality.

A little too general though Mike. Sometimes one's handicap soars
because of other things than putting, or short game. You've had back
problems, add aging to that and you'll find that there are some 20
handicappers who just don't have all of their game any more, for
various reasons.
___,
\o

Date: 24 Aug 2006 10:30:05
From: Mike Dalecki
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Bobby Knight wrote:

> On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 09:55:15 -0500, Mike Dalecki <mike@dalecki.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>PS: No offense to those of you who are a 20. You know what I'm saying,
>>and it's not putting you down. It's pointing out reality.
>
>
> A little too general though Mike. Sometimes one's handicap soars
> because of other things than putting, or short game. You've had back
> problems, add aging to that and you'll find that there are some 20
> handicappers who just don't have all of their game any more, for
> various reasons.

Bobby, that's true, but I also don't think that's the kind of
20-handicapper we're talking about here. Even when I had my back
trouble, and my short game feel went to hell, I was going to be better
with a long putt than a short-game shot.

Mike

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
RSG-Wisconsin 2006 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/pics/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 24 Aug 2006 19:14:46
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 09:55:15 -0500, Mike Dalecki <mike@dalecki.net >
wrote:

>Pete, I guess I don't understand this. "Decent 20 handicapper" is an
>oxymoron; there is no such animal (apologies to 20 handicappers; it's
>not personal).

Since by definition a handicap defines how decent someone is - this
has to be read in context. Someone who is a 20 handicap but whose
strength is chipping or putting. The obvious example is the 80 year
old with good vision but who no longer has a decent full swing.

>Such a player has significant holes in their game, including their short
>game. In fact, I've read in more than one place that a good way to play
>for a high handicapper is to ensure putts, not short-game shots, because
>they are going to be better, over time, putting than chipping/flopping/etc.
>
>A 20-handicapper doesn't, by definition, have a good short game. I
>can't imagine expecting a 20-handicapper to get up and down to a close
>pin from 10' away, unless the ball is puttable (at which point we're
>comparing what is essentially a 10' putt with a 50' putt.

10' isn't very far. From the fairway, even a 30 handicap player
should make it in 2. In the rough, I wouldn't be so ready to bet on
the high handicapper.

>I'd expect a 20-handicapper to get up and down from off the green, 10'
>away, maybe 25 percent of the time. The exception would be if the shot
>off the green were puttable, at which point I might bump the percentage
>up to 40 or 50 percent.
>
>How often will the same 20-handicapper 3-putt or more from 50 feet? I'd
>guess they'd do that at least 3 out of 4 times, which is the same,
>essentially, as getting up and down from 10 feet only 25 percent of the
>time.

Some do, some don't. In my home course I'm not that bad putting, but
I'm not as good as a 20 handicapper.

>So I see no particular advantage to the 20 handicapper in missing the
>green closer. If you get down to someone who is high single digits,
>sure. But not a 20.

Again, it's course knowledge. If we were smart enough to aim for
where the fairway hit the green (and were successful in our aim),
missing the green short helps. Trouble is, we just aren't that
smart. If we played smarter, our handicaps would be lower.

Date: 24 Aug 2006 16:55:30
From: long&left
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Howard Brazee wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 09:55:15 -0500, Mike Dalecki <mike@dalecki.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>Pete, I guess I don't understand this. "Decent 20 handicapper" is an
>>oxymoron; there is no such animal (apologies to 20 handicappers; it's
>>not personal).
>
>
> Since by definition a handicap defines how decent someone is - this
> has to be read in context. Someone who is a 20 handicap but whose
> strength is chipping or putting. The obvious example is the 80 year
> old with good vision but who no longer has a decent full swing.
>

he should have said "20 handicapper with a good short game". A 20
handicapper is just that and the words decent and 20 handicap don't
belong in the same sentence IMO...I also mean no offense to 20+ handicappers
Dave

Date: 24 Aug 2006 20:21:59
From: Otto
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

What is the difference between a lousy 20 handicapper and a decent 20
handicapper?

Otto

Date: 24 Aug 2006 07:35:21
From: long&left
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

pete z wrote:
(snip)
>
>
> You are full of crap. Unless you are in heavy rough, even a decent 20
> handicapper can
> get down in two from 10 ft. Not so from 50, i don't care if you are on
> the green or not.
>

what's a "decent 20 handicapper" ??

Date: 24 Aug 2006 12:38:59
From: sfb
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

I have no idea, but I'll take the over bet every time on a 20 getting up and
down in 2 from 10 feet off the green.

"long&left" <nospam@diespammers.com > wrote in message
news:zOiHg.530$wR3.493@newsfe07.lga...
> pete z wrote:
> (snip)
>>
>>
>> You are full of crap. Unless you are in heavy rough, even a decent 20
>> handicapper can
>> get down in two from 10 ft. Not so from 50, i don't care if you are on
>> the green or not.
>>
>
> what's a "decent 20 handicapper" ??

Date: 25 Aug 2006 10:55:20
From: Mike Dalecki
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

sfb wrote:

> I have no idea, but I'll take the over bet every time on a 20 getting up and
> down in 2 from 10 feet off the green.

The over bet? Meaning you assume they'll goof it up more often than
not? I'll take that bet too.

If it's a shot in the rough where they need a lofted club to get the
ball onto the green and near the hole, then that shot is not within the
regular capabilities of a 20.

If it's a chip from fairway, they'll do better, but if they're 10 feet
off the green, they likely need to carry the fringe, and again, there
you are.

All you need do is watch them hit it, loosey-goosey in the wrists, too
long a backwswing, no acceleration through the shot, you name it.

A 20 doesn't know that stuff, or if they know it, they sure aren't doing
it. They may think they are but not (I know that characterizes how I
viewed things back when).

But when they learn that stuff, and employ it, they will no longer be a 20.

Mike

PS: No offense to high handicappers intended. Everybody has leaks in
their game, and presumably everyone plays to have fun. I know a guy who
is a high handicapper who has a good time golfing, and simply doesn't
want to learn how to get better. More power to him.

>
> "long&left" <nospam@diespammers.com> wrote in message
> news:zOiHg.530$wR3.493@newsfe07.lga...
>
>>pete z wrote:
>>(snip)
>>
>>>
>>>You are full of crap. Unless you are in heavy rough, even a decent 20
>>>handicapper can
>>>get down in two from 10 ft. Not so from 50, i don't care if you are on
>>>the green or not.
>>>
>>
>>what's a "decent 20 handicapper" ??
>
>
>

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
RSG-Wisconsin 2006 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/pics/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 25 Aug 2006 21:41:26
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 10:55:20 -0500, Mike Dalecki <mike@dalecki.net >
wrote:

>The over bet? Meaning you assume they'll goof it up more often than
>not? I'll take that bet too.
>
>If it's a shot in the rough where they need a lofted club to get the
>ball onto the green and near the hole, then that shot is not within the
>regular capabilities of a 20.

One thing is, when we miss this shot, we miss bad.

Date: 25 Aug 2006 17:45:58
From: Mike Dalecki
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Howard Brazee wrote:

> On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 10:55:20 -0500, Mike Dalecki <mike@dalecki.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>The over bet? Meaning you assume they'll goof it up more often than
>>not? I'll take that bet too.
>>
>>If it's a shot in the rough where they need a lofted club to get the
>>ball onto the green and near the hole, then that shot is not within the
>>regular capabilities of a 20.
>
>
> One thing is, when we miss this shot, we miss bad.

