Tee it Forward

Just saw this on the Golf Channel

Great campaign and I am fully in support of it. Basically it is to help speed up play and allow golfers to enjoy the game more

http://www.pga.com/pga-america/pga-feature/pga-and-usga-step-new-sets-tees-in-nationwide-tee-it-forward-initiative

Here is a summary of the length of course you should be playing based on your average driving distance.
Interesting to hear everyone's thoughts

Whoa..... I should be playing in a course which is between 4,400 to 4,600 yards as I can only drive 180 m. But where the heck can I find that type of course around here? In fact, most of the time playing in a course which is around 7,000 yds...

Tituman wrote:

Whoa..... I should be playing in a course which is between 4,400 to 4,600 yards as I can only drive 180 m. But where the heck can I find that type of course around here? In fact, most of the time playing in a course which is around 7,000 yds...

Actually it is in yards so it is 200yds being 5200-5400. Umm...maybe the red tees.

I think we should also make some adjustments as the ball does not roll so much in Singapore due to the softer conditions.

Right_sided_coach wrote:

Tituman wrote:

Whoa..... I should be playing in a course which is between 4,400 to 4,600 yards as I can only drive 180 m. But where the heck can I find that type of course around here? In fact, most of the time playing in a course which is around 7,000 yds...

Actually it is in yards so it is 200yds being 5200-5400. Umm...maybe the red tees.

I wish I could Paul. I don't want to hear a bull horn shouting at me " Will the person trying to tee off from the Red Tee please get off ??" Heard that joke Paul?

Right_sided_coach wrote:

Tituman wrote:

Whoa..... I should be playing in a course which is between 4,400 to 4,600 yards as I can only drive 180 m. But where the heck can I find that type of course around here? In fact, most of the time playing in a course which is around 7,000 yds...

Actually it is in yards so it is 200yds being 5200-5400. Umm...maybe the red tees.

Oh Paul if it is in metres then your 5200-5400 is correct. If in yards then it is much shorter like around 4000-4200 meters. Yds to metres less about 10%. Thats how I convert when I am on the course.

Yes mate...funny joke and I am also joking with you.
I think the concept is good but it may need some tweeking for our course conditions.
Maybe more courses such as the new JCC course which is short but challenging so I am told or building extra tee boxes

I have converted to metres and made some allowance for soft conditions

Avg Drive Course distance
250 m 6300-6500m
225 m 6000-6200m
200m 5580-5760m
180m 5220-5400m
160m 4680-4860m
150m 3960-4140m

huh? I played with a single handicap that hit his iron 250meters.
He is not a driver man so seldom used it as it will go haywire most of the time.

I think the idea of judging what course distance you play based on driver distance is flawed. You should never be judge only by your driver, cause that is not the only club you use in golf.

The above distances are only guidelines , and there will always be exceptions to the rule ... I wouldnt go as far as saying they are flawed because someone can hit an iron 250m!!!

I do get your point though, and possibly one could consider handicap along with driver distance as the two variables that derive suggested course length ...

Do you think if its less 'MAN' if someone tees -off fm a shorter tee?

honestly, I don mind playing white.....occasionally blue.....but definitely....NO BLACK/GOLD tee.

Imo, I dun deserve playing off blue unless I can play in the mid 80s. In reality, sometimes i play off blue because my flight mates want to play from blue so we dun want to be party pooper

90s shooter and up should play from white. If we cant break 90 from white consistently, how on earth can we play well from blue?

Here's one custom that we follow here; in a flight of 4, we always play from same tees. I think the low-mid handicapper can play from blue if they want, and the high handicapper should be allowed to play from white.

Problem: there is betting or nassau/sixes involved. Some golfers think they have distance advantage, and so they force the shorter driving opponent to play from blue.

then here's a question: if my opponent plays from blue and I play from white: how many strokes does that tee difference equate to? Is there a formula using course rating/handicap?

pushslice wrote:

Imo, I dun deserve playing off blue unless I can play in the mid 80s. In reality, sometimes i play off blue because my flight mates want to play from blue so we dun want to be party pooper

90s shooter and up should play from white. If we cant break 90 from white consistently, how on earth can we play well from blue?

