Connect with us

Opinion & Analysis

Sand Saves: How often should you actually get “up-and-down” from the bunker based on your handicap?



This is a follow-up to my recent article,“How often should you … get ‘Up-and-Down’ based on your handicap?”  That article focused on short game shots around the green that were NOT sand shots. If you have not read it, please do as I will not be repeating all of the supporting points in this article.

The traditional “Sand Save” stat has long been the accepted measure of skill from greenside sand. The chart below shows average performance in this area for PGA Tour players and an array of handicap levels. It refers to sand shots around the green and within 50 yards of the hole.

How do you fit in?

While sand saves, or “up and downs,” are nice, I do not believe them to be an appropriate or accurate measure of short game skill. Sand shots are quite a bit different than chipping or pitching, not only because they are a very different skill, but also because they tend to occupy a much smaller part of the overall game.

Non-sand short game shots generally range from a low of four or five shots per round at the top levels of the game, to as many as 15 shots at the other end. For perspective, the typical 15-19 handicap golfer averages about 10 non-sand short game shots per round. Shots from the sand are relatively rare, usually only 1 to 3 per round, and the 15-19 handicap golfer averages less than two.

Despite their reduced role, however, sand shots can have a meaningful impact on score. Why? It’s due to the difficulty of these shots and their high incidence of ERRORs, which I will discuss more below.

Again, I do NOT believe that “up and downs” are an appropriate or accurate measure of short game skill for two reasons:

  1. An up-and-down is actually the combination of two skills: Short Game and Putting.
  2. The stat totally ignores ERRORS, or shots that miss the green.

In my 30+ years of studying golf performance at all skill levels, I have found that FREQUENCY and SEVERITY of bad shots (errors) do so much more to influence a player’s scoring level than do all the good shots. I did not create my stat program to expose the errors in the game, but my early work and analysis revealed exactly how important they are, as well as their glaring omission from existing, traditional stats. Accordingly, I built the ability to capture data on the common errors in the game into

The true measure of a player’s short game skill is their Strokes Gained in that facet. BUT, that is simply a number — a positive number is good, and a negative number is not so good. So how then to best display the skill that is associated with the Strokes Gained number? I believe the combination of the three stats below to be the correct way to display skill from the sand:

  • Average putting distance when the green is successfully hit.
  • Percent of shots hit to within 8 feet of the hole.
  • Percent of errors, or shots that miss the putting surface.

In the chart above, the orange line represents the percentage of shots that the various levels of handicap golfers hit to within 8 feet of the hole. Why 8 feet? Our data has told us that this distance represents a good shot, just as 5 feet does in Chipping and Pitching around the green. The black line represents shots that miss the green (errors). For example, if you are the average 15-handicap golfer, you should be getting about one of every six sand shots to within 8 feet. You’ll miss the green with about one in every three sand shots, however, so you’ll make twice as many errors as you make good shots.

Note that the two lines cross at about a 10 handicap. A 10 handicap is actually a better golfer than 90 percent of the people who play the game regularly. Yet for every sand shot that they successfully get to within 8 feet of the hole, they are also sculling or leaving one in the sand and missing the green altogether. Further, these errors can lead to even more difficult positions, large numbers and real frustration.

Finally, a fear of the greenside sand can dramatically impact confidence and ability to hit greens. If you are having difficulty from the sand, I suggest that you first consult with your pro about your sand wedge. Is it the right loft and bounce for your game and the condition of your course’s sand? Then work to gain confidence in getting OUT. Just focus on getting the ball on the green. Forget the about the “save” until you can practice enough to reliably play the array of sand shots required with confidence.

If you’d like to see how greenside errors are affecting your game, as well as where you stack up to golfers in your handicap level, you can register for a FREE TRIAL of my strokes-gained analysis at

Your Reaction?
  • 149
  • LEGIT8
  • WOW2
  • LOL1
  • IDHT2
  • FLOP1
  • OB1
  • SHANK5

In 1989, Peter Sanders founded Golf Research Associates, LP, creating what is now referred to as Strokes Gained Analysis. His goal was to design and market a new standard of statistically based performance analysis programs using proprietary computer models. A departure from “traditional stats,” the program provided analysis with answers, supported by comparative data. In 2006, the company’s website,, was launched. It provides interactive, Strokes Gained analysis for individual golfers and more than 150 instructors and coaches that use the program to build and monitor their player groups. Peter has written, or contributed to, more than 60 articles in major golf publications including Golf Digest, Golf Magazine and Golf for Women. From 2007 through 2013, Peter was an exclusive contributor and Professional Advisor to Golf Digest and Peter also works with PGA Tour players and their coaches to interpret the often confusing ShotLink data. Zach Johnson has been a client for nearly five years. More recently, Peter has teamed up with Smylie Kaufman’s swing coach, Tony Ruggiero, to help guide Smylie’s fast-rising career.



