Honest Opinions on Stat Software

[Harold]

I too am on dial up and I didn't have an issue with either the stat tracking software or .net. Took about an hour to get the 22MB Now if your connection is a bit twitchy and it disconnects and you have to start over I can understand avoiding it. It is doable though.

[albatross]

The only reason I haven't moved to using Scorecard is the price. In my opinion, it's too pricey.

The golf stats program I have was half the price and does all of the same calculations. I have to say that Scorecards appearance looks better to me, but I just can't afford it.

I won't plug the other program, because I know that iacas works hard at selling his and I'm sure it's a good program.

[mruseless]

As you've demonstrated, it is whatever you make it. If you want to use it as "get up and down from inside of 100 yards," you're free to.

Yes, definitely. My point was simply that if you use a broader definition of U&D;, then the Scrambling stat is not the same as the PGA defined stat.

...high handicappers can't obsess about stats...

Wanna bet?

[mkrolewski]

No offense to the main guys here, just realize as I stated in my original post, I am on dial up. I down loaded the software but there is a need for .NET Framework 2.0 (x86) which is like 22 MB and would take me longer to download than is feasible. Is there not another software out there? I would have thought someone would have suggested at least one other program.

I have enjoyed Intelligolf stat/tracking software. It is built to be entered into a PDA or phone while on the course and can be viewed from your PC ( maybe MAC?). I actually like the stats that are on the PDA for quick browsing of previous rounds. And there is summary information for previous rounds on the same course. As to your original question -- does it need .NET, I am not sure. It appears to be self contained, but I could be wrong. .NET is on my machine, so I would not know if it is needed.

[mkrolewski]

To continue with the thread, IMHO stats are good for golfers at any level. High handicappers are just as in need of information as low handicappers.

In trying to take 10 shots per round off my score, I need to know where to work or what are my goals.

Is it really my putting or short game or driving or iron. Granted one could suggest it is all areas.

Looking at my bogey 9 hole scores, I am realizing I need about 4 pars per 9 holes to compensate for 2 or 3 bad holes. I also realize I need to get to the green area ( about 50 yds in ) in regulation to get those pars and bogeys. Right now I am inconsistent off the tee and with my irons.

The question on stats may be better framed what is enough information to make for game improvement. All good metrics have (1) ease of collection (2) reflect desired performance and (3) allow comparison to a standard of performance.

For instance, what are good putting stats?

A great putting metric is the total putts per round. Each to collect, easy to assess. Everyone is aiming for less than 2 putts per hole.

Tracking 1,2,3+ putts is a nice metric. Easy to collect, easy to assess trend ( less 3+ putts, more 1 and 2 putts), easy to determine what you need to do (practice more putting). You could collect this is terms of starting distances eg 30+ feet away is 3 putt land. But then you are really tracking how well you make your approach shot or pitch or chip. Tracking 1,2,3+ putts is tracking putting. And as often as not, it is tracking 3+ putts from 10 feet.

Another metric is how many putts you are making from different distances, back to the issue with the previous metric. This is more challenging. What ranges are good? When are you putting (you expect/anticipate it going in ); when are you lagging and expecting 2 or more putts? What percentages should you use ( tour players are 50% from 10 ft, amatuers are 50% from 6 ft !!?? ) Does this vary with each golfer. I personally really have issues from 4 feet or less.

Another metric is where do you miss your putts -- high, low, left or right? Again easy to determine, easy to assess. You can make it really complicated -- whether you are putting uphill or downhill or over a swail or did you lip out or how close to the hole did the ball pass. Does a misread or mishit get tracked differently? If you get too complicated, you will never get enough information. Alternatively, assumming low is bad ( the ball will not go in if it never reachs the hole ), just tracking high and low misses is a great metric.

And you all can think of more.

The point is you need metrics ie stats that assist you at playing the game better. At this point in my golf game ( less than 60 rounds), just knowing total putts ( I want 34 or less) and number of 3+ putts ( I want 2 or less per round ) and high/low misses are great putting stats for me.