Here's one custom that we follow here; in a flight of 4, we always play from same tees. I think the low-mid handicapper can play from blue if they want, and the high handicapper should be allowed to play from white.

Problem: there is betting or nassau/sixes involved. Some golfers think they have distance advantage, and so they force the shorter driving opponent to play from blue.

then here's a question: if my opponent plays from blue and I play from white: how many strokes does that tee difference equate to? Is there a formula using course rating/handicap?

ya lor, ya lor....

i should and always play from white....next time dun suan me ar....i'm 'down-to-earth' one hor...haha !!!

I think handicap and drive distance makes more sense, but I do think the existing system is good enough.

For example someone don't drive more than 200 meter. But this does not dictate the ability to play fast. If that person can hit wood or iron for good distance on most par 4 they can still arrive in 2. Even if not, as long as they are good shot, they will be on the green in Par - 1 for a 2 put bogey.

The argument to base what tee you can play of only from your driver distance is hence flawed in my opinion.

Most slow play I noticed during my play are due to the following
1. looking for ball
2. Miss shot (cangkul, slice, top )
3. Ppl that can't hit their iron more than 50 meters
4. Ppl playing multiple balls with number 2 & 3 problem. (Basically treating the green as a driving range).
5. ppl on the call while playing etc

All of the above has nothing to do with how far you hit the driver (or if you use driver at all).

dmateo,

whilst I agree with thebreakdown of your observations, and it is a very multi-dimensional analysis of the typical poor golfer, maybe RSC's Golf Channel reference is aimed at a more uni-dimensional analysis of the typical golfer.

lets say the 2 golfer with similar short game but 1 hits driver out to 220m and the other to 180m. from my limit experience, it does affect the score by 1 stroke per hole or less.

If we keep it in the fairway and are generally talking about average golfers, 1 stroke less per hole can mean spending 1-3 minutes less per hole possibly.

Over 18 holes, that may translate into an hour's less time spent.

mizzy wrote:

dmateo,

lets say the 2 golfer with similar short game but 1 hits driver out to 220m and the other to 180m. from my limit experience, it does affect the score by 1 stroke per hole or less.

If we keep it in the fairway and are generally talking about average golfers, 1 stroke less per hole can mean spending 1-3 minutes less per hole possibly.
.

i assume this is with reference to your drive and ZX drive.....

but hor, how come the score different leh....

Tituman wrote:

Whoa..... I should be playing in a course which is between 4,400 to 4,600 yards as I can only drive 180 m. But where the heck can I find that type of course around here? In fact, most of the time playing in a course which is around 7,000 yds...

How about teeing off at the most forward tee (i.e. Ladies' tee)?

slinger wrote:

mizzy wrote:

dmateo,

lets say the 2 golfer with similar short game but 1 hits driver out to 220m and the other to 180m. from my limit experience, it does affect the score by 1 stroke per hole or less.

If we keep it in the fairway and are generally talking about average golfers, 1 stroke less per hole can mean spending 1-3 minutes less per hole possibly.
.

i assume this is with reference to your drive and ZX drive.....

but hor, how come the score different leh....

oh, if with ZX drive and mine, it is 250m and 200m.
ZX finds it harder to keep it in the fairway at 250m because the additional 50m tends to find rough when the fairways are narrow.

why score the same? because from the rough i notice that he is less able to attack the pin and that usually cost 1 stroke on average if the shot misses the green.

see lah.. now i pit chia lobang.. ZX sure to eat me next game..

mizzy, you free on 31 Jul right? we play vegas 1 point 5 MYR

mizzy wrote:

dmateo,

whilst I agree with thebreakdown of your observations, and it is a very multi-dimensional analysis of the typical poor golfer, maybe RSC's Golf Channel reference is aimed at a more uni-dimensional analysis of the typical golfer.

lets say the 2 golfer with similar short game but 1 hits driver out to 220m and the other to 180m. from my limit experience, it does affect the score by 1 stroke per hole or less.

