Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
skigolf33

What is the correlation between the number of birdies and your handicap.

Note: This thread is 1944 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

71 posts in this topic Last Reply

Recommended Posts

Originally Posted by iacas

What's it to you if someone wants to keep his stats that way?

I doubt he's a moron who is unaware of this or is going to start sharing his awesome GIR and poor putting stats with everyone…

Is that comparison happening and I'm missing it?

Nothing to me at all.  I was just discussing basic statistical analysis......apparently not very effectively.

The comparison happens all the time.  We even do it on here pretty often.  Set a standard and then compare results against that standard.  How many keys vs handicap as one example recently.  If we didn't measure either attainment of the key itself or the hcp index the same for everyone, then the comparison means very little.

I compare my stats to where I want to be based on scoring/handicap/performance goals I set for myself.  I have a group of buddies that are several shots better than me.  If I'm averaging "x" GIR and they're averaging "y", I look at my own performance and it would be reasonable to set a goal to improve my own GIR to match theirs.  But if I'm not calculating GIR in the same manner they are, that comparison isn't valid.  In fact, as I look at my stats compared to theirs, it's likely that since I'm also counting putts that they're not, my putts will seem much higher and again, could lead me to think that I really need to be working on putting, rather than focusing on ways to hit more greens.

I sure don't think that sacm3bil is a moron!  The old saying is that responsibility for any poor communication lies with the one doing the communicating.   I've just failed in communicating my point about the basic statistical comparison effectively.  No big deal at all.  I'll quietly move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Want to hide this ad? Register for free today!

Originally Posted by David in FL

I have a group of buddies that are several shots better than me.  If I'm averaging "x" GIR and they're averaging "y", I look at my own performance and it would be reasonable to set a goal to improve my own GIR to match theirs.  But if I'm not calculating GIR in the same manner they are, that comparison isn't valid.

If you have a group like that and you're all playing the same greens, then that is a case where it *is* necessary for you all to use the same definition for what is a GIR. Obviously. But it is *extremely* rare to have a peer group like that where you're all playing the same course all the time AND also care about what your stats are relative to each other. In most other cases, if you are comparing your GIRs to some "standard", that standard is going to be based on a very wide variety of green sizes and shapes. So it doesn't matter if one's GIR stats are based on greens half a fringe wider than they really are.

Originally Posted by David in FL

The old saying is that responsibility for any poor communication lies with the one doing the communicating.   I've just failed in communicating my point about the basic statistical comparison effectively.  No big deal at all.  I'll quietly move on.

You have communicated your view well, IMO. You have just never addressed or refuted a couple points that have been made, such as the one summed up in my paragraph above, or the one about how it could be more helpful to a high handicapper to use the fringe as part of the green.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by David in FL

EXACTLY!

If your only reason for keeping stats is to chart improvement in each, then you can define anything in any way you like.  BUT, if you're using your stats to identify the weaknesses in your game so you can attack those areas that present the greatest opportunities, you have to be careful.  As you said, if you include the fringe in GIR, your GIR is going to go up, as will your putts.  In comparing the 2, you may very well decide that your putting is worse than it is and spend time there when the real culprit is the approach shots.  That's my point.

Is it??  How big are the fringes on the courses you play?  Do you find it acceptable to 3 putt from 8" off the green?

Like I said before, I keep my stats "correctly" like you, however, they aren't really any more accurate in determining what I need to work on than if I did it tuffluck's way.  In both cases, you still have to analyze everything and since you are the only one keeping you're own stats, it shouldn't be that hard to do no matter how you define everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by sacm3bill

If you have a group like that and you're all playing the same greens, then that is a case where it *is* necessary for you all to use the same definition for what is a GIR. Obviously. But it is *extremely* rare to have a peer group like that where you're all playing the same course all the time AND also care about what your stats are relative to each other. In most other cases, if you are comparing your GIRs to some "standard", that standard is going to be based on a very wide variety of green sizes and shapes. So it doesn't matter if one's GIR stats are based on greens half a fringe wider than they really are.

You have communicated your view well, IMO. You have just never addressed or refuted a couple points that have been made, such as the one summed up in my paragraph above, or the one about how it could be more helpful to a high handicapper to use the fringe as part of the green.

Nope.  It's very basic statistics.  You're smart enough to understand the math, so the failure to explain it is mine.  I'll own it and move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

Is it??  How big are the fringes on the courses you play?  Do you find it acceptable to 3 putt from 8" off the green?

