Many golfers believe that a bad hole is caused by a single poor shot. In practice, it is often different. One mistake usually only makes a hole more difficult than necessary. Several golf strategy mistakes, however, destroy any chance of a good result.
In many cases, the problem starts much earlier – in the assessment of one’s own abilities, in target selection, and in the question of which mistakes are still acceptable in a given situation.
Here is a real situation from one of our recent golf lessons in Mallorca that showed exactly this. It illustrates why strategic golf does not work through feeling and hope, but through information, discipline and realistic decisions.
Example from a lesson in the Strategy Lab at Capdepera Golf
The starting point: measuring dispersion instead of guessing
The golfer has been training with us regularly for many years. In this session, I kind of got him thinking about striking the ball well and forgetting the rest. And so it happened that several situations came up one after another that make for a good learning example for this article.
So his learning was, never disconnect impact from playing decisions.
In this session, the goal was to connect his decisions on the course more consistently with real data. That is why we first measured his dispersion using radar.
The result was interesting. With the short irons, lateral dispersion was much less of an issue than expected. The bigger weakness was distance. Impact quality was too inconsistent, which made distances unreliable.
This is an important distinction. Many golfers immediately talk about direction in such cases. In reality, the bigger issue is often the quality of strike. When strike quality varies, distance control becomes almost impossible.
This made the first consequence clear: strike training had to be added to the training plan for the coming days.
The next step: translating data into decisions
We then started to build these numbers into a first deviation table in order to start using this information directly on the course.
This is just a small insight into how we work. In the Strategy Lab, we go much deeper into these processes to help golfers make better decisions through structured and systematic training.
The goal was not to collect theory, but to show how decisions become more robust when they are based on measured data.
This is completely normal in the learning process: you measure something, derive initial rules, test them on the course and adjust them again after remeasuring. Progress in golf is rarely linear. Improving in golf has much more to do with such processes than with individual good shots.
That is why we will measure dispersion again during the week and refine the table further. Good strategy does not come from assumptions, but from patterns that can be verified. This allows the golfer to carry out the process independently in the future.
The playing situation: how one risky decision led to a disastrous hole
Later on the course, we found ourselves in a situation that immediately made many of these points visible. The ball was lying on the right side of the fairway. About 120 metres ahead, a deep fairway bunker started. Instead of choosing a clearly safe zone, the shot was aimed just past the bunker towards the flag.
The problem: the radar data had already shown that this shot distance tends to miss to the right. This mistake was therefore not unexpected, but already known. The shot went right – directly into the bunker.
From there, the next uncontrolled shot followed from an uphill lie. A poorly struck ball brought the player into the next bunker on the right side. The next day, we worked on fairway bunker shots as part of our training focus on improving strike quality and transferring these skills onto the course.
From a single risky shot, a complete chain of mistakes developed, triggered by increasingly difficult lies.
The golf course shows us exactly in which situations no functional solution exists yet. This information is extremely valuable for us as coaches.
We deliberately integrate such situations into technical training. At the same time, we work on the decision layer on the course so that similar situations can be handled better in the future.
This is how the connection between training and play is created: we develop solutions in practice and test them in real situations on the course.
The real mistake was not the bunker shot
Many golfers would explain such a hole afterwards by saying: “Then came the bad shot.” From our perspective, the analysis starts earlier. The real mistake was not in the bunker, but already in the original decision.
If a known tendency to miss right exists, the target must not be chosen in a way that this normal mistake is immediately punished. Good golf strategy does not mean planning the best shot. It means taking the expected mistake into account.
Under the trees: why the spectacular option is often the wrong one
Later, the ball was lying under trees in front of a palm tree. The distance to the flag was 85 metres. The player chose a high shot over the palm trees with the approach wedge. The problem was obvious: for him, this distance corresponds more to a maximum distance (see radar data above) than to a stable, repeatable standard shot. In addition, the ball was lying in the semi-rough.
The ball did make it over the tree, but came up short, partyly due to early grass contact in the semi cut but also probably due to a slight miss hit. The more robust alternative would have been a lower shot with an 8-iron, played under or between the trees, with significantly more margin for error and a better chance of hitting the green. But this shot did not exist, or did not even enter the decision-making process. This is extremely interesting, as we took a short discussion break afterwards and replayed the situation. In doing so, we were able to identify exactly where the error in thinking had occurred.
This is where a typical pattern becomes visible. Under pressure, many golfers do not choose the simpler option, but the more attractive one. They choose the shot that looks good instead of the one that keeps the highest level of playability in that situation. Another interesting point is that golfers often do not even see the lower shot as an option (note to self: regularly include situations where a low shot is possible and let the player learn how to hit 80 metres with an 8-iron).
What this situation made visible in the lesson
- Data only helps if it is used in decisions
Measured dispersion is useless if target selection ignores it. - Strike quality and distance control are more closely connected than many think
If ball contact is unstable, distance quickly becomes unreliable. - In Stableford, a hole can sometimes collapse due to a single mistake
- In stroke play, however, high scores usually come from several decisions that reinforce each other
- The best option is not always the most attractive one
Under pressure, difficult situations magnify mistakes. The key is to recognise and choose the option that keeps the highest level of playability. - Develop the ability to find and play options.
Good decisions do not plan the perfect shot, but take the expected mistake into account.
This is exactly what we train in the Strategy Lab. We do not only work on technique, but on the connection between ball flight, dispersion, decision making and the playing situation.
Progress in golf does not only happen when a golfer improves their swing. It also happens when they start to read their abilities more realistically and act with more discipline on the course.
Some of these decision processes follow clear patterns that we deliberately do not present completely in public. That is exactly why we work with structured decision rules in the Strategy Lab.