If we keep it in the fairway and are generally talking about average golfers, 1 stroke less per hole can mean spending 1-3 minutes less per hole possibly.

Over 18 holes, that may translate into an hour's less time spent.

I understand your point of view if the guy can't pull the 2nd shot required distance.

On your case the difference in distance is 40m, which can be covered by 2nd stroke if the guy is good with iron/wood. Which means that 40m does not necessarily translates to an extra stroke at all.

Assume a drive around 220 on a 360m par 4. The next shot is 140. If I were to drive 180, my second shot is 180m. This can be achieve with 5 woods or long iron.So there you go still 2 on the green.

Not all people can master driver well but doesn't mean the can't hit iron/wood well. The same with ppl that master driver well does not mean they can hit iron/wood well.
This is the base of my argument on why I think the logic on drawing conclusion on speed of play solely based from driver hitting distance is flawed.

I read the same article and to put it in context, the driving distance was used as a gauge to say that the amateur would be facing the same second shot as a pro....this was primarily to increase the enjoyment of the game and at the same time to speed up play....however, this assumes that you're hitting it straight...if you're still crooked and chunking your second shots, playing off white will only marginally improve the speed of play....

sounding like a broken record, the common faults of slow play are:
1. not playing ready golf
2. taking innumerable practice swings
3. both players insisting on driving to the ball, ie not getting out and walking to their ball
4. squatting over their putts forever and still three-putting
5. picking up balls from the water (even though it's not theirs)
6. not picking up their ball even after hitting their 8th shot

as i've said before, i have friends for whom shooting below 100 would be a miracle and yet, can easily finish a round in less than 4 hours

a better measure of which tees you should playing off of is your h'cap......

If u can hit you 5 wood 180 and it flies straight enough to land on the green, then it is highly unlikely that you will hit your driver only 180 ...

However, if that is really the case, then probably time to get your driver fitted ...

For me, I personally prefer playing from the white tee, cos on a good course setup, I will get to use most of the clubs in my bag

Playing from the blue ... most of the time I find the 7 and 8 irons hardly get used. The 9 and Pw come out for 3 shots for Par 5 ...

I was once like that. Driver 160-180m, 5 woods 180m - 200m.

Was looking back at it I dont realy have that much urge to master driver because I will only used it to tee off on par 4 and 5. Form the economy of thing I prefer to master woods first since I can use it off the tee and on the fairway. So I ended up never using my driver and rely on 5 woods to tee off most of the time.

Not the driver problem, but it's my swing problem that thankfully has been fixed now.

zhenxua wrote:

mizzy, you free on 31 Jul right? we play vegas 1 point 5 MYR

dmateo wrote:

mizzy wrote:

dmateo,

whilst I agree with thebreakdown of your observations, and it is a very multi-dimensional analysis of the typical poor golfer, maybe RSC's Golf Channel reference is aimed at a more uni-dimensional analysis of the typical golfer.

lets say the 2 golfer with similar short game but 1 hits driver out to 220m and the other to 180m. from my limit experience, it does affect the score by 1 stroke per hole or less.

If we keep it in the fairway and are generally talking about average golfers, 1 stroke less per hole can mean spending 1-3 minutes less per hole possibly.

Over 18 holes, that may translate into an hour's less time spent.

I understand your point of view if the guy can't pull the 2nd shot required distance.

On your case the difference in distance is 40m, which can be covered by 2nd stroke if the guy is good with iron/wood. Which means that 40m does not necessarily translates to an extra stroke at all.

Assume a drive around 220 on a 360m par 4. The next shot is 140. If I were to drive 180, my second shot is 180m. This can be achieve with 5 woods or long iron.So there you go still 2 on the green.

Not all people can master driver well but doesn't mean the can't hit iron/wood well. The same with ppl that master driver well does not mean they can hit iron/wood well.
This is the base of my argument on why I think the logic on drawing conclusion on speed of play solely based from driver hitting distance is flawed.

at 140, i have a chance to get it close. at 180.. i don't think i can even get it on the green. and if i do, its on the fringe..