While it wont change the results of this test massively (1% to 25% or anything like that) using arccos data as opposed to running a controlled test doesn't let you control variables and will lead to skewed results. For example, when do golfers use a 3 wood off the tee? Its for harder holes with tighter fairways. So what this data is really showing is that, for all of the easier or "normal" holes with wide open fairways, golfers hit the fairway with their driver ~40% of the time on average. But, when they get to that really tight fairway dogleg left hole with punishing out of bounds and pull out the 3 wood, they still hit THAT fairway 1% more often than their driver hits the wide open fairways. You can't compare numbers 1:1 like this if the clubs are used on different holes of different difficulty. What would be more useful is a dispersion map of 3wood vs driver and comparing the % change in dispersion tightness to that 15-20 yard dropoff in total distance.
I would also argue that people spend alot more time and money getting fitted for their driver than they do for there 3 wood. One other category I think arccos should have provided, is how often off the tee each club found a hazard or OB. I think that's important to note as with a safe club, I am not always going to find the fairway, but it is extremely important that I dont hit it into a hazard such as a bunker, water, or OB
Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics. is a phrase that always amuses me, but it has a lot of relevance when analysing data. Even the great Broadie in his Stat book every shot counts, for example ( a must read for all golfers IMO), where all the data said hitting it longer was better than being more accurate. ( page 125) advocates that avoiding awful shots ( 1 to 2 shots lost) is the best way for amateurs to improve (page 207). There is also a very interesting discussion on optimum aiming ( like actually into the left rough rather than down the fairway if there is oob on the right)) and strategy choices which will help many golfers. But to your video and for further content I would suggest the question you should be asking which I doubt you have data for yet, is what club you should hit off the tee to avoid "awful shots". Another question which I think deserves further analysis, is why amateurs are no more accurate with a 3 wood than driver- you would expect to be as it has a shorter shaft and more loft- is it that three woods are optimised for fairway shots rather than tee shots ( head size?). Anyway enjoyed the video would like to see more stat driven discussion ;-)
Many thanks for these interesting and valuable tips. This fact-based analysis helps me a lot. Perhaps an evaluation of wedges and their different lofts (50 - 54 - 58) vs. (52 - 56 - 60) would be interesting. All the best and have a great holiday season.
It could boil down to this. How often do people actually use or even practice hitting their 3 wood? I'm pretty sure that there are people, myself included, who rarely, and I mean rarely, hit the 3 wood during a round. I hit 3 hybrid far, far more often off the tee or out on the fairway than I ever hit 3 wood.
I think it also comes down to how many people actually get fitted for their 3 woods. Alot of golfers and youtubers have shown an talked about getting fit for drivers, however if you intend to have a 3 wood as your "safe club", you need to get that dialed in and fitted similar to your driver
This was my thought as well. I would like to see the stats for a handful of similar skill level players, comparing those who practice and use their driver regularly and those who mainly practice and use their 3 wood. Who gets more penalty strokes/lost balls on average and who gets lower scores.
Best of both worlds: Learn how to hit a knockdown driver. My 3 wood off the tee goes 215-235. Knockdown driver goes 220-240 and feels like a practice swing. Just tee it a little lower and swing about 50%. It also goes straight or a little left so it takes the right out of play. Might try an entire round of knockdown drivers to see the score.
@@leospaceman2976 Not to mention it didnt take into consideration how often players were hitting each club out of play or into hazards. I think while a safe club generally should be a fairway finder, alot of times it just ends up being something you can keep in play at all costs, or has a predictable miss
A perfect example of how statistics make people come to false conclusions, just off the top of my head I can think of several reasons why this data (from Arcco) would be wrong: 1) People go to their 3w over driver for harder tee shots as its a comfort club, therefore 3w is instantly at a disadvantage given they're playing harder fairways 2) People get fitted for their driver and generally spend a lot of money getting the perfect club for them, woods tend to be more of an afterthought 3) People practice with their driver for hours and hours at the range
Data doesn't lie. But for me I can replicate a good fairway wood swing more often. The driver swing is completely different than hitting any other in the bag. So for me all things aren't equal.
People are more likely to use a 3 wood on difficult fairways. A much better test would be to look at the same person hitting a 3 wood and a driver on the same fairway and then make the comparison. Cheers.
The conclusions in this video are inaccurate. The data tells us nothing about each club. What the data shows is the relative performance of some golfers with drivers versus other golfers with 3 woods. I’d assume most golfers on a tee taking a 3 wood instead of a driver, are less confident and less able. Therefore if they are hitting the fairway as often as the more confident/more skilled golfers, then that must be down to their club choice. So this data potentially highlights the reverse conclusion. But unless you test the same golfers with the two clubs, you cant be certain.