Believe it or not, Howard, I think about the higher handicapper stuff a
lot. Partly it's because I'm not so long removed from that in my own
game, and partly it's because I play regularly with a guy who is, I kid
you not, a 33.

He has the athletic ability to be a 15, and if he played smarter (which
he's learning), AND LEARNED HOW TO DO SHORT GAME AND PUTTING, would get
there fairly easily.

This particular guy is way too handsey with his chips. You'd think his
wrists were hinges the way they work on a chip. He simply uses his
hands too much. Same with putting--he's wristy.

I've not said anything to him about this, because he needs to practice
this off the course before he tries it, but his short game just kills him.

Yesterday we played a game where we combined the net scores for 18
holes. Lots of 2-man teams doing this. My belief and hope was that I
could coach him around, help him with better course management, better
shot selection, helping him take the big numbers out of play.

He ended up shooting a 94, which was his all-time best here. He shot a
net 61 which was pretty good.

But he lost so many shots around the green it wasn't funny. I kept
suggesting he aim to the center of the green and try to get down in two
from there (as a note, our greens are small, so center isn't, by
definition, all that far away from the pin :).

What I couldn't get him to do (and in fairness, who the hell wants to
golf with a nag? :), was to not try the shots I would try, but to try
the shots *he* had a high probability of being successful at. Heck, on
most holes he was getting 2 shots of handicap!

Over time, he'll become better simply by playing with better people and
learning to make better choices. But until and unless he learns to putt
better, and takes the wrists out of his chips, he's not going to drop by
anything like what he otherwise could do.

Mike

PS: My proudest moment came when he hit a drive into the left rough on
a par 5. He had a tree partly blocking him, and started to pull out the
3-wood. I talked him into an iron to put himself in position to reach
the green with his third shot. That shot he missed the green with, but
his chip gave him a 4-footer, which he sank for a par.

A couple holes later I recounted that hole to him, trying to help him
recall that he'd played the hole smartly and recovered well enough to
par it. And he did make a number of better choices without my having to
tell him.

PPS: The worst moment--and it may have won me some money, I haven't
seen the final standings yet--was when he was left of 18, in rough,
below the green. He flops a shot up on the green, it goes in for a par!

Every time he makes a decent short-game shot using his horrible
technique, it sets him back. :)

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
RSG-Wisconsin 2006 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/pics/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 26 Aug 2006 00:13:42
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 17:45:58 -0500, Mike Dalecki <mike@dalecki.net >
wrote:

>But he lost so many shots around the green it wasn't funny. I kept
>suggesting he aim to the center of the green and try to get down in two
>from there (as a note, our greens are small, so center isn't, by
>definition, all that far away from the pin :).

That's very hard to do. Most all of us find it hard to have our
brains overcome our cojones. But it isn't a disease that good
players are immune to. Remember how Billy Casper won his U.S. Open
by laying up on a par-3 hole that was too difficult. He was smarter
than the rest of the field.

But with a poor player, the middle of the green is more important than
with good players. That's because we don't have effective control in
how we miss our shots. And we don't really have as many safe misses
that we can choose.

One way to increase the better players' chances of winning a net
contest is to include "closest to the pin" and "longest drive" side
bets. If we change our strategies to win those, we change our
strategies to make winning harder.

Date: 25 Aug 2006 23:09:18
From: Mike Dalecki
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Howard Brazee wrote:
> On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 17:45:58 -0500, Mike Dalecki <mike@dalecki.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>>But he lost so many shots around the green it wasn't funny. I kept
>>suggesting he aim to the center of the green and try to get down in two
>
>>from there (as a note, our greens are small, so center isn't, by
>
>>definition, all that far away from the pin :).
>
>
> That's very hard to do. Most all of us find it hard to have our
> brains overcome our cojones. But it isn't a disease that good
> players are immune to. Remember how Billy Casper won his U.S. Open
> by laying up on a par-3 hole that was too difficult. He was smarter
> than the rest of the field.
>
> But with a poor player, the middle of the green is more important than
> with good players. That's because we don't have effective control in
> how we miss our shots. And we don't really have as many safe misses
> that we can choose.
>
> One way to increase the better players' chances of winning a net
> contest is to include "closest to the pin" and "longest drive" side
> bets. If we change our strategies to win those, we change our
> strategies to make winning harder.

The thing I remember so clearly was feeling like I was giving shots away
when I played the smart shot. After all, if I were hitting toward the
center of the green, I was not setting myself up for birdie! Never mind
that I virtually *never* made birdie, and more often than not left
myself something where a sure bogey turned into a triple.

I've long wondered if there must be a certain amount of negative
feedback a golfer needs before he/she can start to make the smart
choice. You have to remember that hitting a 3-wood out of heavy rough
is *not* a high percentage shot, and that you're far more likely to
screw up than make the miracle shot.

I think partly what I figured is that the only way I was going to score
was to hit the great shot. Never mind that I almost never did, but the
bigger problem is that you always remember the one time you did, and
seem to conveniently forget the 15 other times when you ended up taking
more strokes because of the hero attempt.

Now, if I miss a shot 3 times, I'm on the practice range trying to
figure out what happened. I have a pretty good sense of what's working
and what's not, and I steer away from what's not. Last Tuesday I was
having trouble with partial wedges off very tight lies (our fairways are
struggling in the end of summer heat and lack of rain). I missed two of
them; the third time I took a PW and did a bump and run onto the green
instead of trying to stick the shot close.

Back when I was in the upper teens for handicap, that would never have
happened. I would have told myself that a good golfer should be able to
hit those shots, and by darn, I was going to hit them.

Not any more.

Mike

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
RSG-Wisconsin 2006 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/pics/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 26 Aug 2006 13:59:58
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 23:09:18 -0500, Mike Dalecki <mike@dalecki.net >
wrote:

>The thing I remember so clearly was feeling like I was giving shots away
>when I played the smart shot. After all, if I were hitting toward the
>center of the green, I was not setting myself up for birdie! Never mind
>that I virtually *never* made birdie, and more often than not left
>myself something where a sure bogey turned into a triple.

I'm thinking my learning of this important truism would be helped if I
play more match play. I'm smart enough and interested enough to
slowly learn the obvious - and in match play the obvious is there more
often.

Example:

I drove into the lake of a dog leg over a hill. For some reason,
the shot over the lake is one which I *always* screw up. The surface
is hard and curved, but the green is a 5I away. Backing up puts me
in a big bunker, or below the hill. So I normally hit into the
middle of the fairway instead from there.

But I was playing match play, and decided I needed to take a chance. I
hit a second ball in the lake, then a 7 iron to the fairway, hit the
green and one putted. I lost the hole by one stroke when my opponent
played worse than I expected then 3 putted.

It's easier to observe these results in match play.

