The stats shown on the graph posted were 2005-2009…we all know driving doesn’t matter in the modern game because of course setup and course conditions of soft greens for the most part … that’s what we have been saying all along. those stats from that era are going to show this
I actually lost that event by 5 not by 8 shots…and the following week I did nothing different. The greens in Sydney were grainy and I am not as good a putter on grainy greens than the bent greens of Melbourne…that was the difference… confidence being on greens I was more accustomed to
Is it just me getting confused?
I stated the importance of putting, the short game in response to jrich saying the long game is more important. I backed it up with the stats from Mark Sweeney which clearly show the importance of putting and scrambling as well as hitting greens. Driving accuracy and length are not as important as these other factors.
Your story reinforces that Hugo. If you’d been playing the greens at Sydney again the following week would your time have been spent better working on your swing to hit 72/72 greens or spent on the Sydney greens gaining confidence?
People invariably like to practice what they are good at, gains come when you work on weak aspects of your game.
How about these stats from Brian Gay this week:
Driving Accuracy - 85.4 T3
Driving Distance - 271.2 T62
Gir - 75.9 - T6
Putts per round 29.0 - T38
Some great ball striking and he is currently T20. Must be frustrating trying to compete against the long bombers. 
Brian Gay keeps it in play regardless of his driver lenght. Read some where he changed coaches maybe they’ll try to increase his distance so he can handle the bombers.
You started by saying “only putting has ever won a tournament”. The fact is that you cannot win without a good week of ballstriking to go with putting. As Bradley mentioned, when his ballstriking was on, he didn’t need to putt well at all to finish really high in a tournament. When his ballstriking was on and he putted better, he ran away with tournaments. While it may be true that in today’s current game, you have to putt better to win than you did 20 or 30 years ago, winning is not all about putting, contrary to what you and many others believe. As Bradley pointed out, 10 more greens in reg over a week is a huge difference.
As far as short game goes, obviously anyone at the Tour level has an acceptable short game. They’re far from short game gods though, even if watching on television seems to give that impression. On Sunday at the WM Phoenix Open, I watched a lot of golf from the last 3 groups and saw a shot from a greenside bunker that didn’t make it out on the first try, a 40 yard wedge that ran off the back of the green and left 60 feet downhill to a front pin, a couple 3 putts, and 5 or so misses inside of 8 feet. These were all from the guys playing in the last few groups on a sunday. Go watch the guys that start in the late afternoon on the 10 tee, and you see golf that doesn’t look any better than good amatuer play. As Nicklaus made very clear in the quote I posted which you seem to ignore, he didn’t share your view about how crucial short game is. Nobody believes you can have a bad short game and putt poorly all the time and still be successful. Good ballstriking definitely makes it way les important though. Maybe if you’re hitting 9 greens a round, you’d be justified in saying that short game and putting were absolutely crucial for scoring well. The way to improve though would be to start hitting more greens, not try to putt and chip better without improving your ballstriking.
Ballstriking outweighs putting much more in the amatuer game, because so many amatuers are wasting shots off the tee and from the fairways. You simply cannot improve a mid-handicap drastically by working on short game and putting. They don’t have an opportunity to get back the shots they waste in their long games.
So you can’t win without a good week of ballstriking but equally you can’t win without a good week of putting lol.
Going round in circles folks.
One question, is it easier to go from shooting 90 to 84 by improving your ball striking or by improving your putting and short game?
depends on how your 90 looks…if you hit 4 balls out of bounds, ballstriking is quick route, if you are 3 jacking or flubbing chips, short game.
i’ve played with plenty of high handicaps that can putt lights out or at least putt good enough, but they can’t get to the green with out finding a penalty stroke. most of my friends don’t play because they don’t put in the time to learn how to hit the ball well. i’ve told them for years if they would learn to do that they would enjoy the game alot more, regardless of score. a well struck shot is good for the soul (at least to me). knocking in a 30 foot putt feels good to me too,
but not as good as a flush long iron.
i know most of my rounds i’m doing one or the other well, rarely both. i’m here because i would like to take one variable out of the equation.
i’m a casual player, so take it for what it is, but i’d rather hit a bunch of greens and have a bunch of putts rather than shoot the same score with smokes and mirrors.
that’s just me though, i don’t play competitively so i’m coming from an average joe’s perspective.
Good answer kirk.
The smart answer lies in the players stats.
If they are averaging 30 putts its a long game issue. averaging 36 putts its short game.
At the pro level though, if you looked at the aimpoint survey you can see what value is of just one putt.
Alot of you guys are arguing as if Short game and Ball striking are Arch Enemies on different ends of the specrum of golf.
You need to be Fantastic at BOTH to play golf. Why pigeon yourself as a one trick pony?
guys here doing ABS need to be careful you do not become spiteful of putting and wedge play as Hogan did in his later years. You’ll end up coming from golf getting trounced by a short game wiz who hits the ball just ok.Or if you do have an off day at least you score ok.
You need to value your short game as much as the long. Because end of the day its all about getting the ball into the hole.Because no one hits every green and fairway.
^
Well said.
I think i read that by the end of his career the hawk was actually advocating that putts only count as half shots!
Did anyone watch Phil mickelson’s final round at pebble today?
What a superb display of golf that was!
It would be pretty easy to go from 90-84 with an improved short game. However, unless they significantly improve their ball striking, a 15 handicapper shooting 90 will never shoot 74. I think that’s the big point.
If you just want to shave a few shots there is nothing wrong with focusing your attention on short game. If you want serious improvement, however, you better start hitting it better.
I’d agree 100% with this.
We can agree on all of this. I also agree on the aimpoint stuff, but I think that putting stats are dependent on ballstriking stats to an extent, too. Putting stats tend to look artificially bad for someone hitting a lot of greens, and articifially good for someone hitting less greens.
Very true, big difference between good putting ‘stats’ and good putting.
I think the relatively new “Putts Gained” stat is the only one really worth anything. Putts per round and putts per GIR are heavily dependent on ball striking.
And the leader of the putts gained is an aimpointer (Scott McCarron)
Charlie Wi is also an aimpointer and did miss some short ones yesterday but winning is tough.
What does it mean to be an aimpointer? I have heard about it but am not very familiar with its uses.
I think its that computerized line that shows the break of a putt. I believe the Golf Channel used it first on their telecasts. Not sure how golfers would use it.
They (aimpoint) make charts that help determine the distance up the fall line a putt needs to start at a given speed based on the stimp and the slope.
It’s actually a pretty cool system. I have some charts from aimpoint from before they were available to the public. My dad loaned Mark (who started aimpoint) our copy of Vector Putting for a while a few years ago. I personally think that Geoff Mangum’s spider system is easier to put into practice, even if not quite as precise.