Connect with us

Opinion & Analysis

Are Your Approach Shots Holding You Back?

Published

on

The GolfWRX editors suggested that I research approach shots, as this is a crucial part of the game, and see if the stats can help golfers improve — or at least gain knowledge of the areas they need to improve.

As I did with my March 10 article: Research Shows Golfers Should Spend More Time Practicing Short Putts, I researched the average 17-handicap golfer from our database of more than 180,000 ShotByShot.com rounds.

I first isolated 3,200 rounds in our database with a 17 Slope Adjusted Differential (SAD). This would represent the average 17-handicap golfer (Mr. 17) when he played to his handicap or the best 10 of his most recent 20 rounds.

Next, I analyzed this large block of rounds just as I would a single player in order to reveal the strengths and weaknesses of his game. The results were interesting, and as you can see from the summary graphic below, his No. 1 Improvement Priority is Approach shot accuracy, specifically in the 150–175-yard range.

Appr. Art. 1

What does this analysis actually mean? Based upon our Strokes Gained model and analysis, in order for Mr. 17 to improve his game to the level of his “Target” Handicap (10 to 14), he would need the most improvement in his approach game and specifically on the 150–175-yard shots.

One might ask: Why not his Chip/Pitch facet? It is also at a relative handicap of 20. Simple, he only has 9.5 Chip/Pitch shots per round vs. 17.6 approach shots each round. The result of the analysis is always a combination of frequency and severity.

Let’s start with the frequency. The chart below displays the number of approach shots from the fairway as they relate to Mr. 17’s TOTAL approach shots (all shot of 50+ yards from Fairway-Tee, Rough or Sand). To be clear, shots from the fairway (and tee) represent 68 percent of ALL of Mr. 17’s approach shots. For perspective, I have included like numbers for the 2016 PGA Tour. Note the obvious spike in the 151-175-yard range. Just over one in every four of Mr. 17’s attempts fall in this range.

Appr. Art. 2

Severity: Not only does this particular distance own the most opportunities, but it is also the most costly. That is, Mr. 17 loses more strokes on average PER SHOT from this range than any other, a negative strokes gained of 0.43 per shot. Why? He only hits the green with 35 percent of his attempts AND makes an error* with 5 percent of his attempts.

*Approach error is a penalty result or a shot hit poorly enough to require a second approach from greater than 50 yards.

Appr. Art. 3I have a theory on why this particular range is so costly. I believe that this distance tends to represent the greatest distance from which MOST of us still hit traditional irons (7, 6 and 5 irons). Outside of 175 yards, we tend to go to hybrids, which are much more forgiving. These longer iron shots require the combination of club head speed and crisp contact in order to carry the distance needed AND hold the green. I personally have resorted to a 5 hybrid for the top end of this critical range.

Conclusions

If your game is like Mr. 17’s, I suggest:

  1. Devote some more range time to the 150-175 distances.
  2. Consider more forgiving irons or hybrids.
  3. Adjust your targets from these longer distances to the middle, even back-middle, of the greens.

For a complete Strokes Gained Analysis of your game, you can visit www.shotbyshot.com.

In 1989, Peter Sanders founded Golf Research Associates, LP, creating what is now referred to as Strokes Gained Analysis. His goal was to design and market a new standard of statistically based performance analysis programs using proprietary computer models. A departure from “traditional stats,” the program provided analysis with answers, supported by comparative data. In 2006, the company’s website, ShotByShot.com, was launched. It provides interactive, Strokes Gained analysis for individual golfers and more than 150 instructors and coaches that use the program to build and monitor their player groups. Peter has written, or contributed to, more than 60 articles in major golf publications including Golf Digest, Golf Magazine and Golf for Women. From 2007 through 2013, Peter was an exclusive contributor and Professional Advisor to Golf Digest and GolfDigest.com. Peter also works with PGA Tour players and their coaches to interpret the often confusing ShotLink data. Zach Johnson has been a client for nearly five years. More recently, Peter has teamed up with Smylie Kaufman’s swing coach, Tony Ruggiero, to help guide Smylie’s fast-rising career.

25 Comments

25 Comments

  1. Dave R

    May 3, 2017 at 11:54 pm

    Mr. Nicklaus hello where are you. Unbelievable ! Best ever golfer what happened.

