I have been sitting here thinking about what I read in the article and have a few ideas.
First, I think keeping the ball in the fairway, or at least out of real trouble, which means straight enough that you can actually see the green from where it lands is really important. This becomes more important if your course has a lot of OB or lateral hazards that cost a lot in penalties.
Secondly, length is good, but if you are playing the correct set of tees for your ability, it becomes less important. Scratch from the tips and scratch from the Sr tees may make a lot of difference in the importance of length.
I believe accuracy is more important than length off the tee. I had much rather hit a 4 iron from the fairway than a 7 iron from 4" fescue rough. My odds of hitting the green go up substantially from a better lie, even if the distance is greater.
The short game is important to amateurs primarily because they miss too many fairways and then have to create a shot to get close to the green. That means they have to get up and down in two shots for par and if you are trying to power the ball out of rough or bend a miracle around a tree, you are putting a lot more pressure on your short game than you would if you hit the fairway, a 3 or 4 iron approach and had to chip up from a decent fairway lie. Keeping it in play in the short grass means a lot to amateurs.
Lastly, if as the writer suggests, the majority of mid-handicap golfers make their putts from 4 ft, then you need to get the chip within that 8ft circle to have a chance at par. That is a lot easier from a good lie in front of the green than from wherever you left it after your attempted miracle from a bad place after your long, inaccurate tee shot...
So what is more important. I believe I will take accuracy off the tee and a good short game before extra length any day. And to be honest, I have to believe that because it is unlikely that God is going to transform me into someone with Tiger-like length in this lifetime.