Date: 25 Aug 2006 23:03:38
From: Tim Mocarski
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

In article <4l9csuFshs4U1@individual.net >, Mike Dalecki
<mike@dalecki.net > wrote:

> Howard Brazee wrote:
>
> >
>
> Believe it or not, Howard, I think about the higher handicapper stuff a
> lot. Partly it's because I'm not so long removed from that in my own
> game, and partly it's because I play regularly with a guy who is, I kid
> you not, a 33.
>
> He has the athletic ability to be a 15, and if he played smarter (which
> he's learning), AND LEARNED HOW TO DO SHORT GAME AND PUTTING, would get
> there fairly easily.
>
> This particular guy is way too handsey with his chips. You'd think his
> wrists were hinges the way they work on a chip. He simply uses his
> hands too much. Same with putting--he's wristy.
>
> I've not said anything to him about this, because he needs to practice
> this off the course before he tries it, but his short game just kills him.
>
> Yesterday we played a game where we combined the net scores for 18
> holes. Lots of 2-man teams doing this. My belief and hope was that I
> could coach him around, help him with better course management, better
> shot selection, helping him take the big numbers out of play.
>
> He ended up shooting a 94, which was his all-time best here. He shot a
> net 61 which was pretty good.
>
> But he lost so many shots around the green it wasn't funny. I kept
> suggesting he aim to the center of the green and try to get down in two
> from there (as a note, our greens are small, so center isn't, by
> definition, all that far away from the pin :).
>
> What I couldn't get him to do (and in fairness, who the hell wants to
> golf with a nag? :), was to not try the shots I would try, but to try
> the shots *he* had a high probability of being successful at. Heck, on
> most holes he was getting 2 shots of handicap!
>
> Over time, he'll become better simply by playing with better people and
> learning to make better choices. But until and unless he learns to putt
> better, and takes the wrists out of his chips, he's not going to drop by
> anything like what he otherwise could do.
>
> Mike
>
> PS: My proudest moment came when he hit a drive into the left rough on
> a par 5. He had a tree partly blocking him, and started to pull out the
> 3-wood. I talked him into an iron to put himself in position to reach
> the green with his third shot. That shot he missed the green with, but
> his chip gave him a 4-footer, which he sank for a par.
>
> A couple holes later I recounted that hole to him, trying to help him
> recall that he'd played the hole smartly and recovered well enough to
> par it. And he did make a number of better choices without my having to
> tell him.
>
> PPS: The worst moment--and it may have won me some money, I haven't
> seen the final standings yet--was when he was left of 18, in rough,
> below the green. He flops a shot up on the green, it goes in for a par!
>
> Every time he makes a decent short-game shot using his horrible
> technique, it sets him back. :)

I passing this on to the golf coach down here in Burlington. He keeps
telling the boys on the high school team the exact same things, but
youth and hormones keep getting in the way...

Date: 25 Aug 2006 21:38:07
From: Joe
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Mike Dalecki wrote:
> sfb wrote:
>
>> I have no idea, but I'll take the over bet every time on a 20 getting
>> up and down in 2 from 10 feet off the green.
>
>
> The over bet? Meaning you assume they'll goof it up more often than
> not? I'll take that bet too.
>
> If it's a shot in the rough where they need a lofted club to get the
> ball onto the green and near the hole, then that shot is not within the
> regular capabilities of a 20.
>
> If it's a chip from fairway, they'll do better, but if they're 10 feet
> off the green, they likely need to carry the fringe, and again, there
> you are.
>
> All you need do is watch them hit it, loosey-goosey in the wrists, too
> long a backwswing, no acceleration through the shot, you name it.
>
> A 20 doesn't know that stuff, or if they know it, they sure aren't doing
> it. They may think they are but not (I know that characterizes how I
> viewed things back when).
>
> But when they learn that stuff, and employ it, they will no longer be a 20.
>
> Mike
>

Mike,

I have been following this conversation in my opinion you are over
generalizing and confabulating two and maybe more, skills. Getting up
and down in two from off the green requires a good set of executable
shots, sound putting and the ability to read slopes.

Here is a challenge:

Ball on the back berm of the green, 3-4 paces off, down slope 25 degrees
1.5 inch rough. Pin is 6 paces in, green runs away from the back with a
10 deg slope, stimp 8-9.

Do you have that shot? What percentage will you make? Better that 25%?

The amount of contour that the player has to deal with can make an awful
lot of difference. Getting the ball inside the flag is only part of the
problem. The same thing applies to the 50' putt. Making that requires
three different putting skills, interpretation of the slope and breaks,
lag putting / speed control and line selection.

With a 50' footer that is pretty straight forward most people who play
off 25 or better should be able to get it to a reliably makeable
distance for the second putt. Throw in some contour and a player who
normally plays flat greens, and they may very well be in for a 3, 4 or 5
putt.

Handicap index is reflective an individual's total game. While you can
certainly make some statements about typical scores for various parts
of the game, relative to handicap, it is not possible to make definitive
statements as you have.

Regarding the challenge above, I can beat the 25% rate but just barely
and that is because that is a fairly typical situation where I play.

Joe

Date: 25 Aug 2006 17:29:42
From: Mike Dalecki
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Joe wrote:

>
>
> Mike Dalecki wrote:
>
>> sfb wrote:
>>
>>> I have no idea, but I'll take the over bet every time on a 20 getting
>>> up and down in 2 from 10 feet off the green.
>>
>>
>>
>> The over bet? Meaning you assume they'll goof it up more often than
>> not? I'll take that bet too.
>>
>> If it's a shot in the rough where they need a lofted club to get the
>> ball onto the green and near the hole, then that shot is not within
>> the regular capabilities of a 20.
>>
>> If it's a chip from fairway, they'll do better, but if they're 10 feet
>> off the green, they likely need to carry the fringe, and again, there
>> you are.
>>
>> All you need do is watch them hit it, loosey-goosey in the wrists, too
>> long a backwswing, no acceleration through the shot, you name it.
>>
>> A 20 doesn't know that stuff, or if they know it, they sure aren't
>> doing it. They may think they are but not (I know that characterizes
>> how I viewed things back when).
>>
>> But when they learn that stuff, and employ it, they will no longer be
>> a 20.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>
> Mike,
>
> I have been following this conversation in my opinion you are over
> generalizing

Never!

> and confabulating two and maybe more, skills. Getting up
> and down in two from off the green requires a good set of executable
> shots, sound putting and the ability to read slopes.

But isn't that the essence of the difference between a 20 handicap and a
single digit?

I agree with what you've said, but I'd ask you this: Where is the
strength in a 20-handicapper's game?

I'd venture to say there really isn't one.

>
> Here is a challenge:
>
> Ball on the back berm of the green, 3-4 paces off, down slope 25 degrees
> 1.5 inch rough. Pin is 6 paces in, green runs away from the back with a
> 10 deg slope, stimp 8-9.
>
> Do you have that shot? What percentage will you make? Better that 25%?

Actually, I do have this shot. We have a wonderful short-game practice
facility with a berm right next to it, on which I practice clipping
balls off the berm to a close pin.

How often do I make it (I presume you mean up and down)? I don't
know--I don't know the actual slope and speed of your green.

Hard to evaluate these kinds of things in text. But that is a shot I have.

> The amount of contour that the player has to deal with can make an awful
> lot of difference. Getting the ball inside the flag is only part of the
> problem. The same thing applies to the 50' putt. Making that requires
> three different putting skills, interpretation of the slope and breaks,
> lag putting / speed control and line selection.

Sure, but that's part of what defines the difference between a 20 and a
single-digit.

> With a 50' footer that is pretty straight forward most people who play
> off 25 or better should be able to get it to a reliably makeable
> distance for the second putt.

I'd disagree on that.

> Throw in some contour and a player who
> normally plays flat greens, and they may very well be in for a 3, 4 or 5
> putt.
>

I agree.

> Handicap index is reflective an individual's total game. While you can
> certainly make some statements about typical scores for various parts of
> the game, relative to handicap, it is not possible to make definitive
> statements as you have.

I'm generalizing, and I'd think it fairly evident that the statements
are generalizations. There may be an exception or two, but that
invalidates neither the logic nor the conclusion.

