pga tour stats inside 100 yards

Today's news
Reviews and deals
Climate change
2024 election
Fall allergies
Health news
Mental health
Sexual health
Family health
So mini ways
Unapologetically
Buying guides

Entertainment

How to Watch
My Portfolio
Latest News
Stock Market
Biden Economy
Stocks: Most Actives
Stocks: Gainers
Stocks: Losers
Trending Tickers
World Indices
US Treasury Bonds
Top Mutual Funds
Highest Open Interest
Highest Implied Volatility
Stock Comparison
Advanced Charts
Currency Converter
Basic Materials
Communication Services
Consumer Cyclical
Consumer Defensive
Financial Services
Industrials
Real Estate
Mutual Funds
Credit Cards
Balance Transfer Cards
Cash-back Cards
Rewards Cards
Travel Cards
Credit Card Offers
Best Free Checking
Student Loans
Personal Loans
Car Insurance
Mortgage Refinancing
Mortgage Calculator
Morning Brief
Market Domination
Market Domination Overtime
Asking for a Trend
Opening Bid
Stocks in Translation
Lead This Way
Good Buy or Goodbye?
Financial Freestyle
Fantasy football
Pro Pick 'Em
College Pick 'Em
Fantasy baseball
Fantasy hockey
Fantasy basketball
Download the app
Daily fantasy
Scores and schedules
GameChannel
World Baseball Classic
Premier League
CONCACAF League
Champions League
Motorsports
Horse racing
Newsletters

New on Yahoo

Privacy Dashboard

Yahoo Finance

Pga tour stats: who's the best on approach shots inside 100 yards.

PGA Tour Stats: We take a look at the top five in approach-shot proximity from inside 100 yards—and the lob wedges they use.

GolfStats.com

Scores, Statistics, Tools and Picks for Golf Research and Betting

Save Search Close

Golf iq - advanced pga tour statistics.

The Open Championship

Royal Troon

5 strategies to teeing it up at Troon

5 tour-pro tips for Troon

The golf stats that matter most on the PGA Tour

KAPALUA, HAWAII - JANUARY 09: Bryson DeChambeau of the United States reacts to his shot from the 18th tee during the third round of the Sentry Tournament Of Champions at the Kapalua Plantation Course on January 09, 2021 in Kapalua, Hawaii. (Photo by Gregory Shamus/Getty Images)

Consider, for a moment, Denny McCarthy. In the 2019-20 season, he was the strokes gained/putting champion of the PGA Tour , and almost became just the second person (after Jason Day) to average an entire stroke gained over the field per round. It was his second straight mythical putting title, and it’s not even a little hyperbolic to call him one of the greatest putters on Earth. That said, if you know anything about Denny McCarthy, you know he’s not one of the greatest players on Earth. In the two seasons when he led the PGA Tour in putting, he finished 111th and 73rd in the FedEx Cup standings and only managed six top-10s in 51 tournaments. There’s no doubt that he’s very good, but there’s also no doubt that in this case, his brilliant putting didn’t translate to superlative results.

Golf, like many sports, is fertile ground for folk wisdom. If you’ve spent time around a course, you’ve heard the expression “drive for show, putt for dough.” McCarthy’s case would cast some doubt on this formulation, but of course the 27-year-old is just one person and it would be a mistake to draw any statistical conclusions from the smallest possible sample size. Right or wrong, though, the “putt for dough” idea is attempting to answer a question of critical importance for players: Which skill matters the most? Which specific aspect of golf has the greatest correlation to sustained success? And which elements are less important than we think?

To search for the answer, I reached out to Rick Gehman, founder of RickRunGood.com and a Golf Digest contributor. There are a few brilliant numbers guys in golf, and he’s one of them. As expected, he took the concept and blew it out of the water. In his words:

I’ve attached a sheet that looks at the 130 official PGA Tour stats and compares them for the 2020 season FedEx Cup Regular Season Points. With only one year, and a shortened one at that, there’s going to be more randomness than usual BUT I think the list certainly passes the eye test.

Gehman’s method was what he called a “straightforward regression model,” in which two variables are compared to each other using 129 qualifying players. The steady variable is FedEx Cup points accrued by a player during the regular season, which was our metric for success (you could argue that total strokes-gained average is better, but I wanted to go by the PGA Tour’s own standard, albeit before the points blow up in the playoffs and skew the results). The second variable is the other 130 stats, with a ranking value assigned to each based on a player’s finish in the year-end standings. By finding out which ones have the closest correlation to each other, you can see which statistics might predict success.

In simpler words, this shows us what the best players did the best.

RELATED: The top 100 PGA Tour pros in 2021, ranked

Let me echo Gehman’s caution up top: With only an abbreviated season’s worth of data, there is bound to be some statistical noise, and to draw definite conclusions of any kind, you’d need to look at a years-long study.

With that said, the list can be found here . The higher the number, the more closely correlated the result is with FedEx Cup success. A few observations:

• As a quality control test, it’s good to see that “official money” and “Official World Golf Ranking” are the top two. Clearly, if these didn’t correlate with our concept of success, something would be seriously wrong.

• Of the comprehensive strokes-gained numbers, SG/approach the green is the most “important” to overall success. It’s the top stat after money and World Ranking, and it’s even above SG/total, which comes in fourth. That last fact is the least intuitive of the results and probably deserves closer inspection.

RELATED: What the sophisticated golf fan should be looking for in 2021

• The top six are: SG/approach the green, SG/off-the-tee, scoring average, SG/total, SG/around the green, and SG/tee-to-green. Again, this all stands to reason and functions as good quality control.

The saying "putt for dough" on the PGA Tour hasn't held up the last two seasons, as Denny McCarthy led both times in strokes gained/putting but finishing 111th and 76th on the FedEx Cup points list, respectively.

Gregory Shamus

• But you might have noticed something missing … where’s putting? Incredibly, SG/putting ranks 64th on the list, exactly at the halfway mark. It’s hard not to think of that number in relation to McCarthy, and while the warning above still has to be observed, it definitely raises some questions about the relative value of putting.

• Looking at the top of the list, there are a lot of stats like “birdie average” and “scoring average” that you’d expect. But when you start getting into highly specific stats, like driving distance and “approaches from > 200 yards” you see the putting categories appear only after several tee-to-green stats.

RELATED: 10 players who will make you money betting on them in 2021

• In particular, long approaches seem to be of some importance. Approaches from longer than 175 yards seem more correlated with success than anything on the green. Greens in regulation is hugely critical, coming in 16th.

• Scrambling matters, too. Not only is SG/around the green fifth overall, but scrambling itself (31st), sand-save percentage (35th), scrambling from the rough (44th) and scrambling from 10-20 yards (49th) are all relatively high.

• Interestingly, “consecutive cuts” finished dead last, one of only two stats with a negative correlation value. Clearly, in a system like the FedEx Cup where points are top heavy, consistency without at least sporadic excellence is a dubious merit.

• In the “Bryson was right” department, driving distance average (28th) is more closely correlated with success than driving-accuracy percentage (52nd).

