Best golfer here?

First topic message reminder :

Following on from the Handicap thread, who is the best/lowest handicapper currently contributing to the golf board?

Of course there were a few tasty golfers on the old 606- Rory Mac and Lee Westwood undoubtedly top of the pile.

Think super is the lowest I've seen, 2 if I remember correctly. Anyone lower than this?

Very true Davie, I wonder how many players have ever measured the distance they hit their clubs? I certainly only know a couple who have, I doubt they notice the difference in winter either. So most GPS and Lasers are a waste of time.

Most people have a number in mind that they expect to hit a club. For some reason, 150 yards with a 7 iron, seems to be the expected norm. I wonder how many can.

That's an example I had in mind too super - and I'm sure quite a few of them can - but the wannabees can perhaps do that off a tee, down a fairway .. but but a bunker in front of them and it will end there every time. There are many I know who DO carry the 7 iron to 150 and get plenty of stop in it - but the braggards who think they can do it are actually carrying it only somewhere between 135 and 145

This "tapper" can maybe work on a 6 iron as a starting point for 160 ... but put ANYTHING in the way and I'll always go bigger and either hope it stops, or have a longer putt from the back of the green that try to save from the sand in front

Yup, There's also the question of how consistently they can hit an iron a consistent length.
How many times out of 10 will they hit a 7, 150 yards for instance. If it's low, might be an idea to take a club more so that even if it's hit badly, it doesn't risk the bunker, but even hit well, doesn't fly the green.

Do people consider the depth of the green? How many clubs does it span?

Course management is so obvious, but people barely use it.

It might not lower my handicap any further, but it certainly helps me to maintain it.

I actually think my course management is pretty good for a high handicapper! I dread to think what I'd be playing off if my management was as bad as some of my friends!

Davie, The only thing I would say, and obviously doesn't apply to water!, is that chipping or pitching from in front of the green is usually, I'd say at least 80% of the time, far easier than from behind the green, which is often jail.

Agree with that Kwini - I was talking about shots with trouble short of the green though

It is true davie, you get guys who see the pro's hit it 150 with an 8 iron and then do likewise next time they are on a 150 par three. From which point they then think, and tell others, that they use an 8 iron from 150, forgetting to mention they did use an 8 from 150 but it was duffed 20 yards right and 30 yards short of the green.

McLaren wrote:It is true davie, you get guys who see the pro's hit it 150 with an 8 iron and then do likewise next time they are on a 150 par three.  From which point they then think, and tell others, that they use an 8 iron from 150, forgetting to mention they did use an 8 from 150 but it was duffed 20 yards right and 30 yards short of the green.

Exactly Mac, they also don't take into account a pro's club might be angled more strongly, the temperature, humidity, altitude etc that the pro's play in. Completely different to the muni down the road in sea-level Britiain.

At the risk of people thinking I fall into the category described above, I know I can carry an 8 iron in still conditions 150-155 yards. I have no idea how far it might roll thereafter as I tend to be trying to hit irons, particularly shorter irons like that, directly onto the green and I do tend to get a fair bit of spin so it's more likely to finish up shorter than its carry distance than longer, particularly at this time of year. I think the skill is not in knowing how far you hit it in ideal conditions but more in knowing how the conditions for a particular shot will impact on the carry you'll achieve on that shot at that time. I watched a lot of the recent matchplay tournament from the London Club, and it was remarkable how often a player would hit the same club on different holes from vastly different distances. I'm afraid I can't remember specifics but I believe Illonen hit 8 on approaches from 140 something and 190 yards. The player who hits 7 iron into the bunker short may not be kidding himself so much as not taking wind, air temperature and slope into account properly.

navyblueshorts wrote:

raycastleunited wrote:The most annoying thing I do is when I play safe, eg hit 4 iron off the tee instead of driver because there is trouble all the way down the right side...... and then still shank it into the trouble.