Handicap index is reflective of a person's total game, sure. But show
me a 20-handicap player with a good short game. Show me three. Nah,
just show me one.

>
> Regarding the challenge above, I can beat the 25% rate but just barely
> and that is because that is a fairly typical situation where I play.

I practice that shot because A) there are 2 or 3 places on my course
where a miss can result in that shot for you, and B) it's an excellent
way to practice with my 60* wedge and learn to control it well.

But none of the above, Joe, seems to me to invalidate my basic premise,
which is that a 20-handicapper is not going to have the skills to get up
and down at anything approaching what you'd expect a single digit
handicap to do.

Mike

> Joe
>

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
RSG-Wisconsin 2006 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/pics/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 26 Aug 2006 02:27:54
From: Joe
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Mike Dalecki wrote:

> Joe wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Mike Dalecki wrote:
>>
>>> sfb wrote:
>>>
>>>> I have no idea, but I'll take the over bet every time on a 20
>>>> getting up and down in 2 from 10 feet off the green.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The over bet? Meaning you assume they'll goof it up more often than
>>> not? I'll take that bet too.
>>>
>>> If it's a shot in the rough where they need a lofted club to get the
>>> ball onto the green and near the hole, then that shot is not within
>>> the regular capabilities of a 20.
>>>
>>> If it's a chip from fairway, they'll do better, but if they're 10
>>> feet off the green, they likely need to carry the fringe, and again,
>>> there you are.
>>>
>>> All you need do is watch them hit it, loosey-goosey in the wrists,
>>> too long a backwswing, no acceleration through the shot, you name it.
>>>
>>> A 20 doesn't know that stuff, or if they know it, they sure aren't
>>> doing it. They may think they are but not (I know that characterizes
>>> how I viewed things back when).
>>>
>>> But when they learn that stuff, and employ it, they will no longer be
>>> a 20.
>>>
>>> Mike
>>>
>>
>> Mike,
>>
>> I have been following this conversation in my opinion you are over
>> generalizing
>
>
> Never!
>
>> and confabulating two and maybe more, skills. Getting up and down in
>> two from off the green requires a good set of executable shots, sound
>> putting and the ability to read slopes.
>
>
> But isn't that the essence of the difference between a 20 handicap and a
> single digit?
>
> I agree with what you've said, but I'd ask you this: Where is the
> strength in a 20-handicapper's game?
>
> I'd venture to say there really isn't one.

That is not the question or the point you raised. Your point was that a
20 is not likely to get up and down from 10' off.

>>
>> Here is a challenge:
>>
>> Ball on the back berm of the green, 3-4 paces off, down slope 25
>> degrees 1.5 inch rough. Pin is 6 paces in, green runs away from the
>> back with a 10 deg slope, stimp 8-9.
>>
>> Do you have that shot? What percentage will you make? Better that 25%?
>
>
> Actually, I do have this shot. We have a wonderful short-game practice
> facility with a berm right next to it, on which I practice clipping
> balls off the berm to a close pin.

Congratulations. Seriously. It's a tough shot and few that I know,
including a "pro" that I played with on Wednesday, can be any kind of
reliable with it. My point was more about generalizing.
>
> How often do I make it (I presume you mean up and down)? I don't
> know--I don't know the actual slope and speed of your green.
>
> Hard to evaluate these kinds of things in text. But that is a shot I have.

What does that mean?
>
>> The amount of contour that the player has to deal with can make an
>> awful lot of difference. Getting the ball inside the flag is only
>> part of the problem. The same thing applies to the 50' putt. Making
>> that requires three different putting skills, interpretation of the
>> slope and breaks, lag putting / speed control and line selection.
>
>
> Sure, but that's part of what defines the difference between a 20 and a
> single-digit.

I play with a couple single digits that would be hard pressed to make
50's in two on some of the highly contoured greens that we have. But
they are long and pretty good at the approach. So, no, that is not what
defines the difference between a 20 and and single digit.

>> With a 50' footer that is pretty straight forward most people who play
>> off 25 or better should be able to get it to a reliably makeable
>> distance for the second putt.
>
>
> I'd disagree on that.

Why? It is a simple lag putt. Just takes a little practice to get it
inside of 4'.
>
> > Throw in some contour and a player who
>
>> normally plays flat greens, and they may very well be in for a 3, 4 or
>> 5 putt.
>>
>
> I agree.
>
>> Handicap index is reflective an individual's total game. While you
>> can certainly make some statements about typical scores for various
>> parts of the game, relative to handicap, it is not possible to make
>> definitive statements as you have.
>
>
> I'm generalizing, and I'd think it fairly evident that the statements
> are generalizations.

Actually you were pretty specific.

There may be an exception or two, but that
> invalidates neither the logic nor the conclusion.
>
> Handicap index is reflective of a person's total game, sure.

Define good short game.
But show
> me a 20-handicap player with a good short game. Show me three. Nah,
> just show me one.

Almost any retirement community will have a few old guys that are bogey
plus but will eat your lunch around the green.

>>
>> Regarding the challenge above, I can beat the 25% rate but just barely
>> and that is because that is a fairly typical situation where I play.
>
>
> I practice that shot because A) there are 2 or 3 places on my course
> where a miss can result in that shot for you, and B) it's an excellent
> way to practice with my 60* wedge and learn to control it well.

I know that you work at your game so I am not surprised. Personally,
working on these shots beats hitting balls on the range, at least for
enjoyment.
>
> But none of the above, Joe, seems to me to invalidate my basic premise,
> which is that a 20-handicapper is not going to have the skills to get up
> and down at anything approaching what you'd expect a single digit
> handicap to do.

The immediately above statement is not the same argument that a 20 can't
get up and down from 10 off, 25% of the time. I do agree that the two
will have different performance rates. Just for the sake of
conversation, what up and down, from 10 off, percentage would you expect
from, say, a 7 index?

>
> Mike

Joe

Date: 28 Aug 2006 08:04:42
From: Mike Dalecki
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Joe wrote:

>
>
> Mike Dalecki wrote:
>
>> Joe wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Mike Dalecki wrote:
>>>
>>>> sfb wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I have no idea, but I'll take the over bet every time on a 20
>>>>> getting up and down in 2 from 10 feet off the green.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The over bet? Meaning you assume they'll goof it up more often than
>>>> not? I'll take that bet too.
>>>>
>>>> If it's a shot in the rough where they need a lofted club to get the
>>>> ball onto the green and near the hole, then that shot is not within
>>>> the regular capabilities of a 20.
>>>>
>>>> If it's a chip from fairway, they'll do better, but if they're 10
>>>> feet off the green, they likely need to carry the fringe, and again,
>>>> there you are.
>>>>
>>>> All you need do is watch them hit it, loosey-goosey in the wrists,
>>>> too long a backwswing, no acceleration through the shot, you name it.
>>>>
>>>> A 20 doesn't know that stuff, or if they know it, they sure aren't
>>>> doing it. They may think they are but not (I know that
>>>> characterizes how I viewed things back when).
>>>>
>>>> But when they learn that stuff, and employ it, they will no longer
>>>> be a 20.
>>>>
>>>> Mike
>>>>
>>>
>>> Mike,
>>>
>>> I have been following this conversation in my opinion you are over
>>> generalizing
>>
>>
>>
>> Never!
>>
>>> and confabulating two and maybe more, skills. Getting up and down in
>>> two from off the green requires a good set of executable shots, sound
>>> putting and the ability to read slopes.
>>
>>
>>
>> But isn't that the essence of the difference between a 20 handicap and
>> a single digit?
>>
>> I agree with what you've said, but I'd ask you this: Where is the
>> strength in a 20-handicapper's game?
>>
>> I'd venture to say there really isn't one.
>
>
> That is not the question or the point you raised. Your point was that a
> 20 is not likely to get up and down from 10' off.