• If you’re looking for a magic secret stat that perfectly predicts success, you’ll be disappointed. Personally, I was hoping that we’d somehow find out that all the best players were wizards from the left rough between 150-175 yards. Alas …

RELATED: 7 sleepers you need to watch in 2021

After reading Gehman’s list, I wanted to try one more approach that looked only at the top 30 players on tour from last season. It’s less scientific, but I thought it might be worthwhile. Luis Rivera at the PGA Tour helped immensely by providing me with a spreadsheet of the overall ranking in all the major strokes-gained categories from the top 30 in the 2020 FEC rankings. With these numbers, it was possible to do a quick and dirty check for success correlation.

A clutch putt from Mackenzie Hughes, something his stats show he's prone to do, at the BMW Championship earned him the last spot into the 2020 Tour Championship.

Stacy Revere

With fewer players, there will be outliers, and the data will necessarily be less precise. As an example, we can look at Mackenzie Hughes, who missed nine of his first 11 cuts, then made it all the way to the Tour Championship by virtue of catching fire late. He’s in the McCarthy vein, having finished eighth in putting but worse than 140th in the other major categories. Meanwhile, Hideki Matsuyama goes the other way, cleaning up from off the green but finishing a sad 170th in putting.

Here were the average season-ending rankings for each category among this group of 30:

SG/total : 29.7 SG:/tee-to-green : 41.47 SG/approach : 52.97 SG/off-the-tee : 53.67 SG/putting : 65.73 SG/around the green : 71.9

The similarity here is that putting is relatively low, and the biggest difference comes with “around the green,” which looks a lot less significant here. (Also, fans of strokes gained will be relieved to know that SG/total is No. 1 here, as you’d expect it to be.) Again, Gehman’s method is the more sophisticated metric, and should take precedence, but it’s interesting to see what changes and what doesn’t with a slightly different method.

The broad conclusion is that when you look at 2020, tee-to-green golf seems to be a more useful skill than putting. In the real world, a great player needs both, but we may want to get ahead of the curve and tweak that famous expression: Putt for show, do everything else for dough.

Ambassadors
Golf Digest Best Teachers
Golf for Beginners
Mental & Game Management
Why We Do It
Club Fitting
Drivers & Woods
Equipment Insider
Hybrids & Irons
Book a Lesson
Book a Club Fitting
GOLFTEC.COM

Record Your Swing with the GOLFTEC App’s Innovative Features

Swing journey – bryan austin, swing journey – lauren suzuki, swing journey – olivia lammey, swinging into style: mariah swigart’s golftec club fitting experience, swing journey – thea boyd, swing journey – chris ellertson & mark ellertson, putting secrets unveiled at the ping putting lab.

Golf Stats: PGA Tour player approach shots

Golf stats: how pga tour pros perform on approach shots and why that matters to you.

By Jon Levy

Are you a stats junkie?

In other words, are you that person who can, at will, recite the batting averages for the entire 2009 New York Yankees World Series team and up-to-the-minute stats in virtually any sport? In golf, do you know every score you’ve shot for the past ten years and track fairways hit, GIR, putts and countless other performance stats with your own game?

Our new series, Golf Stats , takes a look at every stat imaginable in the game of golf. So if that’s the case, listen up.

If you don’t share our unrelenting penchant for numbers nerdiness, well, you may be surprised how more clarity on the game can help your own. Because it’s no secret GolfTEC is a big proponent of knowing the facts when it comes to golf improvement, and this goes far beyond initiatives like the GolfTEC SwingTRU Motion Study . So, take heed as we roll out a variety of golf stats that put you in the know.

As explained this week in the infographics below: How PGA Tour players fare on approach shots from 100-125, 150-175 and 200-plus yards.

Golf Stats tour player approach shot proximity

PGA Tour player approach shots: 100-125 yards

GIR: 74.59%
Proximity from the fairway: 20’0″
Proximity from the rough: 30’3″

PGA Tour player approach shots: 150-175 yards

GIR: 63.95%
Proximity from the fairway: 27’6″
Proximity from the rough: 41’5″

PGA Tour player approach shots: Over 200 yards

GIR: 46.06%
Proximity from the fairway: 50’3″
Proximity from the rough: 72’9″

Why these stats matter to YOU

This is precisely why a better understanding of golf stats can help. Knowing data points like how the world’s best only hit the green with less than half of their shots from over 200 yards — and still just 75 percent of greens with wedges — should tell you even they are far from perfect. It should also say to replace that 4-iron you’ve pulled from deep rough in an attempt to “go for it” with a club you know keeps it in play .

Not just course management, but practice management

Course management is one thing, but knowing Tour pro stats can also help you fine-tune which parts of your game need the most work.

This means that if you do notice a part of your game is close to a specific Tour player stat, or one that conversely falls far below in relation to everything else, you can more easily pinpoint the areas needing the most attention (i.e. a weakness in long putts vs. short putts, tee shots vs. approach shots, etc.). This will help maximize your effectiveness during practice.

By the way, this is a good time to say if you’re not one who tracks their stats on the golf course, you should start. Now.

Tracking simple stats like greens in regulation, fairways hit from the tee, a breakdown of putting performance like total putts, three-putts and length of putts made/missed, up-and-down conversions, etc., may not provide the fully detailed view of your game like the PGA Tour does for its players , but anytime you can create a better overall picture of your game it’s a step in the right direction.

How to track your own stats

New golf tracking software products and apps hit the market seemingly everyday. So there are plenty of great options available to track your own golf stats. If you prefer keep things a bit more old school, however, even just a simple addition to your scorecard can do the trick.

The bottom line

Become a stats junkie with your golf game and your scores will thank you for it. Stay tuned as our Golf Stats series continues …

Related: Aim small to a big target for more GIR The Approach: Red, yellow or green?

Like our content? Subscribe to the GolfTEC Scramble for the latest on instruction, news, equipment and more!

Related articles more from author, the scoop – december 2023, leave a reply cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Notify me of new posts by email.

Instruction

Pros v. amateurs: shots from 100 yards and 150 yards.

I read a great article on a golf blog recently about what distance people think they hit their drivers versus how far they actually do, and it made me think… what is the reality of the 100- and 150-yard shots for the average player? How does this compare to a Tour Professional hitting from the same distance, with the same target, under the same conditions?

So I enlisted the help of a buddy of mine, William McGirt, who finished 85 th on the 2014 PGA Tour’s Money List making just over $1.25 million (Hey, William, can you throw me a few bones, pards!?).

For the test, I asked three golfers to hit 100- and 150-yard shots, then charted their CARRY distance results. I know this is a very small sampling of players, but I just wanted to show you the basic idea of what I see on a daily basis with amateur golfers.

Below is the Trackman Analysis of the four players:

William McGirt, PGA Tour Player
Tom Stickney, Teaching Professional/Scratch Player
John, 10-Handicap
Howard, 15-Handicap

William McGirt (100.6, 98.6, and 103.6 yards)

The Tour Player was much more consistent with his average shot at 100.9 yards, and his “big miss” was only off 3.6 yards. This puts William next to the hole and on the correct tier more often than not, unless he gets unlucky or spins the ball too much once it lands.

Tom Stickney (100.0, 101.2, and 94.2 yards)

The teaching professional did fine, but his “big miss” was off 5.8 yards. This is what we tend to see with the single-digit players. They can hit all the shots, however, their consistency lacks when compared to the Tour Professional.

Howard (93.5, 104.3, and 100.2 yards), and John (102.1, 102.9, and 107.7 yards)

As your handicap goes up, so will the variance of the shots hit from this distance. Both Howard and John hit the ball around 100 yards, but not consistently. Howard had an average of 99.3 yards and John had an average of 104.2 yards. But it’s not the average that is the issue here; it’s the lack of distance control with both short and long shots by both.

