TGC Tour - Congratulations!

Congrats to @braycobb (NET) and @beau lester (GROSS) winning the TGC1 2020 SPRING TOUR - Valero Texas Open !

Join this weeks TGC1 2020 SPRING TOUR - Masters Tournament with 3 rounds at Magnolia National 2016 (ProTee) :
See more
See less

Accuracy of Shot length

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Accuracy of Shot length

    I find with the Uneekor my distances are at least 1-2 clubs shorter than in reality. Especially with irons. My 150 yard club is about a 7 iron usually. On the Uneekor it is a 5 or 6 iron. Is anyone else finding this? I have adjusted the elevation already.

  • #2
    No, I think it's spot on. There's a million posts on here about indoor swing syndrome and most people generally think they hit it farther than they really do. In the sim the only number anyone really pays attention to is carry distance. When outdoor everyone only thinks about total distance.


    • #3
      Ok, thanks..I will check out the "indoor swing syndrome"....


      • #4
        Carry versus total....that’s the answer just about every time, IMO.

        The good news is, once you start playing carry distances in real life, you’re going to be amazed by how much more consistent your approach shots are relative to GIR and the pin. At least that’s my experience so far this spring.


        • #5
          Take all your ball data and plug it into the Flightscope trajectory optimizer. That should tell you if you are getting accurate distances or not.


          • #6
            Sure that indoor syndrome is a thing but, when I go to the club, I can sit at the bar and ask 50 men how far they hit their 7 iron, and probably near 90% will tell me 150yds. Even with today's clubs and strong lofts, the reality is probably 135.

            For so long people have it ingrained that their 7 is their 150 club. Either because that's how we talk or because "that one time" it went 150 and now every shot should match that perfect impact.

            I'm not saying this is you (percentages would though), but it's ultra important to map realistic average yardage with your clubs, all of them, so you can rely on getting to the pin more frequently. Knowing how far you normally and in reality hit the ball and embracing that number, will drop your score faster than many other things.


            • 968Cab
              968Cab commented
              Editing a comment
              Exactly. 😎

          • #7
            I agree with the previous comments, but part of your results may be due to the Uneekor balls. I’ve compared the Bridgestone/Uneekor balls to Pro V1s. Hitting outside with a 9 iron, the Bridgestones were consistently 4 to 5 yards shorter on carry distance and all had slight forward roll, where the Pro V1s all checked back.


            • #8
              Good point.

              I just assumed everybody has sorted their own ball solution (holes, stickers, OEM, etc.) before they came here “complaining” (not really the right word, but you know what I mean, hopefully) about inaccuracy or inconsistent distances. I shouldn’t assume that.

              Bottom line for me.... I have always been a *total distance* golfer. I spent 4-5 months working with my new set of clubs and new QED—data I never had access to. I’ve since played 7 times outside (gotta love Texas winter). I specifically have employed my *carry* distances from the QED work in club selection on the course, since they were new clubs that I’d never used outside before.

              It’s been remarkable how accurate I’ve least distance wise LOL

              Trust this thing. Just like Yoga doesn’t lie.


              • #9
                I agree with the Carry distances on Uneekor per 968Cab 's post above. However, I think the algorithm Uneekor employs for roll out is not as accurate compared to my IRL shots. Obviously there are factors that affect IRL shots (weather, conditions at the course, firmness of greens, etc.) When I have ignite running at the same time as TGC, the carry distances are nearly identical but the total yardage is WAY off. On the other hand, TGC over estimates roll for me... somewhere in the middle lies the truth and good reason to observe carry only. Just one guys observation; YMMV.
                What Could Possibly Go Wrong?


                • #10
                  Completely true. Heck, courses in different parts of town have different roll out. Or even different parts of the same course...low sections versus up on a well draining hill. Similar to green speeds

                  I guess it comes down to practice tool vs competitive simulator. Taking what you learn to the actual course and applying it, or nailing down how to excel at TGC/E6/etc. It’s seems the two aren’t *necessarily* the same pursuit, or correlated 100%.

                  But both are legit pursuits. 👍🏼


                  • #11
                    I'd take a different angle than the "indoor swing syndrome", I don't really believe indoor syndrome to be a thing. I do believe that the vast majority of golfers over-inflate their ability as it pertains to distance (especially with driver) but I think this has more to do with a selective memory bias (most humans) and a legitimate desire for well struck shots to have a positive result. Allow me to expound briefly.

                    1. Selective memory - most people more readily remember their good shots and not their bad ones. They remember roughly how far their 7 iron went on those par 3's when it ended up on the middle of the green or close to the hole but not the few that they mishit whether said mishit was severe or slight. They then don't take an average of all those distances to gauge their 7 iron distance on future par 3's, they simply recall how far the par 3's were when they hit good shots. When you get on a simulator range and hit 4 7 irons 150 (to use the distance from above) and one mishit 100, your simulator range says you hit your 7 iron 140, but do you really? On average you do, but I'd argue that 140 is not your 7 iron's distance unless you're a very inconsistent ball striker and you simply should exclude tops or chunks from your distance estimate to get a distance approximation for the course.

                    2. No one likes hitting the ball well and ending in lots of trouble. Tiger Woods (I can't find the quote) when asked why he continues to play blades with all the technology advancement stated "because the worst place you can miss is long on almost every hole. If I mishit the ball, I want it to be short, right in front of the green." Using the distance analogy from above, no golfer who strikes the ball reasonably consistent wants to use 140 as their 7 iron distance and have 2 of those 4 well struck shots long of the green and in trouble. Thus, using 150 as a realistic expectation of distance for a well struck shot is reasonable even if that distance falls well shy of your statistical mean in a simulator range app. I believe this to be a rational approach to distance estimation whether arrived at via the logic used by Tiger and other tour pros (how far does a well struck shot go) or even if only accidental via the selective memory bias from the above example.

                    Indoor syndrome = shorter shots, probably not. Having exacting statistics that brings to the forefront ones ball striking ability or lack thereof - more likely.

                    My two cents,
                    Last edited by bombri; 03-27-2020, 03:36 PM.