More experience = less aces per holes played?

[Script]

I just wanted to get a feel if everyone is on board with my thinking. I've noticed as my game has drastically improved over the course of several years, my aces are further and further apart from each other. It seems like the ration of aces per time decreases based on better golf lines and attempts to "park" a hole rather than running it.

Anyone else experience this as well, or should I just be more agressive off the T?

 

[billnchristy]

Is that why pros have hundreds?

 

[Script]

They have hundreds cause they play all the time as well. Something to keep in mind. Also, longer holes are more reachable too, increasing the chance.

 

[juanbond]

With zero aces in 19+ years, my average holes per ace comes in at a nice round "complex infinity". Cool number, crappy stat.

 

[Script]

^ Invert it and it's 0.

Also according to my theory.. maybe you're just too good. Think positives.

 

[juanbond]

^ Invert it and it's 0.

Also according to my theory.. maybe you're just too good. Think positives.

Complex infinity just sounds so much cooler than zero.

 

[scarpfish]

I would expect perhaps one reason is that advanced players tend to prefer longer, more challenging layouts that don't have as many ace opportunities whereas lesser skilled players prefer pitch and putts that have considerably more.

 

[Frank Delicious]

Aces are bad shots that got lucky so I agree with the OP.

 

[ERicJ]

I'm generally on board with the OP as well. Aces are definitely sweet when they happen. But unless there's a cash Ace pot involved I'd prefer parked drives for easy putts over Aces. Assuming par 3's, parking two drives for 2's is way easier than hitting an Ace and a 3... and saves you just as many strokes.

 

[racer93]

I just wanted to get a feel if everyone is on board with my thinking. I've noticed as my game has drastically improved over the course of several years, my aces are further and further apart from each other. It seems like the ration of aces per time decreases based on better golf lines and attempts to "park" a hole rather than running it.

Anyone else experience this as well, or should I just be more agressive off the T?

Aces are bad shots that got lucky.

Sorry Frank, didn't see you'd already posted that...

 

[scarpfish]

Just happened to find this thread on another DG board.

http://www.iowadg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=47262&sid=1c9ed4c6a7185b8255e50bd59a7c30ac

I say aces are often bad shots that got lucky, but sometimes are decent shots that got very lucky.

 

[dobbins66]

I say aces are often bad shots that got lucky, but sometimes are decent shots that got very lucky.

I agree with this - I have two Thumber aces on the same hole with the same disc. Throw it high and let it drop by the basket - Two times it happened to drop in.

 

[Waddly Hobbins]

I don't think that all aces are bad shots gone lucky. If you are not running straight at the hole and are letting it fade into the basket it is a good shot gone better. This way, if you miss the ace it will simply continue to fade and park next to the basket. There are holes at several courses that I play that I go for the ace every time I play and even missing it I am still sitting for birdie. Also, if the basket has natural back stop behind it, it is not silly to run straight at it.

 

[Jax11]

Doubles round aces are good strategy if the first thrower parks it and the second one runs at the chains.

And what do you consider skip aces? They obviously hit before the basket and hop up into it, Yes some would fly by if they miss while others might sit and be an easy birdie.

I do not have an ace yet, but am still waiting.

 

[skurf]

Aces are bad shots that got lucky so I agree with the OP.

Not if it's a spike hyzer or overhand ace. Of course any ace is lucky, but those types of shots I mentioned would not be bad shots if they missed since they wouldn't blow by the basket.

 

[racer93]

I don't think that all aces are bad shots gone lucky. If you are not running straight at the hole and are letting it fade into the basket it is a good shot gone better. This way, if you miss the ace it will simply continue to fade and park next to the basket. There are holes at several courses that I play that I go for the ace every time I play and even missing it I am still sitting for birdie. Also, if the basket has natural back stop behind it, it is not silly to run straight at it.

Of course there are times where an ace run is called for, such as doubles or if you have a backstop. But, in general, aces are bad shots that got lucky. In most instances, they would be AT LEAST 30' past the basket versus being parked and a lot closer. Again, there are exceptions that have been pointed out, so no need to rehash.

 

[Donovan]

I personally can think of 2 reasons for this.

First one is the fact that when you are starting out you always seems to be short of the hole on short par 3's. So, as you are learning what your discs do, you are throwing them harder than a parked shot. I doubt most experienced players are really gunning for aces on every par 3 they run into. They are placing good shots to get the 2. If you miss an ace, you are likely to skip or run far enough past the basket, to force you into a tougher long putt for 2 and possibly even end up with a 3.

The second reason that I though of was as you get better you play less short courses. You want the challenge and you stay away from the little pitch & putt type courses as you develop.

BTW, I did not go read that other site's thread posted, so sorry if it said the same things.

 

[stsren]

I plan on trying for more aces in the future, but I agree it's nice to park it as well.
As for stats on less aces as you go forward...can't say. I've gotten 1 ace in the last month (and 1 for my lifetime, as it stands)...so I'll keep you posted.

 

[racer93]

I don't know why people think that playing "short, pitch and putt" courses don't help your game. Yes they do! They help your mid range and putter drives, plus your putting. It really forces you to be absolutely on with your game. Longer courses do the same thing including driving. It's just a different animal, good and needed in its own way. I use short courses like this to really focus on my short game, because my local courses are "long-ish" and don't require many upshots (maybe 2 per round).

Just my $0.02.

 

[Donovan]

I don't know why people think that playing "short, pitch and putt" courses don't help your game. Yes they do! They help your mid range and putter drives, plus your putting. It really forces you to be absolutely on with your game. Longer courses do the same thing including driving. It's just a different animal, good and needed in its own way. I use short courses like this to really focus on my short game, because my local courses are "long-ish" and don't require many upshots (maybe 2 per round).

Just my $0.02.

If this is a shot about my post...

I never said anything about pitch & putt courses not helping your game! I certainly don't want anyone thinking I said that either. I still play them, regularly. I am a big advocate for playing pitch & putt courses to sharpen your short game. I can't get hardly anyone to go with me, but that doesn't stop me from doing it alone. I was stating that "most people" don't play them as often as they did when they started learning the game.

Now if this wasn't directed toward me, just ignore my babbling.