Howard’s shortest shot went 93.5 yards and longest went 104.4 yards, giving us a gap of 10.9 yards or 32.7 feet!

John’s shortest shot was 102.1 and his longest was 107.7 giving us a gap of 5.6 yards or 16.8 feet.

Now if the pin was always in the middle of the green, it would not be that big of an issue. But when the pins are in the front or back, which shot is going to show up? This is the difference between chipping on and having a long two putt for par.

For the single-digit player, you must not lose your focus when you have the feel. If you lose your focus, you have the big miss potentially taking away a good birdie chance. For the average player, grooving solid contact is the key. Hitting the ball solid will help you to accurately predict what shot you’ll hit and how far it will go.

Now let’s examine the 150-yard shot from each group of players.

William McGirt (151.4, 149.9, and 151.0)

As a PGA Tour Professional, you would assume that the yardages would again be perfect — and they’re close, with an average of 150.8 yards. But one thing I want to point out is how TIGHT the dispersion is from this distance. You can see his blue dots are clustered very tightly around the 150-yard target. Once again, this gives him the best chance to be around the pin with the most accuracy. Also look at what club he hit versus the other players.

Tom Stickney (151.9, 150.7, and 149.8 yards)

As a scratch player, the talent is there to hit the shots but the dispersion is not even in the same ballpark as the Tour Player. This shows us once again why I should teach golf for a living! I get strokes from the pro, but never enough.

Howard (141.5, 141.3, and 145.9 yards), and John (143.2, 151.9, and 139.6 yards)

With the handicap golfers, we saw a large difference between the shortest and longest shot. However, as the distances get longer, you will see that most players base their 150-yard shot on the one out of “X” that they hit that yardage, not their average!

Howard’s closest was 145.9, but the actual average was around 141, if you took out the last shot. John indeed hit his best one 151.9, but his other two were around 141 as well.

Now let’s look at carry vs. total yardage for these two players.

Howard’s TOTAL distance was 147.4 yards while John’s TOTAL was 152.7. And these are what most average golfers depend on — the total yardage to get the ball to the distance they want it to go. Sometimes this works, but other times it does not. I will say that it is very difficult to judge what is going to happen once the ball hits the ground and it’s best to understand your carry distances. Sadly, most amateurs do not.

So what do I want you to take from this article?

Tour Professionals carry the ball the same distance every time with the same club within reason.
Tour Professionals have tighter dispersion patterns than all of us with each club.
Single-digit players can have flashes of brilliance as it pertains to distance and dispersion control, but the “big miss” is always lurking. It could be due to a lack of focus or a swing flaw that creeps up. It’s your job to figure out what it is so you can be better in the end.
Average players are OK with shorter clubs in regard to carry distances, but once they get outside 100 yards they focus only on total distance.
Average players based their overall distances on the one perfect shot they hit out of “X” number of shots instead of the real averages.
Average players have huge swings in distance due to unsolid shots (fat and thin) that can hamper their distances.
Average players try and hit the same club as the Pros with little success. Both Howard and John needed one more club to actually carry the ball 150 yards in the air, but never did so on average.

Failure is crucial: Make your practice sessions more difficult

Dr. Gupta: The Secret To Finding YOUR GAME

Tom F. Stickney II, is a specialist in Biomechanics for Golf, Physiology, and 3d Motion Analysis. He has a degree in Exercise and Fitness and has been a Director of Instruction for almost 30 years at resorts and clubs such as- The Four Seasons Punta Mita, BIGHORN Golf Club, The Club at Cordillera, The Promontory Club, and the Sandestin Golf and Beach Resort. His past and present instructional awards include the following: Golf Magazine Top 100 Teacher, Golf Digest Top 50 International Instructor, Golf Tips Top 25 Instructor, Best in State (Florida, Colorado, and California,) Top 20 Teachers Under 40, Best Young Teachers and many more. Tom is a Trackman University Master/Partner, a distinction held by less than 25 people in the world. Tom is TPI Certified- Level 1, Golf Level 2, Level 2- Power, and Level 2- Fitness and believes that you cannot reach your maximum potential as a player with out some focus on your physiology. You can reach him at [email protected] and he welcomes any questions you may have.

75 Comments

Pingback: See How Easily You Can Hit More Greens | Josh Boggs PGA Golf Lessons

Feb 12, 2015 at 4:24 pm

Let me share with you my numbers tested on TrackMan this Saturday 7 Feb 2015 and my hcp is 14:

Dispersion on 140 yards was 33 yards (min:114 – max:147) or a score of 67 on the Trackman Combine, equivalent of a 5 Hcp .

Dispersion on 160 yards was 24 yards (min: 148 – max:172) or a score of 67 on the Trackman Combine, equivalent of a 5 Hcp.

I believe that the scores of Howard and John in your example are still pretty good as the dispersion is lower than 10 yards, right ?

Feb 11, 2015 at 11:22 am

I’m missing one thing from this. How does the carry actually matter? I always hear that phrase “no photos on the scorecard.” In this case, it actually seems as if the higher handicappers understood what their rollout was, therefore they understood their carry.

Your point was they didn’t account for carry. I’m trying to square that still…

Barry Martin

Feb 4, 2015 at 12:27 pm

Great article Tom and many useful takeaways. I have only one point of contention…

The point you make about amateurs consistently under-clubbing isn’t quite the whole picture in my experience. As a a regular Joe, there is NOTHING more tragic than saying “gee, I’m going to be smart, club up, and put a nice smooth swing on this one.” You know what happens next – my tension free swing makes great contact and airmails the green by 10 yards. And on most courses I play, I am penalized FAR more harshly for being long than short.

As a mid-80s guy I hit very few perfect shots, and I’ve been burned so many times with this “Humble Long” miss I can’t tell you. It’s why I’ll keep hitting 8i from 150, even if I do it only 5 out of 10 times. With a short miss, I’ll usually have a fair chance at bogey (and a fighting chance to get up and down for par), where the longer club I am just asking for a particularly cruel double (or worse).

Kit Alexander

Jan 30, 2015 at 8:14 am

A nice read but I do have one issue. It states at the beginning that you asked the players to hit 150-yards shots and judged them on carry. This seems a little unfair, given you say the handicap players consistently under-clubbed even though their total distances were both around 150 yards. Either you asked them to carry the ball 150 yards – in which case you need to re-word the introduction to the article. Or they were asked to hit 150-yard total distances and did exactly that (more or less) but were unfairly judged on their carry distances. This may seem a bit pernickety but it’s pretty essential to the results and conclusions.