  2. Dave

    May 1, 2017 at 2:27 pm

    Leave it golf RX to screw up a link even. I wanted to read about why no one taught Mr. Nicklaus’s swing, and end up reading about some dude needing work on his approach.

    • indyvic

      May 3, 2017 at 2:47 am

      Nicklaus golf swing? ‘Asleep at the wheel?’

  3. Nigel Kent

    May 1, 2017 at 2:16 pm

    I thought this is supposed to be about Chamblee’s take on Nicklaus ???

  4. Shortside

    May 1, 2017 at 11:34 am

    I see realistic room for improvement from 100-150 yards. I am Mr. 17 and that is my window of opportunity. Or should I say lost opportunity. Being Mr. 17 that’s where most of my good tee shots leave me (white tees, where I belong). Most of my range time is devoted to it. Yet when I get on the course I seem to take a stupid pill. Pushed or pulled far too often. My personal analysis is pretty simple. I’m not finishing at my target. Hoping this is the year a little more focus on that gets me to an 8 GIR average. In theory that should get me to Mr. 13-14.

  5. Matto

    Apr 29, 2017 at 6:48 am

    You’re darn tootn. I hit 80%+ of fairways. Getting off the tee is no stress for me. Get a wedge in my hand and I’ll generally hit the green most times under 100. Around the green? No problem….I love the short game. Putting? Not too bad. But I’m an 11hc and that’s ALL thanks to approach shots. Hitting mid to long irons off grass? I basically have NO idea what I’m doing. 30 years of playing and it’s always held me back.

    • IHateLoveGolf

      May 1, 2017 at 1:10 pm

      I’m your exact opposite with weakness. I lose a handful of balls every round from the tee and shoot in the 80s. Irons? Easy peasy. If I (only had a brain) could tee off, I’d be single-digit and maybe even mid single digit.

  6. H

    Apr 29, 2017 at 3:37 am

    I can’t get off the tee, so no, my approach shots don’t hold me back as it takes me about 3 shots to get anywhere near the green, but my short game is deadly

  7. Greg

    Apr 28, 2017 at 9:39 am

    I believe more often then not Mr 17 tees it too far back. Move up one tee box and lower the amount of 150+ yard shots by 4 or 5 and he or she will improve. Also without slowing down the pace of play. Tee it forward.

  8. Parker0065

    Apr 28, 2017 at 9:31 am

    Great article!
    I guess I’ve been preaching this idea for +30 years when people ask how to consistently break 80(or whatever scoring level). I played a lot of golf as a junior, many rounds just me, my bag and the summer sun. By age 13 I was getting so close to breaking 80 and at the end of that season I did a full blown analysis of my game and stats(Crazy, I know, but all I ever thought or cared about as a kid was golf, until girls came along that is), and my conclusion was I just wasn’t hitting enough greens and had to get better with my iron approaches.
    Going into the following season I set out on a mission to do just that and over the first few months I did start to hit more greens. For me it was a combination of taking more conservative lines to the greens, as well as simply continuing to improve my golf swing.
    To me it’s all relative. Just saying “your going to hit more greens” is one thing but without actually “improving your golf swing” makes the idea of hitting more greens just irrelevant words!

    I’ll also add that for me hitting more greens to lower my scores into a competitive zone was a two step process. After my GIR stats started to improve that season many years ago as a junior I quickly realized I had to put in more time with “Lag Putting”. Holes in the past where I may have missed the green I was now faced with 30-40 foot lag putts. Which with a little practice become much easier to two putt versus trying to get up and down from all over the place. Plus it actually takes pressure off your short game(until you start shooting around or under par anyways) because you don’t have to rely on getting up and down 5-7 times a round to break 80.

    By August of that season(1979) I was consistently breaking 80 and never looked back!

  9. Peter Sanders

    Apr 28, 2017 at 8:58 am

    Steve,
    An 8 handicap from the Sand means that the player’s average putting distances following successful sand shots AND his % Errors (shots that do not find the green) match the profile of the average 8 handicap. It is based on Strokes Gained from the sand. While “Saves” are nice and important, they have nothing to do with the assessment of a player’s sand performance – Saves are two facets: Sand and Putting.