So? Am I not allowed to write about things I want to write about?
Certainly the above is related.

>>>
>>> Here is a challenge:
>>>
>>> Ball on the back berm of the green, 3-4 paces off, down slope 25
>>> degrees 1.5 inch rough. Pin is 6 paces in, green runs away from the
>>> back with a 10 deg slope, stimp 8-9.
>>>
>>> Do you have that shot? What percentage will you make? Better that 25%?
>>
>>
>>
>> Actually, I do have this shot. We have a wonderful short-game
>> practice facility with a berm right next to it, on which I practice
>> clipping balls off the berm to a close pin.
>
>
> Congratulations. Seriously. It's a tough shot and few that I know,
> including a "pro" that I played with on Wednesday, can be any kind of
> reliable with it. My point was more about generalizing.

Here's something about generalizing: A lot of people assume that if you
can't say something occurs with 100 percent certainty, that you can't
say anything at all about it.

That's just absolute bushwah. Ask any poker player, for instance, about
pot odds.

>> How often do I make it (I presume you mean up and down)? I don't
>> know--I don't know the actual slope and speed of your green.
>>
>> Hard to evaluate these kinds of things in text. But that is a shot I
>> have.
>
>
> What does that mean?

It means that I really can't tell, from text, what kind of shot it is
that you're describing. A 10 percent grade? I don't know if that is
even possible on a green. Is it? Seems quite sloped to me. And
speedwise, I don't know what my greens stimp at (I couldn't tell you an
11 from an 8, for instance). All I know about them is that they're
considered, by guests who play here, some of the fastest in 100 miles.

So I can't tell you how often I can pull off this shot on your green.

>>> The amount of contour that the player has to deal with can make an
>>> awful lot of difference. Getting the ball inside the flag is only
>>> part of the problem. The same thing applies to the 50' putt. Making
>>> that requires three different putting skills, interpretation of the
>>> slope and breaks, lag putting / speed control and line selection.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sure, but that's part of what defines the difference between a 20 and
>> a single-digit.
>
>
>
> I play with a couple single digits that would be hard pressed to make
> 50's in two on some of the highly contoured greens that we have. But
> they are long and pretty good at the approach. So, no, that is not what
> defines the difference between a 20 and and single digit.

But yes it is. You're trying to tell me that a 20 has good
interpretation of "the slope and breaks, lag putting / speed control and
line selection."??

C'mon, man. I'd venture to guess that most 20s don't even know that
speed is more important than direction on long putts like that.

>>> With a 50' footer that is pretty straight forward most people who
>>> play off 25 or better should be able to get it to a reliably makeable
>>> distance for the second putt.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'd disagree on that.
>
>
> Why? It is a simple lag putt. Just takes a little practice to get it
> inside of 4'.

How many 20s are practicing like that? I never--never--see people with
above 18 handicaps practicing at our short game range. I
never--never--see them spending time on the putting green other than
right before a round.

In my experience, 20s don't practice these things (and in that, putting
before a round I don't consider practice).

I mean actually setting time aside to go to the short game facility and
hit a couple hundred chips and flops and shots off berms to close pins
and...you know what I'm talking about because I'm sure you do it.

Same with putting. I almost always end those sessions with time on the
putting green. I work on mechanics, consistent stroke, and correct aim.

And I do practice long putts, though what I practice is distance, not so
much direction. I'll putt fringe-to-fringe, both uphill and downhill,
trying to get a feel for what it takes to push a putt that far.

How many 20s do that? And I don't mean once, either. If they did stuff
like that, they wouldn't *be* 20s!

>>
>> > Throw in some contour and a player who
>>
>>> normally plays flat greens, and they may very well be in for a 3, 4
>>> or 5 putt.
>>>
>>
>> I agree.
>>
>>> Handicap index is reflective an individual's total game. While you
>>> can certainly make some statements about typical scores for various
>>> parts of the game, relative to handicap, it is not possible to make
>>> definitive statements as you have.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'm generalizing, and I'd think it fairly evident that the statements
>> are generalizations.
>
>
> Actually you were pretty specific.

It's the same thing. What good is a vague generalization?

> There may be an exception or two, but that
>
>> invalidates neither the logic nor the conclusion.
>>
>> Handicap index is reflective of a person's total game, sure.
>
>
> Define good short game.

Is above average on shots around the green.

> But show
>
>> me a 20-handicap player with a good short game. Show me three. Nah,
>> just show me one.
>
>
> Almost any retirement community will have a few old guys that are bogey
> plus but will eat your lunch around the green.

I'll bet they're not 20s. Bogey-plus? I just don't buy it.

>>>
>>> Regarding the challenge above, I can beat the 25% rate but just
>>> barely and that is because that is a fairly typical situation where I
>>> play.
>>
>>
>>
>> I practice that shot because A) there are 2 or 3 places on my course
>> where a miss can result in that shot for you, and B) it's an excellent
>> way to practice with my 60* wedge and learn to control it well.
>
>
> I know that you work at your game so I am not surprised. Personally,
> working on these shots beats hitting balls on the range, at least for
> enjoyment.

I agree. It's so easy to invent little games or challenges around the
short-game green. Throw balls in the rough, step on 'em, see if you can
get them out on the green someplace; chip off the berm; hit a 60* with
spin and without spin to the same pin. Lots of fun stuff to try, all of
which eventually shows up on the course.

>> But none of the above, Joe, seems to me to invalidate my basic
>> premise, which is that a 20-handicapper is not going to have the
>> skills to get up and down at anything approaching what you'd expect a
>> single digit handicap to do.
>
>
> The immediately above statement is not the same argument that a 20 can't
> get up and down from 10 off, 25% of the time.

No, but it's a defense of the argument, which originally was about what
a 20 handicapper would be more likely to do, get up and down from 10
feet off, or 2-putt from 50'.

> I do agree that the two
> will have different performance rates. Just for the sake of
> conversation, what up and down, from 10 off, percentage would you expect
> from, say, a 7 index?

I'd expect 40-50 percent, more of less, depending on how close the pin
is. I've had days with nearly flawless short games, getting up and down
100 percent of the time; other days not so hot. :)

Here's the difference between me and a 20: I have two chances to get up
and down, hitting the chip/pitch/flop stiff, and if not, making the
putt. That's how I look at such shots.

It's a tough question because it depends on so many variables, thickness
of the rough, how buried the ball is in the rough, etc. etc. Or if I'm
not in the rough but in the fairway, or it's closely mowed, or it's....

Mike

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
RSG-Wisconsin 2006 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/pics/
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 28 Aug 2006 23:49:21
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

On Mon, 28 Aug 2006 08:04:42 -0500, Mike Dalecki <mike@dalecki.net >
wrote:

>> Why? It is a simple lag putt. Just takes a little practice to get it
>> inside of 4'.
>
>How many 20s are practicing like that? I never--never--see people with
>above 18 handicaps practicing at our short game range. I
>never--never--see them spending time on the putting green other than
>right before a round.

I expect I shall continue to practice like that when I get that good.
Why not?