Might as well have hit driver

Nothing personal ray but I've always been surprised by this....why do people think it's easier to hit a long (4 in this case) iron easily? Long irons are notoriously some of the hardest to strike both well and keep straight - for good reason. With modern shafts (i.e. longer than in the past) it's even harder to pure a genuine long iron straight down the middle w/o a cut or hook. Yup, should have hit driver with all the modern tech they have going for them.
It's similar logic that gets someone saying "Dunno what was up with me today! Was in the rough a few times and couldn't hit my hybrid from that lie for toffee!". Well...duh! It's called the rough for a reason!

I find it much easier to hit a 4 iron than driver. Maybe it's because my downswing can get a bit steep, and so the descending strike is much more suited to irons. On the tee, I do tend to find it easier to hit driver than fairway woods.

For the record, my 4 iron is c.185 yards carry (in summer). It's currently the longest iron in my bag, although I also have a 3 iron. This doesn't fly any further in the air than the 4 iron, but has a much flatter trajectory so rolls out 20-30 yards which is quite useful for links conditions.

McLaren wrote:It is true davie, you get guys who see the pro's hit it 150 with an 8 iron and then do likewise next time they are on a 150 par three.  From which point they then think, and tell others, that they use an 8 iron from 150, forgetting to mention they did use an 8 from 150 but it was duffed 20 yards right and 30 yards short of the green.

Except I hit it 150 with an 8 iron. The pro's will be hitting a wedge from 150, the likes of Rory, Tiger etc hit an 8 iron around 180 yards.

(in calm warm conditions)

hend085 wrote:i know at least 2 Cat 1 players who are probably about 160 carry or less with a 4i.

Yes. Category 1 at the local pitch and putt.

I played Prince's last weekend (1 Nov). These guys wouldn't even be able to reach the fairways from the white tees into the wind. Probably a dozen holes where they wouldn't be physically capable of reaching the green in regulation. Even with an outstanding short game, that's not "real cat 1 golf" is it?

raycastleunited wrote:

hend085 wrote:i know at least 2 Cat 1 players who are probably about 160 carry or less with a 4i.

Yes. Category 1 at the local pitch and putt.

I played Prince's last weekend (1 Nov). These guys wouldn't even be able to reach the fairways from the white tees into the wind. Probably a dozen holes where they wouldn't be physically capable of reaching the green in regulation. Even with an outstanding short game, that's not "real cat 1 golf" is it?

I genuinely thought i was on my own.........

Am catching up on my posting  

MPB has taken a bit of a battering, but I do understand the point he is trying to make.

For example, the par 3's at my course are:
200 - usually a hybrid for me
140 - 9 iron
185 (over a lake) - 4
175 (uphill) - 5

If you're struggling to carry 160 with a 4 iron, you're probably going to have to hit driver on three of those par 3s, which means making par is going to be difficult. And these are SI 15-18. And it's not some modern super long course built for pro's. Just can't see how such short hitters can maintain cat 1 status unless it's on some mickey mouse course.

Davie wrote:Getting a few remarks on here now about "internet length". That's something that get to me and I see it with non-internet friends at my club

I wonder how many people really *carry* the ball as far as they claim?

I've SEEN it with my own eyes with friends at my club. Talking about clubs to use on particular par 3s - especially ones with bunkers or water at the front of the green.

My regular playing partner is also not terribly long (he's older than me too) - but perhaps one club longer than me. I'm hitting the easy 5 in and he puts his 7 in the front trap. Who is right?

You should tell Al to get himself a new set of them new fangled TM* irons, guaranteed to go further than his old set, that way he can hit a 7 iron over that trap.  Thing is, his new 7 iron would be the same as his old 6 iron which he perhaps should be using...


* Other new fangled irons available. Grumps in no way endorses or disparages TM irons or any other new fangled iron that promises extra distance

Well, I decided to take a slightly more aggressive approach to the weekends golf, resulting in 3 birdies and an eagle in round one, but sadly 2 doubles for a +2 round on a nails course , then yesterday 4 birdies, albeit on a far easier course for a -2.
Jury's out. I would have gone for the eagle green in two anyway, and one of the birdies was due to a conservative strategy.
One of the doubles was certainly due being too greedy with driver.

