quote:
Important but not as much as the tee to green game. The math has been done.
The math has also been done on the "should i lay up to 100 or hit it to 50?" Getting the ball closer results in lower scores. You may feel more comfortable with the 100 yard shot, and in the grand scheme of evaluating shots, may hit higher quality shots from 100. But by hook or crook, the 50 yard shots end up closer to the hole more often and lead to lower scores.
Well Hell.... That settles it. Then from now on, I will not lay up to 100 yds...instead, I will always try to get as close to the green, forget that troubles are mostly near the green but who cares. 250 yards out... I'm swinging my 3W over the trees, hazard areas, bunkers, creeks, rivers, lakes and ponds. And no consideration should be given that I can hit 150 yards more accurately than 250 yards.
If math is important, then let's not forget that probability is math too.
Why don't Pros always go for the green on short par 4s?
Why did Jack throttle back on drives and use 3W?
If you say score from 40 yards is better than 100 yards, then have they looked at the score from 300 yards out using 2 different approaches? Say... someone laying up to 100 yards using 3 iron vs. swinging out of shoes using 3W trying to get within 50 yards? Which method yields a lower scoring average? I haven't read the stats you're using. But if the data only looks at that perfectly placed shot that's 50 yards away from the pin vs. 100 yards, then they need to also look at the shot before it.
Using your logic, on a 300 yard par 4, everyone should strive to drive the green. But we don't. Because there are trouble everywhere near the green. I'm better off scaling back to 3 iron 200 yards then 3W or Driver into trouble.
Playing golf is more than just simple math.