Date: 24 Aug 2006 06:02:19
From: Chris S
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

"pete z" <pz0326@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1156397450.134849.11350@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
>
> fiveiron@webtv.net wrote:
>> >>>
>> >mwo
>> >v fe
>>
>> > "d R i V e <idiot> L e $ s"
>
>
> You are full of crap. Unless you are in heavy rough, even a decent 20
> handicapper can
> get down in two from 10 ft. Not so from 50, i don't care if you are on
> the green or not.
>

Yes, Fivey is full of crap. However, each time we respond to it's babble,
we embolden it. Not the right tact to take at all.

Date: 23 Aug 2006 22:36:05
From:
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

>Is a GIR with a 50 foot putt better than being
>off the green 10 feet from the pin? >(Hopefully not in 6 inches of
rough!)
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
overall? yes.

>mho
>v fe

>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0"d R i V e =A0L e $ s"

Date: 23 Aug 2006 14:40:34
From: sfb
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

From the center of the green, the longest putts are more like 35 feet. A
typical green in the US is 30 yards by 30 yards or 90 feet by 90 feet. The
pin should be 10 feet in from the edges or within 35 feet from the center.

Playing to the center of the green is an excellent strategy for a double
digit handicap golfer.

"muk" <mukhp@NOSPAMhotmail.com > wrote in message
news:kd2pe2llolgu7mv1hfsajnjl84jii0n635@4ax.com...
>
> Is a GIR with a 50 foot putt better than being off the green 10 feet
> from the pin? (Hopefully not in 6 inches of rough!)

Date: 24 Aug 2006 10:12:39
From: oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Mike Dalecki wrote:
> pete z wrote:
[snip]
> I'd expect a 20-handicapper to get up and down from off the green, 10'
> away, maybe 25 percent of the time. The exception would be if the shot
> off the green were puttable, at which point I might bump the percentage
> up to 40 or 50 percent.
>
> How often will the same 20-handicapper 3-putt or more from 50 feet? I'd
> guess they'd do that at least 3 out of 4 times, which is the same,
> essentially, as getting up and down from 10 feet only 25 percent of the
> time.
>
> So I see no particular advantage to the 20 handicapper in missing the
> green closer. If you get down to someone who is high single digits,
> sure. But not a 20.
[snip]

Hmmmmm? There may be some subject drift here. The title of
the thread is "aiming at the center of the green". Accepting your
numbers for a moment, you're basically suggesting that roughly
where the guy ends up, he doesn't improve his chances. But the
issue here is, on the PREVIOUS shot, where should the guy aim.
You're talking about what happens with the next few strokes. If
a guy aims at the center of the green, he's going to statistically
end up in some pattern around the aim point. That distribution may
be fairly even. With that, is it better to aim at the pin and
be +/- some distance around the pin, regardless of whether it's
on the green or not, or should he aim for the center of the green
and possibly not be on the green, but all that further from the hole.
Your suggestion is that he will be as bad off 10 feet off the green
as he is 50 feet on the green. I guess it's important to know what
you think his dispersion will be. Are you suggesting it is better for
the guy to consistently aim for long putts, or to aim for a mix
of long putts and some off the green shots, but close to the hole.
Remember, if he is always aiming at the center of the green, he is
rarely going to be aiming at the pin. If he is aiming at the pin,
he might actually get close once and a bit.

Date: 24 Aug 2006 13:28:40
From: dsc
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

> Pete, I guess I don't understand this. "Decent 20 handicapper" is an
> oxymoron; there is no such animal (apologies to 20 handicappers; it's
> not personal).

I have a friend that I would call a pretty decent 20 handicapper. The
reason is, he's a pretty steady eddie whether he playe a couple times a
month or a couple times a week.
He's steady tee to green moreso than once he gets there. If his short
game/putting were better he could be a pretty decent 16 handicapper. :)

Date: 24 Aug 2006 12:38:28
From: Larry Bud
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

> Ok, I guess it's just a personal preference. I feel I can get up and
> down at least 9 out of 10 times from 10 feet.

How many 10 foot chips do you have? There aren't that many.

> I don't see the logic in a 5 handicap purposely hitting 2 or 3 clubs
> too much, because he wants to be in the center of the green.

Rarely would I use 2 or 3 more clubs. I mean, a 5 iron over an 8?
That's 30 yards. +/-1 club from center is most likely the decision.

Why do it? If a pin is in the front, and you slightly mishit, you'll
be close to the pin. If you hit it flush, you'll be in the center of
the green, or just past center.

If the pin is in back, and you underclub by 1, you'll be just past
center or in the front of the green. Granted, it may leave you a long
putt, but that's better than hitting it past the pin deep because
greens generally slope from back to front.

Date: 24 Aug 2006 12:10:27
From: pete z
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Mike Dalecki wrote:
> pete z wrote:
> > fiveiron@webtv.net wrote:
> >
> >>>Is a GIR with a 50 foot putt better than being
> >>>off the green 10 feet from the pin? >(Hopefully not in 6 inches of
> >>
> >>rough!)
> >>=======
> >>overall? yes.
> >>
> >>
> >>>mho
> >>>v fe
> >>
> >>> "d R i V e L e $ s"
> >
> >
> >
> > You are full of crap. Unless you are in heavy rough, even a decent 20
> > handicapper can
> > get down in two from 10 ft. Not so from 50, i don't care if you are on
> > the green or not.
> >
>
> Pete, I guess I don't understand this. "Decent 20 handicapper" is an
> oxymoron; there is no such animal (apologies to 20 handicappers; it's
> not personal).
>
> Such a player has significant holes in their game, including their short
> game. In fact, I've read in more than one place that a good way to play
> for a high handicapper is to ensure putts, not short-game shots, because
> they are going to be better, over time, putting than chipping/flopping/etc.
>
> A 20-handicapper doesn't, by definition, have a good short game. I
> can't imagine expecting a 20-handicapper to get up and down to a close
> pin from 10' away, unless the ball is puttable (at which point we're
> comparing what is essentially a 10' putt with a 50' putt.
>
> I'd expect a 20-handicapper to get up and down from off the green, 10'
> away, maybe 25 percent of the time. The exception would be if the shot
> off the green were puttable, at which point I might bump the percentage
> up to 40 or 50 percent.
>
> How often will the same 20-handicapper 3-putt or more from 50 feet? I'd
> guess they'd do that at least 3 out of 4 times, which is the same,
> essentially, as getting up and down from 10 feet only 25 percent of the
> time.
>
> So I see no particular advantage to the 20 handicapper in missing the
> green closer. If you get down to someone who is high single digits,
> sure. But not a 20.
>
> Mike
>
> PS: No offense to those of you who are a 20. You know what I'm saying,
> and it's not putting you down. It's pointing out reality.
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Mike Dalecki GCA Accredited Clubmaker http://clubdor.com
> RSG-Wisconsin 2006: June 23-25 Info: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/
> RSG-Wisconsin 2006 Pics: http://dalecki.net/rsgwis2006/pics/
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, I guess it's just a personal preference. I feel I can get up and
down at least 9 out of 10 times from 10 feet. I have no where near that
level of confidence with a 50 foot putt.
I don't see the logic in a 5 handicap purposely hitting 2 or 3 clubs
too much, because
he wants to be in the center of the green. You can aim to the center of
the green at the correct distance, usually leaving yourself no more
than a 20 to 30 foot putt. But I haven't been near a 5 handicap in 20
years, so what do I know?