  10. WILLIAM MARTELLA

    Apr 28, 2017 at 8:13 am

    Pete, can you do a similar analysis for people in the 10-14 range looking to get to single digits? I’d like to see if this scoring zone shifts at all.

    • Dave

      Apr 28, 2017 at 8:29 am

      I would imagine the chipping and putting would be the focal point then.

    • Peter Sanders

      Apr 28, 2017 at 9:02 am

      Could be a good idea for another article. I will think about it. Thanks!

  11. Simms

    Apr 27, 2017 at 11:52 pm

    I find this idea completely correct….even pros end up missing cuts/or finishing low in the money because of this, and they are hitting 8,9 irons from 170. John Daly would be a prime example I would think..

  12. mikee

    Apr 27, 2017 at 8:09 pm

    My instructor wants to see only two stats on my scorecard …..GIR and distance from the pin after the approach shot. She wants 12 to 14 GIR (I am a 7 hcp) and as close as possible to the pin. Tiger dominated for years because he was first in both those stats.

    • Peter Sanders

      Apr 28, 2017 at 9:12 am

      mikee,
      12 – 14 GIR’s? A lofty goal! PGA Tour average is 12.5 and the Winner’s on Tour average 13. The average 7 handicap hits 8 GIR’s. Where are you now?

      • mikee

        Apr 28, 2017 at 9:26 am

        I’m at 10 GIR……but I putt terribly ….about 33 to 35 per round

  13. Matt

    Apr 27, 2017 at 4:53 pm

    Yep, fairway approach shots and pitching / chipping

  14. Mark

    Apr 27, 2017 at 4:20 pm

    Good article. I am struggling at the moment and hitting greens, never mind hitting it close is my weak area. The range beckons…

  15. Chris Bunting

    Apr 27, 2017 at 3:09 pm

    Maybe Mr.17 needs to move up a T box? I do not consider 175 yards an approach shot if I got off the T properly. Its more of a try to limit the damage shot since I barfed all over the T shot and now need a good recovery or else a big number looms.

    I do practice my approach shots quite a bit, but thats with a 7i-54* wedge.

    • george

      Apr 27, 2017 at 3:58 pm

      If you’re playing in the States you have the possibility to ease out and move up a tee, sure. But if you’re playing anywhere else in the world, the men’s tees are the men’s tees regardless of your driving distance or your hcp. The mens tees are rated and your hcp is based on the men’s tees. So you play the men’s tees and not some kind of colour code. And that, my friend, means that real golfers in the UK, anywhere else in Europe or Africa play from 6300-6700yds. If your Par4s are 410+yds you better learn how to hit those approaches from 170 or pitch it close with your 3rd.

    • WILLIAM MARTELLA

      Apr 28, 2017 at 8:10 am

      Also doesn’t take in to account the intentional play from the tee. 175 yards in is a 7 iron for me. Normally I would say I am closer, but my expectation is to be on or near the green with 6 iron or shorter, aka 185 and in.

      Moving up or back should be decided by your ability to hit for distance/accuracy

  16. Steve

    Apr 27, 2017 at 11:43 am

    I wonder what an 8 handicap out of the sand really means. My guess is gets out of the sand most of the time, but rarely gets a sandie.

  17. golfraven

    Apr 27, 2017 at 11:10 am

    Nice breakdown and analysis. Good to know the trouble zone (150-175 – 7,6,5 iron) so I will look out what mine is and work on it. Are my approaches holding my game back? Heck yeah – last round was 80% FIR but only 33% GIR – sucker.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Opinion & Analysis

The 2 primary challenges golf equipment companies face

Published

on

As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!

Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.

Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.

One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?

Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.

Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.

Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”

For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…

Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.

Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…

That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.

Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.

@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic

Continue Reading

Podcasts

Fore Love of Golf: Introducing a new club concept

Published

on

Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!

Continue Reading

Opinion & Analysis

On Scottie Scheffler wondering ‘What’s the point of winning?’

Published

on

Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by BBC SPORT (@bbcsport)

“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”

Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.

That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.

As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.

I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.

One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.

The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.

If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.

Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.

As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.

It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.

David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.

In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:

“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”

Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”

Eventually, though, something shifts.

We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.

Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.

Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.

Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.

So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.

I see someone evolving.

He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.

It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.

Continue Reading

WITB

Facebook

Trending