Feb 2, 2015 at 5:33 pm

no problem with the article and the test: it is accuracy test where you have specific targets. would like to pull a driver to increase your average distance? it is actually funny that you think your club 7 carry 150yrds but you can hit it only 1:3 and the rest is club shorter.

random dude

Feb 4, 2015 at 4:24 pm

Kit, what you’re referring to is IOA (Inter Observer Agreement), in that, was your data and Toms data similar. The problem is, Kit, you weren’t involved in the experiment, and there for, had no say in clearly defining what YOU though would be acceptable range for the dependent variable (the behavior, or in this case, what people hit their shots to) for the experiment. Tom could go out and do this experiment over and over and it would likely (predictability) yield very similar data, meaning this was both accurate, valid and reliable. To be fair to you, Kit, if you and Tom together conducted the experiment, then you could hash out and define a different scale for the dependent variable.

tom stickney

Jan 29, 2015 at 6:57 pm

Al– I feel you pain sir

Jan 29, 2015 at 6:55 pm

Dave and Drew…thank you for your comments

Jan 29, 2015 at 4:41 pm

you’re

Jan 28, 2015 at 8:14 pm

Try the same tests, with range balls the amateur hits most. I’m a hack, but I’ll find 2 (or more) shots I never saw in the sun with 1 or 3 yards between them. I amaze myself all the time with my consistency of terribleness. It’s a putrid swing, but I seem to duplicate it pretty close with practically no effort.

Jan 28, 2015 at 2:04 pm

Great article Tom! This motivates me to chart my own data and adjust my practice plans.

Jan 28, 2015 at 12:41 pm

Enjoyed the read, even if it basically told us what we already knew to be true. I don’t think a person can truly appreciate just HOW good Tour players are until they see it in person. As a 13 hcp, I’ve hit some shots that a TP would be happy with, but the difference is I do it about 1/100 swings… they do it about 90/100 swings. The talent gap is just incredible. I’ve played rounds with a few guys who are run-of-the-mill mini-tour grinders and they will mop the floor with a typical weekend warrior… but they’re not even CLOSE to the talent level of a PGA Tour Pro. And then think about guys in the top 10 – the Rory’s/Scotts of the world – they are worlds above the average Joe.

Jan 27, 2015 at 10:13 pm

Do you have record of what club each of them hit from each yardage ?

Jan 27, 2015 at 8:51 pm

I tend to be shorter on my carry with irons. That’s by design. As an intermediate player with an index of about 14, I play for par. My goal is fairways and greens in regulation. two putt and move on. I go for the middle of the green. Safest place to be for a chance at par. If I get it close and have a opp for birdie, so be it. Where as my regular playing partners are trying to muscle an 8 iron to a back pin from 155 yds to the middle, I will pull my 7, make a smooth move through the ball and have a much better chance at being on the green in regulation. I don’t normally play distance. I hit shots. If the distance calls for a 6 but the shot calls for a 5, I hit the 5…I have no ego. Far is fun. Scoring low is better.

Jan 29, 2015 at 4:40 pm

sounds like your not scoring that low

Jan 27, 2015 at 8:19 pm

Vintage and Scott…wish I had time to do more shots but this article was just meant to be a sampling of sorts

Scott Fawcett

Jan 28, 2015 at 6:20 pm

Tom, I certainly knew you weren’t representing it as iron clad fact. I was simply letting the other reader know that their point was likely lost due to the sample size.

Jan 27, 2015 at 5:55 pm

http://www.thecaddiecard.com Here’s a handy little tool I use to keep my distances on hand. It really works will all the different wedge distances I have…half swing, quarter swing and choke downs.

vintage1976

Jan 27, 2015 at 1:39 pm

Am I the only one who finds it interesting that the Tour guy had better dispersion from 150 than he did from 100?

I wonder when he was last fitted for his wedges?

Jan 27, 2015 at 2:04 pm

With three trials per shot I’d hardly say those results are definitive. If the results were proven to be valid it would likely be the result of 150 being “perfect 9” vs the 100 being a 3/4 56* or something.

Jan 27, 2015 at 1:00 pm

Jamie– couldn’t agree more!

Jan 27, 2015 at 12:59 pm

Super– Brandon is a great guy for sure…William is a ole good county-boy

Jan 27, 2015 at 12:09 pm

The golf course is the one place that perception is not reality

superfido25

Jan 27, 2015 at 11:12 am

Pretty interesting (but not surprising) results. Classy of William to partake in this study. My cousin is his caddy, and says he is one of the most down to earth pro’s he has ever worked for.

Jan 27, 2015 at 10:52 am

Jan 27, 2015 at 10:51 am

The– good call on how to find your yardages

Low– Both…but on the course is the real test!

Pingback: How Far Amateurs Hit Vs. Pros - The Golf Shop Online Blog - The Golf Shop Online Blog

Jan 27, 2015 at 8:19 am

Awesome article. As a single digit player, you hit the nail on the head. As I get into my wedge play my yardages become more solid as was your example. You are correct again as with my 8 iron, the yardages are consistent but my dispersion becomes greater. As I get into my longer irons, both my distance and dispersion suffer a little more. I think the fact that many a times, we are left not hitting the mid to longer irons that frequently where we are as comfortable as say hitting the shorter/wedges since we tend to play them more. What I notice though in watching the tour players on television is that since they play from the tips, even though they hit it a long ways, a see more of the 6-5 iron shots being used on some holes due to the par 4’s being around 460 plus yards. Could this be a factor. I usually play the back tees and find I am around the 8 iron on in yardages. Yes I know I can practice my 6-5 and 4 iron more on the range but to actually use it in playing conditions more often is my question? What would you suggest.

Jan 27, 2015 at 9:35 am

Hit less than driver on more par 4s.

The Infidel

Jan 27, 2015 at 7:55 am

Great point, but also something easy to rectify. Whether it’s on a BYOB (bring your own balls) range, a quiet corner of the course or just a field where you can hit find a level or flat spot and hit 10 balls. Then set a mark with a GPS, I’ve got a $30 sky caddie 2.5, then walk to the middle of the cluster of 10 balls. Mark it, that’s your average distance.

With more than 10 balls you’ll inevitably form a closer dispersion pattern all things being equal. So what you’re looking for is that one number for that one time you pull the 7i from the bag.

I managed to chart my 4-PW over the course of 3 rounds on a quiet course. It’s not the TrackMan experience but “some” data is better than no data. Good luck.

Marty Griffin

Jan 26, 2015 at 11:44 pm

I had the opportunity to interview Tom and one of the things we talked about was consistency. So it was really cool to read all of these trackman data sets (I love stats). 14 hole good, that sounds about right Tom 🙂

Jan 26, 2015 at 10:21 pm

Sorry, I did not track that information, but I will tell you that the irons of McGirt are not set up stronger as are ours. I use the RSI’2 so you can find my specs on-line.

Jan 26, 2015 at 10:19 pm

Taylor- yardage finders help 100%

Chris– where there is a will there is a way…

Jan 26, 2015 at 10:18 pm

Awedge- Agree…thanks!

Kirby– both

Jan 26, 2015 at 10:17 pm

Steve– any tour player is pretty good up close, some just win more than others

Bill Belicheck

Jan 26, 2015 at 9:34 pm

Jan 26, 2015 at 9:17 pm

Imagine the difference if you had a good tour player

Jan 26, 2015 at 7:10 pm

This was a very interesting article. I went from a 7 handicap to a 2 within a few weeks after buying my first laser range finder.Tom, in your opinion was the amateurs inconsistencies due to strike or mechanics or both?

Jan 26, 2015 at 7:03 pm

Being a high handicapper, I charted every club in my bag. I know my average and that’s what I play. Helps with shot dispersion, confidence and common sense. My scores are dropping because I know (within reason) what I can hit. My game is getting better and I’m getting longer with every club. In the spring, I’ll re-chart.

Good article as always!