I don’t think it’s so cut and dried. Sure the percentage of fairways hit is very similar. But what if your driver is 50 yards off the fairway and your 3 wood is 10 yards off the fairway. WOTP
3wood is meant to be hit off the ground, not off the tee. Its a fairway wood. However its also common to use it off the tee as a more accurate driver alternative which is the focus of this video. Something that is really important to note when using crowdsourced data (like this video does with arccos shots) is that you are getting data that's not comparable 1:1. For example, this video isn't putting every golfer on the same tee box and having them hit driver, then 3 wood, then comparing. its evaluating whenever they hit driver and whenever they hit 3 wood. People only tee off with 3 wood on harder more difficult holes that have hazards or tighter fairways. So what this video is really saying is that, when yo get to the really difficult hole and pull out the 3 wood, you still hit that small fairway 1% more often than your driver hits the normal wide open fairway. its not saying that your 3wood hits normal fairways 1% more often than your driver, and that's where the data collection in this video falls apart.
More people would play a 3 wood when there's hazards all over the place for a driver (as an example) so the driver stats you're comparing are probably the longer par 4s / open par 5s generally speaking where a fairway is easier to hit. The 3 wood stats & data are likely on average from the harder holes (dog legs, hazards etc.) where a fairway is harder to hit even if you took a 4 iron / hybrid. An interesting comparison could be 3 wood vs. the other options in this context, (i.e. 3 wood vs. hybrid, 2 iron, 4 iron, 5 wood etc.) - will probably find that something like a 5 wood is optimal decision.
Hardly debunked anything. What would be useful to know is how many penalties (OB) are incurred between driver and 3 wood. The stats gurus would say to not get hung up on missed fairways, rather pay Attention to your penalties off the tee.
Perplexing why you would spend resources on this on just a meaningless stat. Would be more insightful if you gave stats for the difference in strokes gained or even in balls that are kept in play for driver vs 3w or whatever. Cause on tight holes amateurs are just trying to keep it in play not hit fairways
This is the issue with data scrubbing as opposed to testing. There are so many confounding variables that make these "results" deceiving. For example, people likely use fairway woods on tighter (more difficult) fairways. If that were the case, the goal would be using 3-wood on a tight fairway give you a similar odds to a driver on a wider fairway. If you want to bust a myth, test your theory and report those results. I can't take away anything from this video other than poor analytical skills. Disappointing
While it wont change the results of this test massively (1% to 25% or anything like that) using arccos data as opposed to running a controlled test doesn't let you control variables and will lead to skewed results. For example, when do golfers use a 3 wood off the tee? Its for harder holes with tighter fairways. So what this data is really showing is that, for all of the easier or "normal" holes with wide open fairways, golfers hit the fairway with their driver ~40% of the time on average. But, when they get to that really tight fairway dogleg left hole with punishing out of bounds and pull out the 3 wood, they still hit THAT fairway 1% more often than their driver hits the wide open fairways. You can't compare numbers 1:1 like this if the clubs are used on different holes of different difficulty. What would be more useful is a dispersion map of 3wood vs driver and comparing the % change in dispersion tightness to that 15-20 yard dropoff in total distance.
I would also argue that people spend alot more time and money getting fitted for their driver than they do for there 3 wood. One other category I think arccos should have provided, is how often off the tee each club found a hazard or OB. I think that's important to note as with a safe club, I am not always going to find the fairway, but it is extremely important that I dont hit it into a hazard such as a bunker, water, or OB
Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics. is a phrase that always amuses me, but it has a lot of relevance when analysing data. Even the great Broadie in his Stat book every shot counts, for example ( a must read for all golfers IMO), where all the data said hitting it longer was better than being more accurate. ( page 125) advocates that avoiding awful shots ( 1 to 2 shots lost) is the best way for amateurs to improve (page 207). There is also a very interesting discussion on optimum aiming ( like actually into the left rough rather than down the fairway if there is oob on the right)) and strategy choices which will help many golfers. But to your video and for further content I would suggest the question you should be asking which I doubt you have data for yet, is what club you should hit off the tee to avoid "awful shots". Another question which I think deserves further analysis, is why amateurs are no more accurate with a 3 wood than driver- you would expect to be as it has a shorter shaft and more loft- is it that three woods are optimised for fairway shots rather than tee shots ( head size?). Anyway enjoyed the video would like to see more stat driven discussion ;-)
The conclusions are wrong - see post above
Many thanks for these interesting and valuable tips. This fact-based analysis helps me a lot. Perhaps an evaluation of wedges and their different lofts (50 - 54 - 58) vs. (52 - 56 - 60) would be interesting. All the best and have a great holiday season.
It could boil down to this. How often do people actually use or even practice hitting their 3 wood? I'm pretty sure that there are people, myself included, who rarely, and I mean rarely, hit the 3 wood during a round. I hit 3 hybrid far, far more often off the tee or out on the fairway than I ever hit 3 wood.
I think it also comes down to how many people actually get fitted for their 3 woods. Alot of golfers and youtubers have shown an talked about getting fit for drivers, however if you intend to have a 3 wood as your "safe club", you need to get that dialed in and fitted similar to your driver
This was my thought as well. I would like to see the stats for a handful of similar skill level players, comparing those who practice and use their driver regularly and those who mainly practice and use their 3 wood. Who gets more penalty strokes/lost balls on average and who gets lower scores.
Best of both worlds: Learn how to hit a knockdown driver. My 3 wood off the tee goes 215-235. Knockdown driver goes 220-240 and feels like a practice swing. Just tee it a little lower and swing about 50%. It also goes straight or a little left so it takes the right out of play. Might try an entire round of knockdown drivers to see the score.
