The Chipping Series: Let's Geek Out

Stuart Lambert

Oct 9

8 min read

Chipping by the Numbers

Before moving into The Chipping Series, Part I, I would like to take a closer look at some PGA TOUR and amateur short-game statistics. Just as we discovered in the Putting Series, our expectations are not always consistent with reality. We watch PGA TOUR players hit delicate chips that stop beside the hole, see highlights of incredible hole-outs, and sometimes walk onto the golf course expecting ourselves to do something similar. The statistics tell a much more useful story.

More importantly, they can help us establish realistic expectations for our own short games, make better decisions around the green, and determine where purposeful practice may have the greatest impact on our scores. So, before we start talking about setup, technique, bounce, landing spots, club selection, and carry-to-roll ratios.

Let’s geek out.

What Does “Getting Up and Down” Actually Mean?

First, we need to establish what we are measuring. When golfers talk about getting up and down, we generally mean completing the hole in two strokes after missing the green: one short-game shot followed by one putt.

The PGA TOUR commonly reports scrambling percentage, which measures how often a player makes par or better after missing the green in regulation. That distinction is important because scrambling statistics are not purely a measurement of chipping ability. Putting matters too. A golfer can hit a mediocre chip and make a great putt. A golfer can hit a beautiful chip to four feet and miss the putt. The first golfer records a successful up-and-down. The second does not. That is one reason I like looking at several statistics rather than relying on a single number.

How Good Are Amateur Golfers Around the Green?

This is where things get interesting. Shot Scope provides benchmark short-game up-and-down percentages by handicap:

Handicap	Up & Down %
Scratch	47%
5	41%
10	31%
15	21%
20	20%
25	18%

Stop and think about those numbers for a moment.

A scratch golfer does not get up and down half the time in this benchmark data.
A 10-handicap golfer succeeds about three times out of ten.
A 15-handicap golfer succeeds about two times out of ten.

That provides some important perspective. If you are a 15-handicap golfer and fail to get up and down from beside the green, you have not necessarily hit a terrible golf shot. Statistically, getting up and down is something golfers at that level accomplish only about one-fifth of the time in Shot Scope's benchmark data. That does not mean we should accept poor chipping. It means we should establish realistic expectations.

How Close Should You Actually Hit a Chip?

This might be even more useful. Shot Scope published average proximity statistics for short-game shots from 0 to 25 yards from the green, across all lies:

Handicap	Average Proximity
Scratch	9 feet
5	10 feet
10	11 feet
15	13 feet
20	15 feet
25	15 feet

I love this statistic because it challenges what many golfers think a "good chip" looks like. Imagine you are a 10-handicap golfer. You have a chip from beside the green and hit it to 11 feet. You might walk away disappointed.

"I should have hit that closer."

Maybe.

But 11 feet is right around the benchmark average reported by Shot Scope for a 10-handicap golfer from 0 to 25 yards. Even the scratch golfer averages approximately nine feet in this dataset. That is a very different picture from what we tend to remember watching professional golf on television.

Distance Matters. A Lot.

The PGA TOUR statistics make another point especially clear: Not all short-game shots are equal. Current PGA TOUR player data show dramatic differences in scrambling success depending on how far the golfer is from the hole. For example( PGATour.com):

Matt Fitzpatrick's current statistics show: Less than 10 yards: 93.33%10–20 yards: 71.61%20–30 yards: 61.43%More than 30 yards: 26.56%
Jordan Spieth provides another example:
Less than 10 yards: 90.00%10–20 yards: 75.54%20–30 yards: 53.49%More than 30 yards: 29.79%

These are individual-player statistics rather than TOUR-wide averages, so we should not treat them as universal benchmarks. But they illustrate something extremely important. As the recovery shot gets longer, getting up and down becomes considerably more difficult. That may sound obvious.

The magnitude of the difference is what matters.

The Lie Matters Too

Distance is only part of the equation.

The lie matters.
The amount of green available matters.
The slope matters.
The location of the hole matters.
Whether you are short-sided matters.
Whether you are playing from fairway, fringe, rough, or sand matters.

This is why I do not want golfers judging every chip using the same standard. A 30-foot chip from a perfect fairway lie with plenty of green between the ball and hole is not the same shot as a 30-foot chip from deep rough over a bunker to a downhill hole location. They may both be "30-foot chips." They are completely different golf shots. This is going to become increasingly important as we work through this series.

Here Is Another Interesting Number

Arccos has collected an enormous database of amateur golf shots. In one analysis based on more than 800 million recorded shots, Arccos reported that the average 10-handicap golfer gets up and down 31% of the time on shots under 20 yards.

That happens to align exactly with Shot Scope's broader 10-handicap up-and-down benchmark of 31%.

Different databases and methodologies mean we should be cautious about making direct comparisons, but seeing similar numbers from two large amateur-golf datasets is useful.

It gives us a reasonable picture of what real golfers actually do.

Now Let's Talk About Club Selection

Here is where the statistics become especially interesting for this Chipping Series.

Shot Scope analyzed which clubs produced the highest up-and-down percentages for different handicap groups in its benchmark data.