Jan 27, 2015 at 2:14 pm

About 6 months ago I purchased a “Swing Caddie” from Voice Caddie and have been using the averages stored in the device for each club and have dropped my HCP by minimum 3 strokes. Best $195 I ever spent.

Jan 26, 2015 at 6:25 pm

The ultimate question is not about what the results show, but how we as amateur players can get better at learning our distances? The obvious answer is “consult your PGA pro for lessons”. This is great to work on your swing and get more consistent. However, as your swing becomes more consistent how can we learn our real distances. We cannot afford a trackman or flightscope to measure each shot, driving range balls are generally limited distance which make determining distances impossible, and hanging out on a hole on your local golf course is generally frowned upon.

Jan 26, 2015 at 6:53 pm

After I got a laser for distance my club selection has become much more honed in. It’s not the slope version so there is still some guessing when it comes to big drops, but overall, I really know how far I hit my clubs through trial and error. More importantly, I figured out what distance I hit most from (150 yards), so I practice my 9 iron a lot more than other clubs. This really has lowered my score as I know when it comes to 150 I’m dancing.

Double Mocha Man

Jan 26, 2015 at 5:01 pm

Any chance of telling us what club (loft in degrees, not club number) each player hit on both the 100 and 150 yard shots???

Jan 26, 2015 at 4:38 pm

Good article thanks for the info. If you think this is useless information you’re probably not trying to improve. If you want to be better why not compare yourself to a pro? See how far you have to go to do something like shoot under par. That kind of accuracy from 150 is impressive and something to strive for. I know a lot of amateur golfers that can probably outdrive a tour pro…..i don’t know many that can stick it from 150 within 15 on avg.

number crunch

Jan 26, 2015 at 4:12 pm

I’m getting to the point where I’m going to stop watching golf broadcasts and stop digesting the nonsense written on mere mortals compared to a touring pro.

I do not cluster my 9i’s in a 2′ circle from 150y. I do not stop 100y shots within feet of the pin. I also do not book $1+ million in prize money on the tour on an annual basis.

How many times do we have to hear about how @#$%ing good these guys are at golf?

And the industry sits around and wonders why participation is on a negative slide. People who write these articles are shaming the average golfer…the guy who is on tour already knows he’s better than 99.99 percent of the world…this article just reminds the decent player that he will still never be as good as the guy on TV (or the guy teaching him for that matter).

on a positive note…the spelling looked good…keep up the good work!

Jan 26, 2015 at 3:45 pm

I’m not going to say these are useless numbers you crunched. But the results and findings seemed to be too simple and generally intuitive to most any half wit. As an 11, I can hit it 2 feet from the flag (occasionally) or I can hit it 20 yards from it (more likely). Would I have thought that kind of lame consistency from a tour player before reading this? Or even a scratch golfer? And now through your study we know that with empirical evidence to back up what we knew. Sadly it won’t do me any good tho holding a club in my hand at 150 yds out…

Jan 26, 2015 at 3:30 pm

Nice article, Tom. Can’t wait for the snow to melt here in Montana so I can get back after it!

Jan 26, 2015 at 3:22 pm

This article is a great example of the fact that Pros (a vast majority of the time and only unless the shot requires them to release the ball), hit the ball to or past the flag. Amatures so often, forget to factor in release or in some cases spin. A big part of this is knowing course conditions and how they affect (effect?) the ball. It’s all part of creating consistency.

Jan 26, 2015 at 3:08 pm

Great, Great, article!! Kevin-This is extremely useful data because of the conditions. This was done under ideal conditions, and these results are the absolute best they could hope for. On the course under “real world” conditions, with the pressure of a “not middle” pin (which is 2/3 of pin placements on an average course set up), the numbers are just going to get worse. That my friend is useful data, if they are willing to learn.

Jan 26, 2015 at 3:07 pm

Useful info. I am not as consistent as your two amateurs, let alone a pro. I love to play golf but hate to do poorly. Practice practice practice. Thanks.

Robert Cadnor

Jan 26, 2015 at 2:54 pm

Great article! Two questions. For William’s 150 yard shot, you mention “Also look at what club he hit versus the other players”.

1. Isn’t he using the same 8iron as you and Howard?

2. What were the carry/total for William and your 8irons?

Thanks for the great read. It’s interesting to see the dispersion differences.

Jan 26, 2015 at 2:15 pm

Talk about a pile of lame and useless info!

Jan 26, 2015 at 3:28 pm

How can you deem this “useless info”? It really digs into why tour pros are so good week after week after week, and leaves us with practice implications, ideas to ponder, etc.

i could say the same about your comment

Kevin Taglione

Jan 26, 2015 at 2:09 pm

This was cool test but I feel like the data is kind of un-useful. Because they were hitting on the range and same lie every time. not like a golf course. I would have more interesting to track a couple rounds of golf for these 4 players and see their GIR reg % from various yardage ranges (>100, 100-120, 120-140, ect.) Becasue most their misses from what I could see would still be on the green as long as they weren’t going at tucked pins.

Jan 26, 2015 at 1:46 pm

Mark– I did that article a few months ago, check my archives on Golfwrx and you’ll find it. Thx

Jan 26, 2015 at 1:45 pm

Golf- Yes, be mindful of how far you fly the ball, but do remember how the ball usually reacts when it hits the greens you tend to play

Jan 26, 2015 at 1:44 pm

Teaj– Glad you liked the article, take a golf vacation ASAP

Jan 26, 2015 at 1:42 pm

Jason– Agree, but at least this gives you some information to audit on your own

Jan 26, 2015 at 1:41 pm

Thanks Ryan

Jan 26, 2015 at 1:30 pm

glad to see someone breaking down small things like this. But for the guy who goes to the range to try and do this I don’t think it will reflect the correct data they are after. Your players use balls on the range that is the same ball they play with. From what I know range balls we common people use do not fly the same as the ball I play with.

Jan 26, 2015 at 1:17 pm

this makes me want to hit balls for hours to see what my carry and total distances are for each club, because you bring up a good point that all we think about is the total distance. I started doing this with wedges, finding the carry distance but why would we not do this for all of our clubs. if you have a bunker that you need to carry in front of the green on a long par 4 id like to know if I should club up and hope the ball stays on the green and not roll of the back. Oh how I am missing golf up hear in the great white north.

Jan 26, 2015 at 1:15 pm

what I take from it is to be more concious of total distance especially to pins. Often I take the right club for the distane but don’t take the roll into account – well we don’t spin it as well. Hitting it both 100 and 15o yards is key – now I see how I struggled on the 100 yards mark.

Mark Littlejohn

Jan 26, 2015 at 1:03 pm

Very interesting. It would also be interesting to see something like this done for single digit handicappers with hybrids vs 3/4 irons. Hybrids may be easier to hit and get airborne, but I suspect that the average single digit player would spray them as much or worse than they do the 3/4 irons…most hybrids have a built in draw bias. I hit my Mac 1025m 3 iron way better than my 21 degree hybrid, but I use a 17 degree Titleist 909H hybrid as a 2 iron just fine.

Ryan @Front9Back9

Jan 26, 2015 at 12:15 pm

Nice analysis. These kinds of breakdowns are cool to see

Tom Stickney

Jan 26, 2015 at 12:12 pm

Jafar- not right now…sorry

Jan 26, 2015 at 12:11 pm

Matt– no chance. I’ll be last! ????

Jan 26, 2015 at 11:50 am

Oooooo! Do drivers! DO DRIVERS! Haha!