  1. Brad

    Aug 3, 2018 at 5:01 am

    The best thing to do on many of the bunkers around here is to take your putter or a 7 iron and just chip it out on the lowest side of the bunker, regardless of what direction that may be. Many of the bunkers are like wet concrete around here and the bunker technique used by most pros and taught by most coaching pros is entirely worthless and will only result in a skulled bunker shot 80% or more of the time. I would rather hit a flop shot over a bunker or over a 50 foot tall tree from a hard pan lie than have to get it out of most bunkers.

    I would just love to see some of the best pros on tour get out of some of the kind of bunkers we have to play in sometime. There would be no end to the complaints from them I’m sure…

  2. DaveyD

    Aug 2, 2018 at 11:02 am

    The charts above should be explained by the number of data points used to create the statistics. While the overall trends aren’t surprising and are most likely expected, these types of stats are kept for your players, but less likely to be kept as the handicap increases.
    The last comment is in regard to putting, or rather the putting surface- in general. An assumption might be made that better golfers might play on better courses with better-maintained greens which could positively impact putting success.

    • DaveyD

      Aug 2, 2018 at 11:03 am

      The “your players” above should be “tour players”

  3. Poot

    Aug 2, 2018 at 2:04 am

    You ain’t applying this to Links bunkers, that’s for sure. We saw what happened at Carnoustie last week, they were lucky just to get it out.
    So, another meaningless “you’re an amateur and you suck” statistical analysis.

  4. Paul

    Aug 1, 2018 at 10:54 pm

    Makes me feel better about my sand play!
    I thought I was pretty average but I’m actually doing ok!

  5. Tom54

    Aug 1, 2018 at 2:21 pm

    Kevin explains it well. Our bunkers at our course aren’t the greatest either. Depth of sand inconsistent. One shot you hit couple inches behind and it comes out great. Next bunker you’re in there’s no sand, the club bounces into the ball and over the green it goes. Lots of times our group plays move it out of footprints. Pros play off perfect lies why shouldn’t we?

  6. Tee-Bone

    Aug 1, 2018 at 1:58 pm

    Strokes Gained on the PGA Tour are based on the averages of the field. Where are the averages from with your Strokes Gained programs?

    • Peter Sanders

      Aug 2, 2018 at 9:09 am

      Good Q! Our Strokes Gained model is based upon the average Scratch player. We calculate each players SG # vs. Scratch and then compare it to the average SG #’s in each facet for the player’s Target handicap range. It works!

  7. Kevin

    Aug 1, 2018 at 11:05 am

    Sand save recovery stats are skewed as i’d guess the majority of amateurs aren’t playing courses where the greenside bunkers have several inches of sand and perfectly manicured like on tour. factor in that thousands of courses have little to no sand in some bunkers and the liklihood of a skull is much higher than a pga course. i always find it amusing when watching an instruction program on GC and they mention opening face and hitting 3 inches behind the ball. good luck when you come play in ohio and the bunker is hard packed. and its not goat tracks…a lot of really nice courses simply can’t afford to constantly replace/fill sand in their bunkers.

    • Mat

      Aug 1, 2018 at 5:33 pm

      Complete agreement. Sand, believe it or not, is expensive and getting rare. Traps are not worthy of a lot of practice outside of knowing your lie (your feet will tell you how far you sink in is how far behind the ball you enter) and getting out in one shot. If you’re a 10+, that’s the biggest challenge. Get out and two putt for bogey. Don’t take two to get out – that’s the card killer.

      • Pete McGill

        Aug 2, 2018 at 2:08 am

        True. My course has one hole with the only two bunkers. Players walk off with either 100% or zero in sand saves.

Leave a Reply

Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Club Junkie

Club Junkie: VA Composites Nemesys wood shaft review and a big golf week for me!



This week is a big golf week — playing in a member invitational! Got the bag sorted out and there are 14 clubs that I am going to live or die on the course with. I have been hitting the new VA Composites Nemesys wood shaft and am very impressed. A great counterbalanced option with a mid-low launch and low spin.

