I'm right there with ya Trig. I always thought they needed to change that saying to "Drive for dough, Putt for dough". I've seen plenty of guys who could scramble like heck and keep their score in the satisfactory range by putting well, but it's hard to take it deep if you don't give yourself reasonable birdie chances by hitting fairways and greens. (Of course there's nothing worse than getting beat by one of those guys when you're hitting 13 fairways, 15 greens and then putting it 36 times or so!)
I really think it depends upon the level you are playing at.
My accuracy off the tee is normally very good, if I miss a fairway we are talking about inches and feet normally. Problem is once the course distance goes past a certain length or it has all par 4's of 420 plus, then my scoring hurts. I am not a long hitter. The full swing for the second shots are critical if I am going to score well, else I am going to be scrambling all day for pars with no opportunities for any birdies.
It IMO is really a balance and it is dependent upon the golfer skills, physical capabilities and mental abilities.
I think the real answer lies on the score card. If you are carding anything more than a bogey, I beleive you need to rethink your choices. If everytime you miss a fairway and have to chip out, then I believe you need to rethink your choices. Long and lost or Long and a penalty stroke doesn't make for low scores.
Statistically speaking, the ONLY factor that determines your place on the money list is how well you scramble. BUT, as others have said "long and wrong" don't ring the gong. I think accuracy off the tee is probably more important than raw distance. But, if you are a shorter hitter, you had better have a very accurate fairway game with the longer clubs. Paul Runyon (Little Poison) springs to mind.
Statistically speaking, the ONLY factor that determines your place on the money list is how well you scramble. BUT, as others have said "long and wrong" don't ring the gong. I think accuracy off the tee is probably more important than raw distance. But, if you are a shorter hitter, you had better have a very accurate fairway game with the longer clubs. Paul Runyon (Little Poison) springs to mind.
Merry xmas,
Fred
That is true for Tour Professionals. For the average guy, short game is a way to easily improve. BUT, short game is useless for any competitive golf if you are hitting 3 from the tee a lot.
Even Pelz admitted there are ball striking minimums. He said that the tour guys average 7% error on full shots. The best players were lower and there were players that were higher. IIRC 10% error on full shots was the minimum for "tour" performance. If you couldn't manage 10% error on full shots, you weren't going to be on tour to have your scrambling measured.
The scrambling correalation isn't exactly true for the current top 5 money winners.
1. Tiger 1st in GIR, 10th scrambling
2.Furyk 5th in GIR, 4th scrambling
3. Mickelson 14th in GIR, 128th in scrambling
4. Ogilvie 144th in GIR, 50th in scrambling
5.Vijay 26th in GIR, 45th in scrambling
Looking at Tiger and Furyk, I think the GIR and Scrambling are linked. They aren't missing many greens, and I would bet that when they do, it isn't by much, leaving easier shortgame shots.
Hybrid Mode