Jan 26, 2015 at 11:40 am

I like these kinds of articles. Shows what I might be doing myself. Is there gonna be one for 150+ yards or drives?

Jan 26, 2015 at 11:30 am

Nice article, with just one ticky-tack comment. McGirt’s “big miss” on the 100yd shot would be 3.6 yards…not 1.4, correct?

Zak Kozuchowski

Jan 26, 2015 at 11:57 am

That appears to be our “big miss.” Thanks for the edit, sir.

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 .

Clement: Laid-off or perfect fade? Across-the-line or perfect draw?

Some call the image on the left laid off, but if you are hitting a fade, this could be a perfect backswing for it! Same for across the line for a draw! Stop racking your brain with perceived mistakes and simply match backswing to shot shape!

The Wedge Guy: The easiest-to-learn golf basic

My golf learning began with this simple fact – if you don’t have a fundamentally sound hold on the golf club, it is practically impossible for your body to execute a fundamentally sound golf swing. I’m still a big believer that the golf swing is much easier to execute if you begin with the proper hold on the club.

As you might imagine, I come into contact with hundreds of golfers of all skill levels. And it is very rare to see a good player with a bad hold on the golf club. There are some exceptions, for sure, but they are very few and very far between, and they typically have beat so many balls with their poor grip that they’ve found a way to work around it.

The reality of biophysics is that the body moves only in certain ways – and the particulars of the way you hold the golf club can totally prevent a sound swing motion that allows the club to release properly through the impact zone. The wonderful thing is that anyone can learn how to put a fundamentally sound hold on the golf club, and you can practice it anywhere your hands are not otherwise engaged, like watching TV or just sitting and relaxing.

Whether you prefer an overlap, interlock or full-finger (not baseball!) grip on the club, the same fundamentals apply. Here are the major grip faults I see most often, in the order of the frequency:

Mis-aligned hands

By this I mean that the palms of the two hands are not parallel to each other. Too many golfers have a weak left hand and strong right, or vice versa. The easiest way to learn how to hold the club with your palms aligned properly is to grip a plain wooden ruler or yardstick. It forces the hands to align properly and shows you how that feels. If you grip and re-grip a yardstick several times, then grip a club, you’ll see that the learning curve is almost immediate.

The position of the grip in the upper/left hand

I also observe many golfers who have the butt of the grip too far into the heel pad of the upper hand (the left hand for right-handed players). It’s amazing how much easier it is to release the club through the ball if even 1/4-1/2″ of the butt is beyond the left heel pad. Try this yourself to see what I mean. Swing the club freely with just your left hand and notice the difference in its release from when you hold it at the end of the grip, versus gripping down even a half inch.

To help you really understand how this works, go to the range and hit shots with your five-iron gripped down a full inch to make the club the same length as your seven-iron. You will probably see an amazing shot shape difference, and likely not see as much distance loss as you would expect.

Too much lower (right) hand on the club

It seems like almost all golfers of 8-10 handicap or higher have the club too far into the palm of the lower hand, because that feels “good” if you are trying to control the path of the clubhead to the ball. But the golf swing is not an effort to hit at the ball – it is a swing of the club. The proper hold on the club has the grip underneath the pad at the base of the fingers. This will likely feel “weak” to you — like you cannot control the club like that. EXACTLY. You should not be trying to control the club with your lower/master hand.

Gripping too tightly

Nearly all golfers hold the club too tightly, which tenses up the forearms and prevents a proper release of the club through impact. In order for the club to move back and through properly, you must feel that the club is controlled by the last three fingers of the upper hand, and the middle two fingers of the lower hand. If you engage your thumbs and forefingers in “holding” the club, the result will almost always be a grip that is too tight. Try this for yourself. Hold the club in your upper hand only, and squeeze firmly with just the last three fingers, with the forefinger and thumb off the club entirely. You have good control, but your forearms are not tense. Then begin to squeeze down with your thumb and forefinger and observe the tensing of the entire forearm. This is the way we are made, so the key to preventing tenseness in the arms is to hold the club very lightly with the “pinchers” — the thumbs and forefingers.

So, those are what I believe are the four fundamentals of a good grip. Anyone can learn them in their home or office very quickly. There is no easier way to improve your ball striking consistency and add distance than giving more attention to the way you hold the golf club.

Experts on understanding ground force and how shoes can impact your golf game

Brooks Koepka rules incident comes under scrutiny at LIV Golf Houston

Three Swing Challenge: Testing the Edel Array F-2 putter

‘Most overrated course in the world!’ – Major champ rips ‘awful’ Pinehurst No. 2

Pros weigh in on Titleist’s new GT drivers at the Memorial

Miura launches new forged wedge series

AimPoint under attack again as footage from U.S. Open enrages golf fans

What clubs do equipment free agents choose to use on tour? We found out

‘You’re right, we’re always wrong!’ – Sergio Garcia receives warning during Open qualifier

Rory McIlroy releases statement following crushing U.S. Open loss

Daniel Brown WITB 2024 (July)

Daniel Brown WITB accurate as of The Open Championship. Driver: Ping G430 LST (9 degrees) Shaft: Fujikura Ventus Blue 6...

C.T. Pan WITB 2024 (July)

C.T. Pan what’s in the bag accurate as of the John Deere Classic. More photos from the event here. Driver:...

Justin Thomas WITB 2024 (July)

Justin Thomas’ what’s in the bag accurate as of the Scottish Open. We will make any updates if JT has...

Mike Lorenzo-Vera WITB 2024 (July)

Mike Lorenzo-Vera what’s in the bag accurate as of the Barracuda Championship. More photos from the event here. Driver: Callaway...

Highlights from the Wilson Golf Product Testing and Fitting Experience at Pinehurst

Davis Thompson’s winning WITB: 2024 John Deere Classic

Q&A: The truth behind Bryson DeChambeau’s new Avoda irons from company founder Thomas Bailey

Major champ ‘disappointed’ not to be chosen as U.S. Ryder Cup captain

Cam Davis’ winning WITB: 2024 Rocket Mortgage Classic

Mac Meissner keeps lead at PGA Tour's Barracuda Championship

Associated Press

TRUCKEE, Calif. -- Mac Meissner held onto the lead Saturday in the Barracuda Championship, following a late par save with a tap-in birdie in the only PGA Tour event that uses the modified Stableford scoring system.

Meissner had a one-point lead over Vince Whaley , reaching 39 points with 13 in the round delayed about 1½ hours in the afternoon because of lightning.

Chad Ramey , tied for sixth with 33, was the only PGA Tour winner in the top eight after three rounds on Tahoe Mountain Club's Old Greenwood course.

"By the time I tee off tomorrow I probably won't be in the lead," Meissner said. "So, that will be nice. I'll be able to still feel like I can chase, because it's always easier to win a golf tournament when you're coming from behind."

Players receive eight points for a double eagle, five for an eagle and two for a birdie. A point is deducted for bogey and three for double bogey.

Meissner got up and down from 230 yards for par on the par-5 15th, making a 20-footer. He drove into trouble left and took two shots to get to the fairway.

Making his 23rd PGA Tour start, Meissner then hit to 2 feet on the 196-yard 16th to set up a birdie, but missed a 5-foot birdie try on 17 and also parred 18.