No.  I would expect to one putt from 8 inches off the green most times.  Because the first stroke isn't a putt.

if you're counting it as a putt, then your putts are going to appear higher than those who don't count it as a putt.  That could lead you to the wrong conclusion.

It's worth noting that tracking putts per GIR helps solve the problem though.  A much better stat too, IMHO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by David in FL

No.  I would expect to one putt from 8 inches off the green most times.  Because the first stroke isn't a putt.

if you're counting it as a putt, then your putts are going to appear higher than those who don't count it as a putt.  That could lead you to the wrong conclusion.

It's worth noting that tracking putts per GIR helps solve the problem though.  A much better stat too, IMHO.

Yes, but you are the one keeping the stats, right?  Are you saying that you will randomly space out and forget who you track them?  I mean, you know for 100% sure that you're not counting those fringes as GIR.  You haven't magically forgotten since your last few rounds, so why would he forget that he WAS counting them as GIR?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by David in FL

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacm3bill

If you have a group like that and you're all playing the same greens, then that is a case where it *is* necessary for you all to use the same definition for what is a GIR. Obviously. But it is *extremely* rare to have a peer group like that where you're all playing the same course all the time AND also care about what your stats are relative to each other. In most other cases, if you are comparing your GIRs to some "standard", that standard is going to be based on a very wide variety of green sizes and shapes. So it doesn't matter if one's GIR stats are based on greens half a fringe wider than they really are.

You have communicated your view well, IMO. You have just never addressed or refuted a couple points that have been made, such as the one summed up in my paragraph above, or the one about how it could be more helpful to a high handicapper to use the fringe as part of the green.

Nope.  It's very basic statistics.  You're smart enough to understand the math, so the failure to explain it is mine.  I'll own it and move on.

Wow. Ok then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by sacm3bill

Wow. Ok then.

If that came across snarky, I apologize.  It wasn't meant to be.  I meant what I said.  For some reason I'm not explaining what I thought was a simple concept very well today.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by David in FL

If that came across snarky, I apologize.  It wasn't meant to be.  I meant what I said.  For some reason I'm not explaining what I thought was a simple concept very well today.

FWIW, I didn't read it as such ... but I could see how some might. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by David in FL

Quote:

Originally Posted by sacm3bill

Wow. Ok then.

If that came across snarky, I apologize.  It wasn't meant to be.  I meant what I said.  For some reason I'm not explaining what I thought was a simple concept very well today.

My apologies as well. It just seemed that you're using "I didn't explain it well enough" as an out to not address or refute a couple points that have been made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i still think it's like paying $10 less in gas than you expected and spending that $10 on a case of beer at the gas station while you waited for your car to fill up instead.  you know...six of one and half a dozen of the other sort of thing.  if i KNOW a shot is poor (and granted i'm a higher handicap than you fellas and i consider a fringe a good shot), then i count it as what it should be.  a fringe is a good approach shot.  a putt from the fringe (within reason) that goes sailing 30 feet past, is a poor shot.  it's simple.  the missed GIR is never the stroke that hurt my score on that hole.  of course if i had instead hit the approach shot within 3' that would not be the case, but that is introducing an entirely different discussion.  besides David in FL, who cares what the exact technical definition is?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a bit confused why you would redefine the basics of Fairways/Greens in Regulation and putting.  I am a high handicapper as well, but if I miss a green, I miss a green.  If I mark the fringe as a GIR then it inflates my %'s of greens hit.  Now I understand that the person keeping these marks will understand his own system, but how does it work when you reflect back on past rounds?

If I look at my score cards over the past year and I used this method,  I certainly don't remember if I truly hit the green or if I hit the fringe.  I understand that for us high handicappers us hitting the fringe is an improvement, but we are still not hitting the green, and thus it is an area we still need to work on.

A method I use for hitting fringes is to mark that I missed the green, but put an F beside my mark.  This informs me that although I missed the green I was at least on the fringe.  When I check how well I did putting on each hole I am able to tell if my putts were all on the green or if some were on the fringe.

Just a thought.  Obviously, if you are able to use your own system of tracking shots to improve your game that is all that matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by SloverUT

I am a bit confused why you would redefine the basics of Fairways/Greens in Regulation and putting.  I am a high handicapper as well, but if I miss a green, I miss a green.  If I mark the fringe as a GIR then it inflates my %'s of greens hit.  Now I understand that the person keeping these marks will understand his own system, but how does it work when you reflect back on past rounds?