I think there's room for more aggressive tactics, but got to be sensible when to take it on.

navyblueshorts wrote:

Roller_Coaster wrote:Guys I play with have just ditched their hybrids and both opted to carry the Titleist 712u "hybrid" iron to get a lower ball flight. Seems to work for them but the repeat consistency of a normal (have we been using them long enough again to consider them normal, I suppose so) hybrid for me does make them a better option.

Wonder if I'm now just being stubborn continuing to carry a 4 iron...

Although akin to super's point, I hit a "career" 4 iron from 200 to 2 foot in the summer and that was a magnificent feeling (let's ignore the fact that that was but 1 amazing shot amid the more regular lesser efforts for now eh?)

The guys that want to "hit it lower"...they're all high club speed bombers and low handicaps? Why would anyone "want to hit it lower", unless playing in a gale on links?? Do they know that, in actual fact, hitting a modern trajectory with the driver (i.e. up-angle attack, low spin, high dynamic loft etc), even into a stiff breeze, is longer than trying to hit it "under the wind"? Do they get great backspin with their 712u utility irons to stop the ball on the green as a hybrid, amazingly, seems to be able to do?
Or, are they simply buying the latest, greatest thing simply to say "Look at me!"?

Edit: I have no problem at all hitting the ball low(ish) if I want with the hybrids I carry. Maybe not as low as I could conjure with the corresponding iron but how often do I want to hit a low bullet with a long iron cf. hitting a nice, long, towering hybrid which holds on the green, having carried that front trap? Not often...!

Sorry - will now be out of kilter with the other posts, but hey ho!

The guys that want to hit it lower simply want to hit it lower with one of the clubs in their bag, usually off the tee for position. They have professed to being more confident over irons than hybrids. They are fairly low handicaps that hit it quite long and consistently (3 & 6 h/cap). We do play on a windy course. Neither of them are what I would describe as "look at me" flash players (sorry, you'll just have to take my word for that as I know them).

I'm not here to defend their club choice, or debate merits of ball flight. It's simply that they want to have these irons over clubs they don't like. As someone who actually sees them play every week I happen to think they hit them better and more consistently than the hybrids they used to carry (sounds odd, I appreciate). They certainly think so otherwise they'd switch back as they aren't stupid people. I don't think these iron things would improve my game, and you seem to prefer hybrids too. They don't.

I understand what Roller is saying here.

I'm sure Titleist wouldn't have spent time and money developing a lower trajectory utility iron if there wasn't a market for it. Mizuno have a line of "driving irons"  as well, not sure if the objective of these clubs is lower ball flight, but rather more workability than a hybrid. Fairway woods these days are as large as drivers used to be, and modern hybrids are as large as old fairway woods, so there is a gap in the market.

I remember a few years ago taylormade had a set of irons called RAC LT (low trajectory). They also had HT which was more of a game improvement club.

Why would you ever want a lower ball flight?

raycastleunited wrote:Yes. Category 1 at the local pitch and putt...

Sorry but Cat 1 is Cat1. SSS/CSS should take care of the differences in the courses.

raycastleunited wrote:...If you're struggling to carry 160 with a 4 iron...

Love the way what's been posted before get's altered. It was 170 as I recall, it wasn't mentioned that it was a "struggle" and that's carry.

McLaren wrote:Why would you ever want a lower ball flight?

Mac, I can't believe you are serious, and you claim to love links golf. Ever heard of "wind"?

super_realist wrote:

McLaren wrote:Why would you ever want a lower ball flight?

Mac, I can't believe you are serious, and you claim to love links golf. Ever heard of "wind"?