"Sometimes, you're going to hit good putts and they're not going to go in, like it did on 17," Meissner said. "So, just trying to be as confident over the ball as possible and trying to have as good speed and if it matches and goes in, then all the better."

The 25-year-old former SMU player eagled the par-5 third, making a 6-footer.

Whaley had a 16-point round. He rebounded from a bogey on the second with an eagle on the third and had six birdies, the last on the par-4 18th.

"Eagles are nice out here," Whaley said. "Just hit an 8-iron in there and made a little 20-footer up the hill. That definitely got the round going."

Rico Hoey , coming off a playoff loss last week in Kentucky in the ISCO Championship, was third at 36 after a 15-point afternoon.

"I've gotten a lot of confidence out of that week," Hoey said. "I just felt, like everyone says, like, you know, I belong out here. I feel like I belong out here and I'm putting myself in those positions, and whether I get it done tomorrow or not, I'm just going to keep fighting and keep breaking down those walls."

Patrick Fishburn and Max Greyserman had 34 points, and Ramey was a point back along with Marcus Armitage and Casey Jarvis

With three weeks left in the FedEx Cup regular season, Meissner is 103rd, Whaley 167th and Hoey 111th. The top 70 will advance to the playoffs.

Trackman Tour Averages

Updated_tour_averages_blog_post_header_trackman_mobile

At Trackman, we're dedicated to providing the most accurate and up-to-date data to enhance your golfing experience. That's why we're excited to announce the release of our new Tour Averages, reflecting the latest insights from leading professional golf tours.

How We Gathered the Data

Our team has been hard at work collecting data from a wide range of pro players, utilizing Trackman technology to capture every swing and shot with precision.

Explore the New Tour Averages

Discover the latest numbers for both PGA and LPGA Tours, now presented in a redesigned format for easy reference. To see how the game has progressed over time, check out this link to see what’s changed compared to the last Tour Averages.

What's Changed Since Last Time

Since Trackman last revealed the Tour Averages, certain areas of the game have changed. When driving, for instance, players are now hitting further, with greater ball speed and less spin rate. See how your figures compare to the pros.

The Impact of Trackman

Trackman's role in driving performance gains cannot be understated. From influencing club manufacture to revolutionizing training methods and making data more accessible, Trackman continues to shape the future of golf. Additionally, integrating Trackman technology with advanced golf simulators offers players an immersive experience, allowing them to practice and improve their skills in a virtual environment.

Stay Informed

Whether you're a seasoned pro or a weekend warrior, Trackman is here to help you reach new heights on the course. So stay tuned for more updates and insights from Trackman as we continue to push the boundaries of golf technology.

Get the New Tour Assets

The updated Tour Averages data is available for download here in various formats (incl. in meters or yards), whether you're a coaching professional or simply want them handy on your phone when you're on the range.

Key Insights:

Male data is captured across 40+ different events and 200+ different players.

Data is captured at both PGA TOUR and DP World Tour events with majority coming from PGA TOUR events.

Female data is captured across 30+ different events and 150+ different players.

Data is captured at both LPGA and LET events with majority coming from LPGA events.

Averages are based on data from competition as well as on the range.

There are multiple processes in place to eliminate shots hit with a non-driver during competition.

There could be a small number of non-driver shots in the dataset (less than 0.5 percent).

Official stat holes are picked going in opposite directions to reduce any effects from wind.

GOLF BY THE STATS

A statistical story behind the performance.

About & Bio

Monday, April 7, 2014

Stats lesson: get aggressive inside 100 yards..

No comments:

Advancing Players

Advancing Yourself
Business Travel
Golf Development
Human Resources
Productivity
Social Media
Sustainability
Work Culture
Coaching Trips
Disability Golf
Performance
Women & Girls
Communications & PR
Golf Travel
Health & Wellbeing
Personal Development
The Golf Course

PING advances Prodi G Junior Clubs; Introduces Junior Custom-Fitting App

Glenmuir unveils ss2025 collection: a tribute to heritage and innovation, how to successfully implement technology within a golf operation, cpg team take on 100 hole challenge for the ryder cup trust, dp world tour, the r&a and pga tour launch global amateur pathway, successful golfsixes league grows globally, kipp popert & daphne van houten take g4d open honours, 5 pre-season steps for your golf shop with golf genius, golfbidder pro expansion – b2b pricing tool now available to all of europe, ping putter line expands with six new premium models, abu dhabi golfsixes league grand final won by abu dhabi city golf club juniors, ping announced as supporting partner of pga women’s championship of canada, dr mark bull 3d biomechanics seminar – 06-07 may, austria, andreas kali’s whole istic golf coaching seminar – 15-16 april, austria, pga tour players overwhelmingly select bushnell as top choice among laser rangefinders, bushnell golf introduces upgraded pro x3+ laser rangefinder, edugolf project delivers key insights for advancing golf education, golf genius report highlights true value of open events, mulberry meets performance: sunderland of scotland unveils new aw24 collection, easy-to-hit g730 irons deliver more distance, maximum forgiveness, every shot counts: using the revolutionary strokes-gained statistics to improve golf performance & strategy 11 min read.

Statistics have always played a part in the analysis of golf and its golfers. They allow comparisons to be made between individuals with all their varied characteristics, abilities and experiences, enabling a golf coach to use those statistics to drive action.

The amount of information and number of statistics/metrics available to the Professional coach has never been greater – in fact, many argue that there is too much information out there that does not answer the questions people really want to know about.

This is something that Columbia Business School Carson Family Professor of Business and keen golfer, Mark Broadie, saw as being fundamental to his groundbreaking research in the past 10 years. Current statistics and metrics are good but lack the capability in many cases to relate other metrics. In response to this he developed a system that allows all the elements of the game to be compared to each other – Strokes Gained.

In his new book, ‘Every Shot Counts’, Broadie explores his Strokes-Gained metric that has entered the public consciousness through use of Strokes Gained – Putting on the PGA Tour, and the overall research that has led to a fundamental change in our understanding of how important the different areas of the game are.

IGPN: The Strokes Gained statistic is really a completely different way of assessing the performance of a player on the course – how did you come up with the concept for it?

MB: I started by asking ‘what separates an ‘80’ and a ’90’ golfer – where do these 10 strokes come from?’ Another question was how to grade a golfer in different areas; long game, short game, sand play, approach shots, driving – how could you compare all those things?

There are a lot of ways you could do this – such as how close do they put approach shots to the

“About two-thirds of a 10-stroke difference comes from shots outside of 100 yards and about one-third comes from shots inside 100 yards…that’s pretty robust across hugely different skill levels”

hole? If you have a large enough data set then you can see that this person’s average score might be 80 but they’re hitting their approach shots like a scratch golfer, or they may be hitting relatively poor approach shots like a ‘90’ golfer.

The problem is that these measures still don’t answer the question of where do the 10 strokes between and ‘80’ and a ‘90’ come from? In order to answer that question you need to be able to compare drives that are measured in yards/meters with something like greens in regulation which is either ‘yes you hit it’ or ‘no you missed.’ You have all these different ways to measure golf but they don’t answer the question about where that scoring difference comes from.

In order to do that you need to be able to measure say driving distance and driving accuracy on a scale that’s comparable to sand play or to putting, and it turns out how to do that is to measure everything in strokes – and that led to strokes gained.

The idea was that you could measure the quality of every shot from a drive to an approach shot, or a sand shot to a putt in this consistent unit of strokes gained – it allows you to measure all parts of the game together.