If I look at my score cards over the past year and I used this method,  I certainly don't remember if I truly hit the green or if I hit the fringe.  I understand that for us high handicappers us hitting the fringe is an improvement, but we are still not hitting the green, and thus it is an area we still need to work on.

A method I use for hitting fringes is to mark that I missed the green, but put an F beside my mark.  This informs me that although I missed the green I was at least on the fringe.  When I check how well I did putting on each hole I am able to tell if my putts were all on the green or if some were on the fringe.

Just a thought.  Obviously, if you are able to use your own system of tracking shots to improve your game that is all that matters.

That's actually pretty clever.  I use an iphone app (golfshot) that justs asks me to put in the score for the hole and the number of putts and it calculates whether or not its a GIR so I couldn't do it that way.

Nothing is foolproof.  Whatever method you use, its still up to you to analyze your own stats.

Here's another example:  Big green, slopes back to front, front pin.  Player A hits a solid shot that ends up below the hole, with a 20 foot straight uphill putt for birdie, but is 15" off the green on the fringe.  One putt onto the green, and then 2 putts from there for a bogey.  Player B thins his wedge but it has enough spin and the green has enough slope that he's just on the back of the green, 80 ft away, and 3 putts form there for a bogey as well.  Which player needs to work on his ballstriking and which needs to work on his putting?  Conventional stats say A needs more work on ballstriking, and B needs more work on putting.  Pretty sure everybody would agree that is backwards, no?

Stats alone - regardless how you define them - don't tell the whole story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Proximity to hole on approach shot. That is the best way to judge approach shots. Of course the ShotLink guys don't follow me around and walking off each one would be a pain. Could always guesstimate and that would probably be good enough. The previous scenario is a good example of why stats can't be applied to a specific instance. They only work on large sets an thus that scenario would not ultimately impact the stats unless you had an unusually high percentage of instances like that. 50% of marriages end in divorce but that does not mean I have a 50-50 chance of getting divorced. It would seem to make more sense to track the stats in a way that is consistent with the golfing world at large. However one thing that makes golf great is that you do not need another living soul to play so do whatever you want. If you choose to track stats differently from the generally accepted method then you become a demographic of 1. Either way my life is not impacted :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by Golfingdad

That's actually pretty clever.  I use an iphone app (golfshot) that justs asks me to put in the score for the hole and the number of putts and it calculates whether or not its a GIR so I couldn't do it that way.

Nothing is foolproof.  Whatever method you use, its still up to you to analyze your own stats.

Here's another example:  Big green, slopes back to front, front pin.  Player A hits a solid shot that ends up below the hole, with a 20 foot straight uphill putt for birdie, but is 15" off the green on the fringe.  One putt onto the green, and then 2 putts from there for a bogey.  Player B thins his wedge but it has enough spin and the green has enough slope that he's just on the back of the green, 80 ft away, and 3 putts form there for a bogey as well.  Which player needs to work on his ballstriking and which needs to work on his putting?  Conventional stats say A needs more work on ballstriking, and B needs more work on putting.  Pretty sure everybody would agree that is backwards, no?

Stats alone - regardless how you define them - don't tell the whole story.

I agree to an extent.  Yes, in your example, player A had the better shot.  But this is why we measure in %'s.  There will always be exceptions to the rule but I don't think anyone can disagree that hitting more GIR's is better for your golf game.  But as has been said numerous times, whatever works for you.  If you are able to track your improvement and meet your goals, that is all that matters.  I certainly agree, that at my handicap, hitting the fringe consistently is an accomplishment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Originally Posted by sacm3bill

Just as in the case I gave of someone who plays large greens having a higher GIR than someone else with the same game but who plays courses with small greens, two people with the same handicap and the same exact game may have different birdie stats if one of them plays shorter tees than the other.

A ha!  But if they played the same courses/tees, their stats would be directly comparative...unless they were re-defining what a green is.

FYI, I'm just arguing/debating/discussing for discussion's sake.  And because I have nothing better to do right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"There are three kinds of lies. Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics." (Mark Twain).

There's a heck of a difference between a guy missing every fairway into the first cut and a guy ripping them off down into the woods or swamp, and a heck of a difference between missing a green by six inches and pull hooking it over into the next county.

