This discussion group is best enjoyed using Google Chrome, Firefox or Safari.
Of course angles matter. They matter much more in the moment of a single shot than they do vs data of thousands of shots. Let's look at, say Pacific Dunes #17 (only because it's the one that popped in my head .. must be where it happens the most). Someone will ask what I hit or "what should I hit." For simplicity purposes, just imagine no wind. My response is it depends on your flight. The entire hole is an "angle" .. what's your comfortable ball flight? Sometimes I'm going to try to fly it more, sometimes I'm going to use the land .. it depends how and what I'm feeling that day in that moment. I can have the choice of 3 or 4 different clubs for the same shot ... yes, angles matter .. gravity matters ... it all matters .. as much as you want it to.
Ira,Variety and strategy are not mutually exclusive in the slightest. In fact, I’m saying it is variety that creates strategy, not some standard school of thinking that relies on one kind of angle. Strategy (with a capital S) does not create variety.
What architect has or does rely on one kind of angle?
I hit a lot of pitches and chips so the way I am coming into a green with exterior and interior contours matters a lot for me. As noted, I understand the basic point in the other thread, but for me the exception of “except when the ball is on the ground” swallows the rule. I did not mention Hope Valley where we are members, but it is Ross design and has several holes where depending on your angle the green runs quite a bit away from you.
The saddest part of it is that the guys who say "angles don't matter" also try to talk great players out of using their shotmaking abilities, and just always play the same shot with which they are most consistent. And that may be the correct approach statistically, but it is just taking all the life out of the game.
For me, it was only ever a conversation about “The strategic school of design matters less than we think”.
I get why Pros teach the statistical method. Even 15 handicappers want to improve their score. But my guesses are (a) the improvement in score is very marginal statistically (b) they might actually score better if they learned a variety of shots and (c) they would have a lot more fun if they embraced (b).
A good thread about what KVV calls "mechanics" and "artists."https://twitter.com/KVanValkenburg/status/1633982791334469633Tiger was an artist, but unless you're Tiger… It also explains why JT is friends with Tiger, and may explain why JT has under-performed in the minds of many. Compared to Collin Morikawa, who may be this generation's best "mechanic" per KVV.
I am not missing greens on purpose to try to set up chips or pitches for birdie.
I knew what your answer would be even if you are not offering the course by course data that Ally requested early on in the other thread.
My hypothesis/contention is there are courses where angles (again, not chasing them off the tee) make for compelling architecture because they provide strategy that is meaningful for interest and scoring.
I particularly think my hypothesis about quality architecture and angles holds true because for most players in the 10-20 handicap range (and perhaps lower) the ball is on the ground a lot which is the major exception to your rule.
One thing I find interesting is that it appears to be almost statistically insignificant whether the second shot is from 110 yards or 190 yards.
I'd go with Ira, that angles can mean a lot to me when I (often) have to play 3rd shots into par 4 greens and par 5 greens or 2nd shots into par 3 greens.
Sadly I do not have enough talent to control where I end up on those shots all or even most of the time.
The statistical averages concerning the one kind of angle situation doesn't really apply to me on an individual shot basis.
Perhaps over a hundred plays of a specific hole the angle of the second shot might average out to no difference but I remain skeptical.
I think you’re being too black and white: “Angles don’t matter” was just a headline for discussion.For me, it was only ever a conversation about “The strategic school of design matters less than we think”.Of course angles matter. But in a much more instinctive and individual way than some simplistic theory of strategy that actually doesn’t hold up that well.