IGPN: And the PGA Tour have used the putting element of your research…

MB: I had written an article and then presented at the World Scientific Congress of Golf in 2008 with some early findings on this notion of strokes gained applied to the entire game. A couple of years later I was at a conference with a group from MIT [The Massachusetts Institute of Technology] and the PGA Tour was there just letting academics know that this is what their ‘ShotLink ® ’ data is and how it’s available to academics through their ‘ ShotLink ® Intelligence Programme ’. So we presented our work there…[and] that sort of crystallised things at around the same time that the PGA Tour internally was saying ‘we need to come up with a better putting statistic because putts-per-round’s deficiencies were obvious to them.

What the PGA Tour implemented in 2011 was just the ’Strokes Gained – Putting’…I had been looking at short, medium and long putts [to] break it down into sub-categories, but the PGA Tour’s reaction was ‘no, no, the problem is we have too many stats’. They have putting from four-feet, five, six, seven, eight, etc. – so in a way they have too much and too little.

Part of the reason for this book is to let people know that this analysis applies to all parts of the game and that the PGA Tour’s aim has always been to roll out more strokes gained stats in the future. They are planning on rolling out ‘strokes gained – tee to green’ next. On a TV broadcast or leaderboard at a tournament… you could have ‘total stokes gained’ broken down into tee to green play and putting. That would allow you to see on why somebody is leading or why somebody is only in 10th or 20th place.

Strokes Gained – Putting Example from the PGATour.com:

The statistic is computed by calculating the average number of putts a PGA TOUR player is expected to take from every distance, based on ShotLink® data from the previous season. The actual number of putts taken by a player is subtracted from this average value to determine strokes gained or lost. For example, the average number of putts used to hole out from 7 feet 10 inches is 1.5. If a player one-putts from this distance, he gains 0.5 strokes. If he two-putts, he loses 0.5 strokes. If he three-putts, he loses 1.5 strokes.

A player’s strokes gained or lost are then compared to the field. For example, if a player gained a total of three strokes over the course of a round and the field gained an average of one stroke, the player’s “Strokes Gained Against the Field” would be two.

IGPN: Your research revealed that when you look at all these areas together the relative impact of each area of the game was actually different to traditional thinking – the differences between ‘80’ or ‘90’ golfers, or even between good tour players and the best players, were more because of the long game…

MB: Roughly about two-thirds of a 10-stroke difference comes from shots outside of 100 yards and about one-third comes from shots inside 100 yards and that’s pretty robust across these hugely different skill levels.

There are definitely differences amongst individuals – I’m talking about a typical ‘80’ golfer versus a typical ‘90’ golfer, or a typical professional golfer versus typical top-10 professional.

IGPN: So the traditional emphasis on putting, or at least the general tendency towards ‘drive for show, putt for dough’, is not accurate – what sort of reaction have you had to that?

MB: I’ve heard more from the people that agree with the findings in the book – people are saying ‘finally, I’ve thought this all along’ – and probably a little less from the people that disagree.

I tried in the beginning of the book to figure out what are the strongest arguments that people have for the importance of putting – I tried to say why I thought the arguments fell short, but I’m certainly interested in trying to speak to anyone that has a different view.

A lot of people have pointed to Tiger Woods and have said that the main factor that explains his success is his putting. The reason that seems plausible is that he’s such a good putter – the data bears that out, but he’s also good at everything else, it’s just approach shots where he really dominates. He’s great at everything but really great at approach shots. It’s a surprise to a lot of people but not someone like Sean Foley, his coach.

“Tiger’s approach shots are where he really dominates, he’s great at everything but really great at approach shots. It’s a surprise to a lot of people but not someone like Sean Foley”

The other thing I’ve found is that when you look at PGA Tour winners, the explanatory power of putting is higher. Using 10 years of data, I find that putting contributes about 15% of the scoring advantage of the best Tour players compared to average Tour players. If you look at tournament winners then putting contributes about 35% of the scoring advantage during their wins.

Part of the reason is that when you look at tournament winners, then there’s a different one every week, and whoever wins that week is someone who’s playing well above their norm.

That’s part of the reason that people tend to believe in the importance of putting – they see putts going in from all over the planet when they watch the highlight reels of someone winning a tournament but they don’t show the shots that get them there.

IGPN: You spoke recently at an MIT Conference with Tiger Woods’ and Justin Rose’s coach, Sean Foley, about how he and other coaches can turn the data produced using strokes gained into actionable data and also on the statistical approach coaches should have – what do you think are the main ways a coach can use this type of information?

MB: It’s deﬁnitely easier for coaches whose pupils are PGA Tour golfers because of the ShotLink® data that’s available…the PGA Tour records all of the shots of all of the players at all PGA Tour events. You can break down a golfer’s strengths and weaknesses fairly accurately [using strokes gained] and that allows a coach like Sean Foley to focus his instruction on what will give the biggest bang for the buck.

It would be ideal if amateurs went to their instructors with strokes gained reports, which detailed their trends, strengths and weaknesses. It is possible for amateur golfers to collect data on their own shots, using lasers or yardage books, and then use the tables in the book to do the strokes gained analysis on their own. We’re working on an app that I am hoping will be ready for beta-testing in two or three months that will make it even easier for individuals to do it themselves.

You want to make it as painless as possible for golfers to record their shot information – the PGA Tour pros have it great because someone else is doing it for them – but for amateur golfers data entry is the hurdle. The good thing is it’s really not that painful for an amateur to record their own data – I’ve been doing it for years and the app will make it even easier. In my database of amateur golf shots, it shows that putting contributes about the same to scoring differences as it does for the pros. But every golfer is unique, and having strokes gained report for individual golfers would be, I think, quite useful for coaches.

The book shows how you can go out to the practice green or short game area and test your skills by hitting a bunch of putts and shots. There are tables in the book where you can compare yourself to pros and amateurs of various levels. It’s fun and you can do it in a short period of time, an hour or so, though it has the disadvantage that it’s not in tournament play and it’s not in the changing conditions that you might get on the course.

In EVERY SHOT COUNTS: Using the Revolutionary Strokes-Gained Approach to Improve Your Golf Performance and Strategy (Gotham Books, March 10, 2014, Hardcover, eBook) Broadie explains the simple idea behind strokes gained and shows how it applies to all golf shots. He uses it to answer many questions of golf performance: What does it take to win a PGA Tour tournament? What is the secret behind Tiger Woods’ success? Which skills separate amateurs from pros? How much is twenty extra yards of driving distance worth?

EVERY SHOT COUNTS also uses this new data to analyze golf strategy: Lay up or go for it? Play an aggressive or conservative shot off the tee? Not a book about swing mechanics, EVERY SHOT COUNTS uses data and analytics to better understand golf performance and golf strategy. EVERY SHOT COUNTS reveals truths that will change the way golfers of all handicaps look at and play the game.

For more information visit www.everyshotcounts.com and to purchase your copy of EVERY SHOT COUNTS visit the Amazon Bookstore here http://eur.pe/PA76cZ (includes a short preview of the book).

Privacy Policy
Website by Pixeldot

This website uses cookies. Find out more

Accept & close

You have come to the ESPN Africa edition, for other ESPN editions, click above.

Mac Meissner keeps lead at PGA Tour's Barracuda Championship

Associated Press