Date: 24 Aug 2006 11:23:13
From: Larry Bud
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

> where the guy ends up, he doesn't improve his chances. But the
> issue here is, on the PREVIOUS shot, where should the guy aim.
> You're talking about what happens with the next few strokes. If
> a guy aims at the center of the green, he's going to statistically
> end up in some pattern around the aim point. That distribution may
> be fairly even. With that, is it better to aim at the pin and
> be +/- some distance around the pin, regardless of whether it's
> on the green or not, or should he aim for the center of the green
> and possibly not be on the green, but all that further from the hole.
> Your suggestion is that he will be as bad off 10 feet off the green
> as he is 50 feet on the green. I guess it's important to know what
> you think his dispersion will be.

Right. A guy that's aiming at the flag isn't always going to miss it
just 10 feet off the green. Take these two examples I drew up

http://www.areddy.net/misc/aiming1.gif
http://www.areddy.net/misc/aiming2.gif

A little explanation: The shot pattern I adopted was from the Pelz
short game bible, in which he demonstrates that with longer irons, the
misses are mostly directional. The pattern here is for a right handed
player. Pelz calls this the "bra effect". Note that the grouping on
the right as a whole is shorter than the left, because fades go shorter
than draw. The pattern he developed is from actual shots that he
plotted. Granted, these are patterns for pros, but it's the only
imperical data I have.

So in the two drawings, the one pattern is in the dead center of the
green, and the other is in the back right or front right.

So you'll note that on the shortsided portion when going for the pin,
just off the green (10' from the pin, for example) is a small
percentage of where the shots end up. Many of the shots are much
farther off the green on the short side, which I believe is really what
the discussion boils down to.

Date: 25 Aug 2006 15:52:11
From: dsc
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

> But isn't that the essence of the difference between a 20 handicap and a
> single digit?

>
> I agree with what you've said, but I'd ask you this: Where is the
> strength in a 20-handicapper's game?
>
> I'd venture to say there really isn't one.

Many 20 handicappers do something pretty well... but that one thing
just can't overcome all the other weakness they have and tthe mistakes
they make because of them.

Date: 25 Aug 2006 13:22:04
From: dsc
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Date: 25 Aug 2006 13:17:21
From: dsc
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

long&left wrote:
> Mike Dalecki wrote:
> (snip)
> >
> > Now I'm a 7 again. Decent? No--just a 7.
> >
> > Mike
> >
>
> my point exactly, hence the ;-P You can't qualify a handicap with an
> adjective IMO
>

Sure...... you can... you can be a steady 7 (shoots basically the same
score every time out within a couple stokes) and you can be a wild 7
that goes LOW one day and HIGH the next. You can throw an adjective on
nearly anything. :) Of the two I pick the steady one as being more
decent... :)

Date: 25 Aug 2006 14:59:25
From: long&left
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

dsc wrote:
> long&left wrote:
>
>>Mike Dalecki wrote:
>>(snip)
>>
>>>Now I'm a 7 again. Decent? No--just a 7.
>>>
>>>Mike
>>>
>>
>>my point exactly, hence the ;-P You can't qualify a handicap with an
>>adjective IMO
>>
>
>
> Sure...... you can... you can be a steady 7 (shoots basically the same
> score every time out within a couple stokes) and you can be a wild 7
> that goes LOW one day and HIGH the next. You can throw an adjective on
> nearly anything. :) Of the two I pick the steady one as being more
> decent... :)
>

you're absolutely correct!

Date: 23 Aug 2006 08:46:42
From: Tex
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Date: 23 Aug 2006 07:07:05
From: dsc
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Date: 23 Aug 2006 22:30:28
From:
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

>However,
>the contention is that it's better to have a 50
>footer than to short side yourself.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
at 50', your no one priority is distance.

>mho
>v fe

>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0"d R i V e =A0L e $ s"

Date: 23 Aug 2006 19:12:52
From: dsc
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Larry Bud wrote:
> pete z wrote:
> > muk wrote:
> > > On 23 Aug 2006 06:38:41 -0700, "Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com> :
> > >
> > > >I average 50% girs. Last night on my league it was pretty windy, and I
> > > >decided to run a little test, just try to hit the ball in the dead
> > > >center of the green, both distance and direction instead of flag
> > > >hunting
> > > >
> > > >I hit 7/9 girs. I missed one par 3 that was a crazy right to left wind
> > > >to the left, and another on the fringe that was long (apparent
> > > >misclub).
> > > >
> > > >I had 1 birdie, 6 pars, 2 bogies. I didn't get up/down on either
> > > >missed green. Ok, I lied, the birdie putt I didn't hit to the center,
> > > >but short since the pin was on a lower tier and it's dead if you go
> > > >above it.
> > > >
> > > >While I had no 3 putts, I had left myself with some monsterous putts.
> > > >I had 3 of them over 30 feet, and one was probably 50 feet. However,
> > > >the contention is that it's better to have a 50 footer than to
> > > >shortside yourself.
> > >
> > > Is a GIR with a 50 foot putt better than being off the green 10 feet
> > > from the pin? (Hopefully not in 6 inches of rough!)
> >
> >
> > I'll take the 10 ft. shot anytime, even in 6" of rough. How far are you
> > going to miss
> > from 10 ft.? not more than 10 ft. unless you are straight downhill.
> > Pros 3-jerk from 50
>
> What % of 10 footers do you think you make?
>
> Do you think you'll miss the 50 footer by 10 feet? Time to hit the
> putting green!

As a rule run of the mill golfers will 3 putt from 50 feet more often
than they will 2 putt...
I'd rather be closer in most cases.

Next question, if you are 50 feet from the hole and a couple feet off
the green on the fringe...
putt it or chip it? I seem to have better luck chipping for some
reason?

Date: 23 Aug 2006 23:27:15
From: Colin Wilson
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Larry Bud wrote:
> I average 50% girs. Last night on my league it was pretty windy, and I
> decided to run a little test, just try to hit the ball in the dead
> center of the green, both distance and direction instead of flag
> hunting
>
> I hit 7/9 girs. I missed one par 3 that was a crazy right to left wind
> to the left, and another on the fringe that was long (apparent
> misclub).
>
> I had 1 birdie, 6 pars, 2 bogies. I didn't get up/down on either
> missed green. Ok, I lied, the birdie putt I didn't hit to the center,
> but short since the pin was on a lower tier and it's dead if you go
> above it.
>
> While I had no 3 putts, I had left myself with some monsterous putts.
> I had 3 of them over 30 feet, and one was probably 50 feet. However,
> the contention is that it's better to have a 50 footer than to
> shortside yourself.

I would say you can't go wrong aiming for the middle of the green
direction wise. Given a 25 metre wide green with the flag at least three
metres in, at worst you'll have about a 10 metre putt.

The problem might be aiming for the middle of the green distance wise.
On sloping greens where the pin is towards the front, the last place you
want to be is above the hole with a downhill putt on a fast green. You
might be better off taking one club less than would get you to the green
centre.

Of course the other problem is a green with a steep, closely mown front
fringe and not making the distance!