The point I was trying to make to Roller was that most of the time, we aren't playing in a howling gale and therefore most of the time we don't need to hit a low chaser with a long iron. Most of the time, it's almost certainly more useful to be able to hit it higher with a hybrid.
I get the point re. aesthetics at address and therefore confidence though - I still prefer the look of the long irons I no longer have in my bag but the hybrids are so easy to hit well in comparison, they'll have to stay.

raycastleunited wrote:I understand what Roller is saying here.

I'm sure Titleist wouldn't have spent time and money developing a lower trajectory utility iron if there wasn't a market for it. Mizuno have a line of "driving irons"  as well, not sure if the objective of these clubs is lower ball flight, but rather more workability than a hybrid. Fairway woods these days are as large as drivers used to be, and modern hybrids are as large as old fairway woods, so there is a gap in the market.

I remember a few years ago taylormade had a set of irons called RAC LT (low trajectory). They also had HT which was more of a game improvement club.

I get it too and I used to use the MP-FliHi utilities of Mizuno. They're harder to hit than they'd have you believe though. As for 'workability', pros don't spend their time (Bubba maybe excepted) hitting slashing cuts and raking draws just for the fun of it - they hit their stock shot almost all of the time. I'm not sure why amateurs believe they need more 'workability'? In any case, many of the hybrids are perfectly workable.

Super

Roller was in no way suggesting these guys were playing long chip and runs from 150 out over the links ground. If you take the aerial route in the wind, then as navy points out, a normal high'ish ball flight is the way to go.

McLaren wrote:Why would you ever want a lower ball flight?

As well as wind, a lower ball flight minimises the influence of the coriolis effect on ball flight

What I mean Mac is that I often require the use of a low, boring flight which keeps beneath the wind a bit.
A high ball can get knocked down in wind.

super_realist wrote:What I mean Mac is that I often require the use of a low, boring flight which keeps beneath the wind a bit.
A high ball can get knocked down in wind.

Is there any evidence that it is even possible to keep "below the wind"?

inco

But what about the coanda effect?

I hit a knock down 8 iron on Saturday which kept the ball below the tree line and so out of the strongest of the breeze. What do you suggest I should have done instead, Mac? (it finished 8 feet from the flag)

McLaren wrote:

super_realist wrote:What I mean Mac is that I often require the use of a low, boring flight which keeps beneath the wind a bit.
A high ball can get knocked down in wind.

Is there any evidence that it is even possible to keep "below the wind"?

Just a turn of phrase Mac, I'm talking about hitting low shots which are affected less by the wind, i.e. Darren Clarke en route to winning the open.

What is it about golfers that means challenging the conventional wisdom is so offensive?

Smithers, what a nice anecdote, but where is the evidence that shows hitting it lower in the wind is better than all the possible alternatives?

Super, again where is the evidence that lower = more successful in the wind?

Mac, why do you think a ball is affected more by wind when it emerges from below trees?

I presume if you were flying a flag at Edinburgh Castle you would attach the flag to the bottom of the flagpole and expect it to be affected by the wind as much as if it were on top?

Super

But what difference does the wind make to the flag if it is 10m, 15m or 20m above the ground?

So over the range of possible ball flights, is it actually the case that those at the lower end are less effected by the wind?

It is possible that over the range of max altitudes a golf shot will attain that the wind effect is almost constant.

Dr. Lex Bertrand has conducted research into how wind affects the golf ball. Here is a summary of his findings:

- The higher you hit the golf ball the more wind will affect the flight.

- Wind gusts making it difficult to really predict the wind.

- Wind has a much greater affect on the golf ball when hitting into it than with it.

- Spin rate at impact and launch of the golf ball have a major affect on distance into the wind, more so than downwind.

- In the Northern hemisphere wind at ground level coming at you in the face will actually be coming more from your right the higher you go, due to drag and shear from the land. The opposite is true in the Southern hemisphere. For instance in America at 60 to 80 feet off the ground the wind can be 30-40 degrees more from the right and double the strength you feel on your face.

- There will be more wind in front of the direction a cloud is traveling and less wind once the cloud has passed.

