Let’s start with a bold statement: There’s no such thing as playing it safe off the tee. And if you’re hitting irons off the tee to “manage the course,” you’re probably costing yourself strokes.
To hammer home the point, the folks at Shot Scope pulled some data to shed light on the “distance versus accuracy” debate. The results are eye-opening.
The scenario
Let’s imagine you’re facing a hole with a narrow fairway. You might think playing safe with a hybrid and finding the fairway is a better option than hitting driver and finding the rough.
It certainly sounds logical.
Let’s look at what the stats tell us about these two potential outcomes.
Hitting the hybrid may seem like a safer play—some might even use the phrase “course management” to justify that decision—but the data tells a different story.
Best case versus worst case
But wait, there are two other outcomes to explore—a best-case and worst-case scenario of sorts.
Sure, the driver may find the rough but what if it doesn’t? What if you hit the hybrid into the rough and now are 30 yards farther back with a worse lie?
The stats below suggest that these two outcomes are not nearly as unlikely as you may think:
Fairway Hit % – By Club
| Club | Fairway Hit % |
| Driver | 47% |
| 3 Hybrid | 45% |
Is a two-percent decrease in fairways hit worth a 30-yard drop in distance? Might I be so bold as to suggest it isn’t?
When we look at the worst-case scenario, having 150 yards to the green from the rough will take the average golfer 3.9 shots to finish the hole. That’s half a shot lost.
Lather, rinse, repeat several times per round and you can imagine the less-than-positive difference “playing it safe” will have on your score.
Again, the chances of you hitting a hybrid into the rough are nearly the same as your driver so is it really a safer alternative off the tee?
What about penalties?
You may be wondering about penalty avoidance. The average golfer takes a penalty with the driver two percent of the time. It happens less often with the hybrid but if you’re hitting the ball OB at a higher percentage than most, a shorter club (definitely not a fairway wood) might help.
Most likely, the better approach is to get properly fitted for a driver that works for you or, at a minimum, shortening your shaft for better control off the tee. It will improve accuracy and not cost you the same number of strokes as dialing back to a hybrid or iron.
The big picture
In this scenario, we used driver versus hybrid as the example. You may face that same decision on the course but the underlying thing to be aware of is the value of an additional 30 yards.
Shot Scope data suggests 30 yards of distance negates the “lie type” disadvantage and, for what it’s worth, that’s consistent with the widely used Strokes Gained tables.
Simply, this means players in the rough have the same shots-to-finish expectation as a player in the fairway 30 yards farther back.
For example, the average golfer from 70 yards in the rough will have the same number of shots to finish as they would from 100 yards in the fairway (3.4).
The same goes for 170 yards in the rough versus 200 yards in the fairway (4.0 shots to finish).
But remember the best-case and worst-case scenarios, too: What if you were in the fairway with the longer club and in the rough with the shorter? It’s important to remember that choosing driver doesn’t guarantee a missed fairway nor does hitting hybrid guarantee you’ll hit the fairway.
What about your data?
Want to learn the data behind your individual game? While averages can tell us a lot about what’s likely to happen on the course, each of our games is different.
With Shot Scope performance tracking products, you can learn more than 100 tour-level statistics about your game including Strokes Gained and Handicap Benchmarking, all with no subscription fees—forever.
Get the most out of your game with Shot Scope.
The post Distance Versus Accuracy: The Only Question To Ask Yourself On The Tee appeared first on MyGolfSpy.