--
Cheers
Colin Wilson
------------------------------------------------------------------
Trentham Golf Club: http://www.trenthamgolf.com
Barnbougle Dunes: http://publishing.kyneton.net.au/barnbougle
------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: 23 Aug 2006 16:20:45
From: Larry Bud
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

pete z wrote:
> muk wrote:
> > On 23 Aug 2006 06:38:41 -0700, "Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com> :
> >
> > >I average 50% girs. Last night on my league it was pretty windy, and I
> > >decided to run a little test, just try to hit the ball in the dead
> > >center of the green, both distance and direction instead of flag
> > >hunting
> > >
> > >I hit 7/9 girs. I missed one par 3 that was a crazy right to left wind
> > >to the left, and another on the fringe that was long (apparent
> > >misclub).
> > >
> > >I had 1 birdie, 6 pars, 2 bogies. I didn't get up/down on either
> > >missed green. Ok, I lied, the birdie putt I didn't hit to the center,
> > >but short since the pin was on a lower tier and it's dead if you go
> > >above it.
> > >
> > >While I had no 3 putts, I had left myself with some monsterous putts.
> > >I had 3 of them over 30 feet, and one was probably 50 feet. However,
> > >the contention is that it's better to have a 50 footer than to
> > >shortside yourself.
> >
> > Is a GIR with a 50 foot putt better than being off the green 10 feet
> > from the pin? (Hopefully not in 6 inches of rough!)
>
>
> I'll take the 10 ft. shot anytime, even in 6" of rough. How far are you
> going to miss
> from 10 ft.? not more than 10 ft. unless you are straight downhill.
> Pros 3-jerk from 50

What % of 10 footers do you think you make?

Do you think you'll miss the 50 footer by 10 feet? Time to hit the
putting green!

Date: 23 Aug 2006 16:17:06
From: pete z
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

Date: 23 Aug 2006 12:21:57
From: Rude Dog
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

"Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com > wrote in message
news:1156340321.209788.219380@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
>I average 50% girs. Last night on my league it was pretty windy, and I
> decided to run a little test, just try to hit the ball in the dead
> center of the green, both distance and direction instead of flag
> hunting
>
> I hit 7/9 girs. I missed one par 3 that was a crazy right to left wind
> to the left, and another on the fringe that was long (apparent
> misclub).
>
> I had 1 birdie, 6 pars, 2 bogies. I didn't get up/down on either
> missed green. Ok, I lied, the birdie putt I didn't hit to the center,
> but short since the pin was on a lower tier and it's dead if you go
> above it.
>
> While I had no 3 putts, I had left myself with some monsterous putts.
> I had 3 of them over 30 feet, and one was probably 50 feet. However,
> the contention is that it's better to have a 50 footer than to
> shortside yourself.
>

I've tried that strategy before, but I couldn't keep it up. That damn pin
beckoned to me.

Date: 23 Aug 2006 11:43:19
From: Larry Bud
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

sfb wrote:
> From the center of the green, the longest putts are more like 35 feet. A
> typical green in the US is 30 yards by 30 yards or 90 feet by 90 feet. The
> pin should be 10 feet in from the edges or within 35 feet from the center.
>
> Playing to the center of the green is an excellent strategy for a double
> digit handicap golfer.

I'm currently a 5, we'll see how it work out in the long run.

Date: 23 Aug 2006 11:23:07
From: oconnell@slr.orl.lmco.com
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

muk wrote:
> On 23 Aug 2006 06:38:41 -0700, "Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com> :
>
> >I average 50% girs. Last night on my league it was pretty windy, and I
> >decided to run a little test, just try to hit the ball in the dead
> >center of the green, both distance and direction instead of flag
> >hunting
> >
> >I hit 7/9 girs. I missed one par 3 that was a crazy right to left wind
> >to the left, and another on the fringe that was long (apparent
> >misclub).
> >
> >I had 1 birdie, 6 pars, 2 bogies. I didn't get up/down on either
> >missed green. Ok, I lied, the birdie putt I didn't hit to the center,
> >but short since the pin was on a lower tier and it's dead if you go
> >above it.
> >
> >While I had no 3 putts, I had left myself with some monsterous putts.
> >I had 3 of them over 30 feet, and one was probably 50 feet. However,
> >the contention is that it's better to have a 50 footer than to
> >shortside yourself.
>
> Is a GIR with a 50 foot putt better than being off the green 10 feet
> from the pin? (Hopefully not in 6 inches of rough!)

That's the thing about local knowledge. It can be better to be
10 feet short of a pin, off of a green, on a false front or other
closely mown area, than to be 50 feet long yet still on the green.
Alternately it can be better to be 50 feet long, but on the same flat
part of a large green, than to be 10 feet short, but putting down
hill, over a cross ridge. We have a par 3 around here that has
a large green with 3 levels. I'd rather be long, 10 feet off the green

for a pin on the back level, than on the green but 50 feet below
the hole needing to putt up to the third level. The par 4 2 at
Metro West has 3 levels and the drop from the middle to the
lower can suck your putt right off the green. I'd rather be short
there
than long for a pin on the lowest level. Alternately, when the hole
is up and back, I wanna be past all the traps and on level with
the hole than anywhere on the green but well below. Well,
except when they grow the rough for the local qualifier. Then I
just wanna be at Stoneybrook East.

Date: 24 Aug 2006 05:27:37
From: Larry Bud
Subject: Re: Aiming at the center of the green

dsc wrote:
> Larry Bud wrote:
> > pete z wrote:
> > > muk wrote:
> > > > On 23 Aug 2006 06:38:41 -0700, "Larry Bud" <larrybud2002@yahoo.com> :
> > > >
> > > > >I average 50% girs. Last night on my league it was pretty windy, and I
> > > > >decided to run a little test, just try to hit the ball in the dead
> > > > >center of the green, both distance and direction instead of flag
> > > > >hunting
> > > > >
> > > > >I hit 7/9 girs. I missed one par 3 that was a crazy right to left wind
> > > > >to the left, and another on the fringe that was long (apparent
> > > > >misclub).
> > > > >
> > > > >I had 1 birdie, 6 pars, 2 bogies. I didn't get up/down on either
> > > > >missed green. Ok, I lied, the birdie putt I didn't hit to the center,
> > > > >but short since the pin was on a lower tier and it's dead if you go
> > > > >above it.
> > > > >
> > > > >While I had no 3 putts, I had left myself with some monsterous putts.
> > > > >I had 3 of them over 30 feet, and one was probably 50 feet. However,
> > > > >the contention is that it's better to have a 50 footer than to
> > > > >shortside yourself.
> > > >
> > > > Is a GIR with a 50 foot putt better than being off the green 10 feet
> > > > from the pin? (Hopefully not in 6 inches of rough!)
> > >
> > >
> > > I'll take the 10 ft. shot anytime, even in 6" of rough. How far are you
> > > going to miss
> > > from 10 ft.? not more than 10 ft. unless you are straight downhill.
> > > Pros 3-jerk from 50
> >
> > What % of 10 footers do you think you make?
> >
> > Do you think you'll miss the 50 footer by 10 feet? Time to hit the
> > putting green!
>
> As a rule run of the mill golfers will 3 putt from 50 feet more often
> than they will 2 putt...
> I'd rather be closer in most cases.

In this context, that's not the right question to ask. The question to
ask is, will you get down in 2 more often from 50' on the green, or
shortsided 10 or 20 feet away? I think the answer is absolutely yes.
If the answer was no, you would aim at the flag for every approach
shot.

> Next question, if you are 50 feet from the hole and a couple feet off
> the green on the fringe...
> putt it or chip it? I seem to have better luck chipping for some
> reason?

Assuming the fringe is in decent shape, putt. The lower you can keep
the ball, the more it will stay on your intended line. Pelz proved
this with objective testing.