Questions about some golf terms

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by sacm3bill

What are you on about? They're not compounding the initial error, they're actually balancing it somewhat with the second. As long as someone uses a consistent definition for their stats, they'll be able to see whether they're improving or not in whatever areas they're keeping stats on. The only downside is they won't be able to compare their stats to someone who uses the PGA Tour's definition - but that's irrelevant if they're just tracking their *own* progress. (No "quotes" around that word necessary).

IMHO, it is a case of two wrongs not making a right. These people are doing it wrong. That's my point. The OP wanted the correct definitions and he now has them. What do you get out of counting a GIR when you miss it or saying you had 35 putts when you really had 32? I don't get it. It takes the same amount of effort to do it right as to do it wrong. From my experience, people that count their stats incorrectly in this way, do it so they have a reason to cry about their poor putting in the clubhouse after the round.

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by iacas

Bit testy today? ;-) It's okay. Some would tell me I'm testy on days that end in "y." :-)

I consider it "massaging the data."

We agree, as you'll notice, that keeping the "hard data" is still important.

I just like things to be done properly! ;-)

I agree with your way of tracking your game, I do the same thing. The massaging the data is done mentally in 2 minutes after the round, but always keeping the hard data in mind.

I always collect data on my students' games and go over all this with them to make sure they get it right. If they are high handicappers, but all means we drop some of the categories or add others but always calling an apple an apple.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by The_Pharaoh

IMHO, it is a case of two wrongs not making a right. These people are doing it wrong. That's my point. The OP wanted the correct definitions and he now has them. What do you get out of counting a GIR when you miss it or saying you had 35 putts when you really had 32? I don't get it. It takes the same amount of effort to do it right as to do it wrong. From my experience, people that count their stats incorrectly in this way, do it so they have a reason to cry about their poor putting in the clubhouse after the round.

Maybe they simply prefer to track their stats that way. It's "wrong" by the PGA Tour's definitions (and common sense), but so what? What's it really matter? I don't care if in a friendly round some guy wants to give himself two shots for everything inside of 100 yards - why would how someone keeps their stats bother me? Beyond that, even - I understand why they might count the fringe as the green, and so long as they're consistent about it, they can accurately track their progress .

Originally Posted by The_Pharaoh

I always collect data on my students' games and go over all this with them to make sure they get it right. If they are high handicappers, but all means we drop some of the categories or add others but always calling an apple an apple.

If true, someone could say you're doing your high handicapper students a disservice because you can't ever really track their short game since they're unlikely to ever really have a chance for an "up and down" (par or better on the hole). That's a big chunk of their game that you can't "track" because you want to be be so rigid as to enforce a system built for the world's best upon someone who can't break 100 from 5000 yards.

[jamo]

IMHO, it is a case of two wrongs not making a right. These people are doing it wrong. That's my point. The OP wanted the correct definitions and he now has them. What do you get out of counting a GIR when you miss it or saying you had 35 putts when you really had 32? I don't get it. It takes the same amount of effort to do it right as to do it wrong. From my experience, people that count their stats incorrectly in this way, do it so they have a reason to cry about their poor putting in the clubhouse after the round.

Because, sometimes for instance, missing the green by a feet can be better than hitting it. If you want a way to track how close to the pin you are hitting your approach shots, "Greens or Really Close to the Greens in Regulation" can sometimes be a better indicator than GIR as long as you have both (and don't try to compare the former to the latter of a pro). Not saying it's something I would do, but it's a victimless crime.

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by iacas

If true, someone could say you're doing your high handicapper students a disservice because you can't ever really track their short game since they're unlikely to ever really have a chance for an "up and down" (par or better on the hole). That's a big chunk of their game that you can't "track" because you want to be be so rigid as to enforce a system built for the world's best upon someone who can't break 100 from 5000 yards.

You've misunderstood me. An "up and down" (par or better on the hole) is still that on the stat sheet. I would add another line for bogey or better or double bogey or better. There would also be another line for GIR+1 giving bogey golfers an extra shot to get to the green. All I'm saying is I am consistent with the correct terminology.

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by jamo

Because, sometimes for instance, missing the green by a feet can be better than hitting it. If you want a way to track how close to the pin you are hitting your approach shots, "Greens or Really Close to the Greens in Regulation" can sometimes be a better indicator than GIR as long as you have both (and don't try to compare the former to the latter of a pro). Not saying it's something I would do, but it's a victimless crime.

I agree with you on this and something I do when massaging the data after the round. There are times when hitting your own fairway is the wrong play and you are better off hitting another hole's fairway. But I still count it as a missed fairway on my stat document! Also, when I go for a par 4 in one and wind up in the greenside bunker I also count it as a missed FIR. I don't know how they track this on the PGA Tour, but I only count it as a FIR if I hit the fairway or drive the green.

[mdl]

I keep my stats the way Erik does but calls it GFIR.  Although I tend not to like putting through long stretches of fringe, and feel pretty confident with little chips from the far edge of the fringe, so in reality I only count a fringe shot as "GIR" if it's close enough to the green that I want to putt it.  Obviously this isn't how it would be scored in a PGA tournament, but I'm keeping my stats just to keep track of my own progress, and I'd prefer to see in my stats how often I'm hitting approach shots to give myself a putt, whether through 6 inches of fringe or on the green, and how my putts are actually falling, not recording artificially deflated numbers because I "1-putted" two greens that day with 1st putts through a couple inches of fringe.

[B-Con]

I keep my stats the way Erik does but calls it GFIR.  Although I tend not to like putting through long stretches of fringe, and feel pretty confident with little chips from the far edge of the fringe, so in reality I only count a fringe shot as "GIR" if it's close enough to the green that I want to putt it.  Obviously this isn't how it would be scored in a PGA tournament, but I'm keeping my stats just to keep track of my own progress, and I'd prefer to see in my stats how often I'm hitting approach shots to give myself a putt, whether through 6 inches of fringe or on the green, and how my putts are actually falling, not recording artificially deflated numbers because I "1-putted" two greens that day with 1st putts through a couple inches of fringe.

I was going to say the exact same thing for GIR and putts. :-) For my concerns, the fringe is close enough to the green that if I want to putt it I count it as a hit green. This also has the side-benefit of making it easy to decide on greens that have a poorly maintained fringe, and you can't really tell exactly what the ball is on. And my putts-per-GIR would be artificially low (and probably close to useless) if I didn't count that first fringe putt as an actual putt. I count up-and-downs as getting up and down in 2 shots from the shot that puts me onto the green if it was from within about 40 yards (basically, if it was a half wedge or less). A tad fudgey, but it's really helpful for watching my stats.

[mcfc_nick]

sand save - up and down from the bunker in 2 (one-putt, hole 2nd shot, do what you like just take 2 shots)

up and down - 2 shots from around the green (same as above)

none of these matter on what score its for, thats how i do it, easy enough

[mcfc_nick]

oh yeah and GIR - have a putt for birdie