Your Reaction?
  • 8
  • LEGIT4
  • WOW0
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP1
  • OB1
  • SHANK2

Continue Reading

Opinion & Analysis

Book review: The Golf Lover’s Guide To England



There is this notion in the British isles, completely foreign to America, that states that visitors shall have access to all but a smallish passel of private clubs. In abject contrast, the finest clubs of the USA do their level best to keep their gates closed to both the riff and the raff, neither of which is nearly as detrimental to their continuity as some fearful members might believe. In this era of the database, would it be that hard to allow a visitor access once in her/his/their lifetime to Cypress Point, or Friar’s Head, or Prairie Dunes? Into the database their GHIN number would go, and if said individual were fortunate enough to win the lottery for a coveted golden ticket, err, tee time, that would be it for all time. I digress, however, as that rant is not the purpose of this book review.

The Golf Lover’s Guide To England, written and compiled by Michael Whitehead, lists 33 elite golf clubs across that country, divided into four regions, which are further divided into nine districts. Each of these clubs would be identified as unlikely in the USA, but is certainly accessible in England. The short story is: this nearly-pocket-sized compendium should accompany any traveler of golfing purpose, as it is invaluable for understanding the ins and outs of making contact, locating courses, and learning of their nature and history. The long story goes quite a bit deeper.

Michael Whitehead has the forethought to organize his works (Scotland was his first TGLGT volume) in meticulous fashion. The volume opens with a colorful map of the targeted country, complete with numbered flags to identify each of the courses reviewed within. The entire book explodes with wondrous colors, both in page background and course photography, and heightens the sensory experience of its study.

A delightful touch is the location of the Acknowledgements section in the front of the book. Typically relegated to one of the final pages that we skip past, before closing the cover, this is not the case here. Whitehead recognizes the invaluable assistance of his supporting cast, and situates them front and center. Good for you, Mr. Whitehead.

A brief history of the game in England is followed by the first of the four (North, Midlands & East Anglia, South East, South West) regions. The most populous of these is the South East, and we will use it to break down the districts. Five courses occupy an unnamed, scattered district. Five more are situated in the Surrey/Berkshire sandbelt, and four of those sites offer 36 holes on property. A final three fit into the Kent Coast district, and one of them has 27 holes within its confines. Thus it goes throughout the other three regions, albeit at a less-frenetic pace.

Moving along, each of the 33 seminal courses is granted six pages for description and assessment. Whitehead assigns color-coded price guides to each course, ranging from the up-to-49-British-Pounds entry point to the over-200-British-Pounds stratum. He also offers seasonal stratification, identifying the High (expensive) season, the Shoulder (mid-range) seasons, and the Low (economic) season. To facilitate contact with the club, Whitehead does his level best to provide online, email, and telephone booking options for each of the clubs. He adds in area courses of interest, in case the reader/traveler is confined to a specific locale. What more could one need, in advance of the golf trip of a lifetime?

For starters, one might wish to know a bit more about the course. Mr. Whitehead goes into the distances of teeing grounds, the need (or not) for a handicap certificate, the availability of caddies and rentals (push cart, electric push cart, clubs and motorized carts), the dress code, and (if any) tee time restrictions. In other words, any botched planning falls squarely on the shoulders of the golfer. Michael Whitehead has led the horse to the trough, filled it with water, and essentially dunked the equine mouth in the aqueous substance.

I’ve a friend who hates to know anything about a course he has yet to play. Attempt to mention any facet of the course and his response is a loud and grating LA-LA-LA-LA-LA, ad infinitum or until you cease your attempt at enlightenment. For the rest of us sane travelers, a bit of back story about the property, the architect, and the laying out of the course adds to the anticipation. As an architecture aficionado, I base the majority of my trips around the works of the golden-age architects, here in the USA. If afforded the opportunity to travel to England, I would seek out the works of Harry Colt, Alister MacKenzie, Herbert Fowler, and their contemporaries. Thankfully, all of this information is listed in Whitehead’s thorough volume.

The old carpenter’s motto of measure twice and cut once can certainly be applied when considering a purchase of this volume. Abandon its opportunity and you risk a return trip to the lumber yard, at considerable expense. Take advantage of what it has to offer, and your trip’s chances at success are doubled at the very least.

Your Reaction?
  • 5
  • LEGIT1
  • WOW1
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK0

Continue Reading

Golf's Perfect Imperfections

Golf’s Perfect Imperfections: What’s your target score?



Without a target score, you are just wandering in the field like a feather in the wind. The North Star for your mindset starts with a target score!


Your Reaction?
  • 1
  • LEGIT0
  • WOW0
  • LOL0
  • IDHT0
  • FLOP0
  • OB0
  • SHANK1

Continue Reading