Y did u stop the 30yard stat at 5 handicap?
Some bias here as people tend to hit 3W on harder holes. So it would make sense they hit the fairway less with 3W than D on wide open holes.
Good point. This kind of nuance is lost on basic data analysis.
@@leospaceman2976 Not to mention it didnt take into consideration how often players were hitting each club out of play or into hazards. I think while a safe club generally should be a fairway finder, alot of times it just ends up being something you can keep in play at all costs, or has a predictable miss
thanks for bringing this up.
A perfect example of how statistics make people come to false conclusions, just off the top of my head I can think of several reasons why this data (from Arcco) would be wrong:
1) People go to their 3w over driver for harder tee shots as its a comfort club, therefore 3w is instantly at a disadvantage given they're playing harder fairways
2) People get fitted for their driver and generally spend a lot of money getting the perfect club for them, woods tend to be more of an afterthought
3) People practice with their driver for hours and hours at the range
if the miss is ob thats so many strokes that makes up more of a difference than percentage hit
I do hit my 3 wood a lot but my go to for a tight hole is my 3 iron
Data doesn't lie. But for me I can replicate a good fairway wood swing more often. The driver swing is completely different than hitting any other in the bag. So for me all things aren't equal.
Very interesting 👍
People are more likely to use a 3 wood on difficult fairways. A much better test would be to look at the same person hitting a 3 wood and a driver on the same fairway and then make the comparison. Cheers.
The conclusions in this video are inaccurate.
The data tells us nothing about each club. What the data shows is the relative performance of some golfers with drivers versus other golfers with 3 woods.
I’d assume most golfers on a tee taking a 3 wood instead of a driver, are less confident and less able. Therefore if they are hitting the fairway as often as the more confident/more skilled golfers, then that must be down to their club choice.
So this data potentially highlights the reverse conclusion. But unless you test the same golfers with the two clubs, you cant be certain.
Sorry mate your stats are not correct for me 15handicapper I don't miss a fairway with my 3wood ever( period) but I miss plenty with the driver.
Just hit driver FFS bin the 3 wood get a 5 wood or 7 wood ...anyone who says 3w for safety is a hacker 😂😂😂 as theybe probably topped it
I don’t think it’s so cut and dried. Sure the percentage of fairways hit is very similar. But what if your driver is 50 yards off the fairway and your 3 wood is 10 yards off the fairway. WOTP
So what really is the point of a 3 wood?
3wood is meant to be hit off the ground, not off the tee. Its a fairway wood. However its also common to use it off the tee as a more accurate driver alternative which is the focus of this video. Something that is really important to note when using crowdsourced data (like this video does with arccos shots) is that you are getting data that's not comparable 1:1. For example, this video isn't putting every golfer on the same tee box and having them hit driver, then 3 wood, then comparing. its evaluating whenever they hit driver and whenever they hit 3 wood. People only tee off with 3 wood on harder more difficult holes that have hazards or tighter fairways. So what this video is really saying is that, when yo get to the really difficult hole and pull out the 3 wood, you still hit that small fairway 1% more often than your driver hits the normal wide open fairway. its not saying that your 3wood hits normal fairways 1% more often than your driver, and that's where the data collection in this video falls apart.
More people would play a 3 wood when there's hazards all over the place for a driver (as an example) so the driver stats you're comparing are probably the longer par 4s / open par 5s generally speaking where a fairway is easier to hit. The 3 wood stats & data are likely on average from the harder holes (dog legs, hazards etc.) where a fairway is harder to hit even if you took a 4 iron / hybrid.
An interesting comparison could be 3 wood vs. the other options in this context, (i.e. 3 wood vs. hybrid, 2 iron, 4 iron, 5 wood etc.) - will probably find that something like a 5 wood is optimal decision.
Hardly debunked anything. What would be useful to know is how many penalties (OB) are incurred between driver and 3 wood. The stats gurus would say to not get hung up on missed fairways, rather pay Attention to your penalties off the tee.
I’m thinking the same thing! Penalties off the tee kill me with driver
Agreed, alot of times a safe club is one you can keep in play on the trickiest holes, not just finding fairways.
Putter is safe😂
Perplexing why you would spend resources on this on just a meaningless stat. Would be more insightful if you gave stats for the difference in strokes gained or even in balls that are kept in play for driver vs 3w or whatever. Cause on tight holes amateurs are just trying to keep it in play not hit fairways
This is the issue with data scrubbing as opposed to testing. There are so many confounding variables that make these "results" deceiving. For example, people likely use fairway woods on tighter (more difficult) fairways. If that were the case, the goal would be using 3-wood on a tight fairway give you a similar odds to a driver on a wider fairway.
If you want to bust a myth, test your theory and report those results. I can't take away anything from this video other than poor analytical skills. Disappointing
5 wood all day long for a fairway finder. & off the deck is better than a 3 wood in the bag.
Absolutely. Handicap came down 7 strokes when I took that god forsaken 3W out of the bag and replaced it with a 5W turned down -1.5 degrees.