- Rain clouds will have maximum effect on wind strength and direction.

Mac, I think you are just being willfully contrary here to fish for responses.

Lets say I dropped a ball from a crane at 100 yards (to represent the top of the ball flight parabola where energy begins to drop off.) and measured where it landed, now, if I do the same from 25 yards to represent a lower shot, which do you think will be most affected by a wind?

Have you never climbed a hill and the wind speed is lower at the bottom than at the top? Does the top deck of your bus not get buffetted more than the bottom deck?

Wind is not uniform at all heights as I'm sure you know, trees, bushes, hills, mounds, etc all help to shelter from wind in lee of the obstacle.
If it weren't for wind speed at different heights and the effect of obstacles on it, we wouldn't have links golf courses.

Super

No, i have never climbed a hill. I am neither religious or lack things to do in my spare time.

To your physics questions, I am not even going to speculate as it is many years since I last did physics.

Why would you want a lower ball flight - if you aren't happy with the ball flight of your current club(s).

Why an iron over a hybrid - because you prefer it (I don't, they do in this example)

Can you keep it below the wind - to a certain extent yes (the pro's that are used to US target golf change their game for the Open, at least the successful ones do for when it's windy)

Is the wind different at different altitudes - yes, even in the range a golf ball peaks at (anecdotally - watch a hot air ballon pilot spit over the side to ascertain where the wind is at different heights, even when low to the ground)

Would I have a long iron vs my hybrid - no, I'm better with a hybrid and I personally prefer the relative lack of roll a steeper descent gives removing the inconsistency of bounces on fairways and tightening up (length) dispersion.

McLaren wrote:Super

No, i have never climbed a hill.  I am neither religious or lack things to do in my spare time.

To your physics questions, I am not even going to speculate as it is many years since I last did physics.

I'm not sure whether to take you seriously or not. Sometimes you appear to be moderately intelligent, at others, you appear to be a complete buffoon.

You don't need to have an understanding of physics, you simply have to have been alive and experienced weather to be able to notice how wind differs at different heights.

I find it hard to believe you don't know much about cross-winds, wind in the face,, hitting a ball downwind, having a ball almost come back at you etc

You play at Braid Hills for goodness sake, that must be one of the windiest places in Edinburgh. I would think you have a perfectly developed sense of how the wind impacts on ball flight, but you are being difficult to appear different and "deep".

I'll take it you are wumming.

Your own idol Nine Chins plays the low stinger (or certainly used to) to great effect. Sergio too, do you think they would risk a technically more difficult shot if it was no more effective than a normal shot?

super_realist wrote:Mac, I think you are just being willfully contrary here to fish for responses.

Lets say I dropped a ball from a crane at 100 yards (to represent the top of the ball flight parabola where energy begins to drop off.) and measured where it landed, now, if I do the same from 25 yards to represent a lower shot, which do you think will be most affected by a wind?

Have you never climbed a hill and the wind speed is lower at the bottom than at the top? Does the top deck of your bus not get buffetted more than the bottom deck?

Wind is not uniform at all heights as I'm sure you know, trees, bushes, hills, mounds, etc all help to shelter from wind in lee of the obstacle.
If it weren't for wind speed at different heights and the effect of obstacles on it, we wouldn't have links golf courses.

With all due respect Sups, I don't think anyone hits it 100 yards high at the apex of their ball flight. I assume you mean 100 feet/~30 yards?

Super

Maybe I didn't get your question, but either way physics is never as intuitive as we would like it to be. So I genuinely couldn't answer your question as I thought you asked it. If you want my best guess I would say the time the ball spends being affected by wind and the spin rate of the ball are the two factors that will be most important on a windy day.

As for playing the braids, that is partly why I am skeptical of the conventional wisdom surrounding how to play in the wind. Every round at the braids is windy, so I have had plenty of chances to try out different shots in the wind. I can assure you that so far nothing really works all that well, and a manufactured low shot is about as bad in the wind as they come.