The best-performing clubs were:

Handicap	Best Club	Up & Down
Scratch	8-Iron	55%
5	9-Iron	49%
10	9-Iron	33%
15	8-Iron	30%
20	8-Iron	25%
25	9-Iron	27%

Now that is worth geeking out over. Notice what is missing from the "best club" column.

Lob wedge.
Sand wedge.

For these particular Shot Scope benchmark groups, the clubs associated with the greatest up-and-down success were 8-irons and 9-irons. That does not mean you should chip with an 8-iron every time. It certainly does not mean the lob wedge is a bad club.

There are situations where loft is absolutely necessary. But it supports an idea we are going to return to throughout this series:

Do not make the shot more difficult than it needs to be.

If you can safely get the ball onto the green and rolling toward the hole, sometimes the simpler shot is the better shot.

The Texas Wedge Deserves Some Love Too

Shot Scope's analysis also makes a point about one club golfers sometimes overlook around the green: the putter.

When conditions allow it, putting from off the green removes many variables involved with a lofted chip.

There is less concern about strike.
Less concern about low point.
Less concern about launch.
Less concern about spin.

You still have to judge speed and terrain correctly, of course. But sometimes the best chip...isn't a chip at all.

That is a concept we will explore later when we discuss shot selection.

What Do These Numbers Really Tell Us?

This is the part I think matters most. The statistics are interesting, but I do not want you walking away thinking: "I need to get up and down 47% of the time."

That misses the point.

Instead, use the numbers to establish expectations and identify opportunities. A 20-handicap golfer does not need a PGA TOUR short game. A 15-handicap golfer does not need to hit every chip inside three feet. And a 10-handicap golfer should not automatically consider an 11-foot result a failure. What we want is improvement relative to our own game. Maybe your average chip finishes 20 feet away. Ask yourself:

Can you get that to 15?
Then 12?
Maybe you get up and down 15% of the time.
Can we get that to 20%?
Then 25%?

Those improvements may not look dramatic on Instagram. They can look very different on the scorecard.

The Putting Series Taught Us Something Important

There is also an important connection between the Putting Series and this one. Improving your chipping does not mean hitting every ball next to the hole. It means improving the quality of the putts you leave yourself.

One Shot Scope case study (Data Article: Ian Turnbull) followed a 16-handicap golfer who averaged 21 feet from his short-game shots and got up and down only 12% of the time. Shot Scope noted that improving his average short-game proximity to approximately 15 feet could potentially save about two strokes per round in that particular player's statistical profile.

That is the relationship we need to understand.

Better chip → shorter putt → greater opportunity to get up and down.

Chipping and putting are not separate games. They work together.

Change the Goal

So perhaps we need to change how we define a successful chip.

Instead of: "I need to hit this close."

Start with: "I need to get this ball safely onto the green."

Then: "Where should it land?"

Then: "How will it roll?"

Then: "What club gives me the best chance of producing that result?"

And finally: "Can I leave myself a reasonable putt?"

That is a much more productive way to approach the shot. It is also where we are headed throughout this series.

Practice With a Purpose

These statistics should not lower our standards. They should make our standards smarter.

We now have benchmarks.
We know that handicap matters.
We know distance matters.
We know the lie matters.
We know proximity matters.
We know club selection matters.
And perhaps most importantly, we know that even very good golfers do not get every chip close and do not get up and down every time.

So when we begin practicing, we can stop hitting ball after ball toward a hole without measuring anything. Instead, create a circle around the hole.

Track your proximity.
Track your up-and-down percentage.
Practice from different lies.
Change clubs.
Change landing spots.
Keep score.
And let your performance tell you what needs your attention.

Practice With a Purpose.

Because the goal of this Chipping Series is not to teach you how to hit the prettiest chip shot. It is to help you make better decisions, develop a more predictable short game, leave yourself more makeable putts, and ultimately.

REALISTIC EXPECTATIONS → SMARTER PRACTICE → LOWER SCORES

Before moving on to The Chipping Series, Part I, I wanted to take a closer look at the numbers behind the short game. The statistics give us some valuable perspective, but now it is time to start putting that information into practice. In the next article, we will begin with the foundation: What is a chip shot, when should we choose it, and what are we trying to accomplish? Understanding the shot before worrying about technique will help us make better decisions, simplify our approach around the green, and ultimately give ourselves more opportunities to get up and down.

I hope you enjoy The Chipping Series.

References:

Amateur Up & Down % — Shot Scope's newer benchmark
Amateur Proximity from 0–25 yards — Shot Scope
10-Handicap Under 20 Yards — Arccos: 31% up and down, based on its analysis of more than 800 million shots.
2026 PGA TOUR Scrambling by Distance: 87.84%, 65.87%, 52.68%, and 30.13%.
PGA TOUR Proximity: 6'10" from 10–20 yards and 9'5" from 20–30 yards.
Ian Turnbull Case Study: 16 handicap, 21-foot short-game proximity, 12% up-and-down rate, with Shot Scope projecting approximately two strokes saved per round if he improved his average proximity to 15 feet. "Case Study: One Golfer" (not a handicap benchmark).