Whatever, It's all relative. It changes nothing. A higher ball at it's apex will be affected more than a ball hit the same distance with a more boring trajectory.

Mac's clearly fishing here.

If you putt a ball instead of a flop shot on a very windy day, which is most likely to be affected?

McLaren wrote:Super

Maybe I didn't get your question, but either way physics is never as intuitive as we would like it to be.  So I genuinely couldn't answer your question as I thought you asked it.  If you want my best guess I would say the time the ball spends being affected by wind and the spin rate of the ball are the two factors that will be most important on a windy day.

As for playing the braids, that is partly why I am skeptical of the conventional wisdom surrounding how to play in the wind.  Every round at the braids is windy, so I have had plenty of chances to try out different shots in the wind.  I can assure you that so far nothing really works all that well, and a manufactured low shot is about as bad in the wind as they come.

Mac, considering you aren't a golfer of great skill or regular play (not intended to be an insult), I'll take your lack of practice and general lack of play to confirm you simply haven't played that type of shot enough in order to get the benefit from it. I remember one particular shot I played into the 1st on TOC a few years back. It was seriously windy right into the face, I could have ballooned a 3 wood into the wind and might possibly have made it, but I took a 3 iron, and kept a low, boring, powerful shot into about 10 feet.

No one is saying that wind is predictable, that gusts won't affect it, that spin rate and height are uniform and predictable on every shot. There might not even be conventional wisdom, learning how to play in wind is just another part of the game. Sounds like your game is pretty one dimensional. One way for all conditions.

Super

You wouldn't believe the hard on I get when the conditions are tough. It is the type of golf I live for.

I see your 3 iron into 1 and give you this, I have played a chip/putted hybrid onto the 18th green at TOC from about 140 out, keeping it bouncing along the deck all the way.

McLaren wrote:Super

You wouldn't believe the hard on I get when the conditions are tough.  It is the type of golf I live for.  

I see your 3 iron into 1 and give you this, I have played a chip/putted hybrid onto the 18th green at TOC from about 140 out, keeping it bouncing along the deck all the way.

What are you putting over that distance for Grandad, off the road or just for a laugh?

Super

I can't remember exactly but the route to the hole was probably something like this;

Spoiler:

Interesting choice, but surely less likely to come off than an aerial shot (of any height) given the rather bumpy and contoured area between you and the hole.

Very poor drive though for someone who claims to drive it 260!!!!

Super

It was very much into the wind and I didn't catch it properly. It being an interesting choice was the only reason I played the shot. The TOC is like the ultimate golf sandpit, when playing it you should let your imagination go wild and hit the most interesting shots possible. Sometimes score is a secondary goal for me.

PS according to google maps, from the left hand tee on 18 it is 240 yards to reach the road. Not sure I knew the road was that far up.

I'm not sure why you consider it the ultimate "sandpit", I'm convinced that you think that the history of the place somehow gives it the upper hand in regards to design, a sort of unjustified "original and best" philosophy. There are so few "interesting" holes on that course, or certainly there are few holes which live up to the sort of hype that golfing lore pours upon it.

Think I failed to clear the road once, and had to hit a grandad style putt with my rescue club.

Often try to hit a low one though and see if I can give the pedestrians crossing the road a fright.

super_realist wrote:...I remember one particular shot I played into the 1st on TOC a few years back. It was seriously windy right into the face, I could have ballooned a 3 wood into the wind and might possibly have made it, but I took a 3 iron, and kept a low, boring, powerful shot into about 10 feet...

To be fair, technology is driving the long game to be "high launch, low spin" - a ballooning flight tends to be the result of low launch, too much backspin. I take your point re. a crosswind and the % deviation cf. a  low runner but straight into the wind it's less of a problem hitting it higher than it used to be. It's spin that's the killer in the wind in my experience.

super_realist wrote:...Often try to hit a low one though and see if I can give the pedestrians crossing the road a fright.

Hope your insurance is all paid up!