I know a guy that just LOVES to talk about his "one putts" and/or "putts per round". Takes him four strokes to get up by the green and all he ever has to do is basically a "putt" with an iron that doesn't count as a putt.

I know another one that plays a lot on some of the Robert Trent Jones Golf Trail courses where the greens look like a 5 acre field and LOVES the GIR stat. Those 50 yard putts don't impress me much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Note: This thread is 1944 days old. We appreciate that you found this thread instead of starting a new one, but if you plan to post here please make sure it's still relevant. If not, please start a new topic. Thank you!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2018 TST Partners

    PING Golf
    FlightScope Mevo
    More to come…
  • Posts

    • I tell this to anyone who is hitting a particular club really well...don't jack with it!  Seriously, if you have a club that you hit long and straight, don't change it, modify it or replace it.  The chances of you improving on a club that you hit that well is slim. It sounds like you still have your original driver, correct?  If that is the case, I recommend putting it back in the bag rather than try to find a shaft/head combination that you can hit as well, and put your money into a set of irons that you can hit.  I'm not trying to sound sarcastic, so please don't take it like that.  I'm being 100% sincere on this.  If you hit your iDrive really good, leave it in the bag and work on finding a set of irons that fits you better than your current set.
    • Hi everyone,  First time here posting a thread, loving reading prior to this but never participated, but now i desperately need people help lol. Ill start at the beginning. Im 28 and have been playing 15 months and am currently handicap 12.7.  I started playing with a friend old beaten up idrive 12° driver aldilia vx reg shaft, and man i could bomb that driver, apart from pros i could outdrive anyone and exceptionally accurately too, were talking landing on greens on par 4's (all the while not being able to hit a single iron haha). But as christmas came around and i was getting better i thought it would special for my partner to buy me a replacment for my boom stick. So i looked around and got my heart set on the wilson fg tour f5 driver, the thing just looked gorgeous to me. Now due to the distance i was getting with the idrive, perhaps stupidly got it with the stiff shaft(50 gram fubuki z), that was my first mistake, turns out i have a swing speed of 90-96mph and couldnt hit the damn thing. So a couple of months later a friend gave me a aldilia nvs 65 lite tm-3, lovely looking shaft and looks fantastic with the wilson head, the complements i get on the looks sometimes makes me giddy. However no matter how i hit the club (centre face, nice controlled swing) or how high or low(i prefer low, the red shortees if everyones familiar) the peak of my ball flight is about 5- 10 yards off the grounds, for a little while i thought i was closing down the face, but this isnt the case no matter what i seem to do the ball just wont get up. So ive been looking at info online and on ebay and read the nvs has a low kick point whereas the fubuki z has a high point, and bearing in mind i feel the wilson head is quite heavy, very heavy against say a tm rbz, i was wondering if this is where my problems are coming from? As im hitting the ball with a heavy head is it flexing too much? See, i dont mind spending the money on a 3rd shaft (fubuki z 50 reg) if its going to solve the problem, but this isnt the case and i do, then ive wasted stupid money just to end up getting rid of the thing and probably going for a cobra f6.... Please any insight from people who know what they're talking about would be soo appreciated, and i would certainly owe u a drink. Oh, and should mention due the the low ball flight i use the 0g weight and my old driver being set quite high, i set it at 11.5 deg the next setting up would be 12.5 deg and i just feel that would be ridiculous. Please no tee suggestions, if the tee exists ive tried it. Thank you very much in advance
    • 9.5 loft, probably around 110 ss... Used to use a driver set at 7 3/4 loft but my current ones loft is more accurate. Actual loft of drivers are not always the most accurate. I try to hit on the upswing so lower loft is used to keep the ball flight at a good launch angle. 
    • Ya I just watched your swing and they are bad, sorry to be blunt. Your ball placement is should be a bit further back with your pw. Your posture is horrible, IMO the most important thing to master first. You need lessons if you ever want to get better. You just don’t look to have the natural ability to swing the club. Not trying to be mean but if you want to get better, stop what your doing and get help. Bad habits are extremely hard to break and don’t want to build them into muscle memory. Your whole swing, stance, ball placement need work. And you have no where near the club speed for steel shaft irons. 
    • Ugh, not a good round. How many putts did he leave 3-4 feet short? I think I counted at least 4.... He also had some iffy strikes on the irons off the tee, looked a little steep on a few of them, and I caught one on replay that he hit kinda high and toe-ey....SMDH.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Blog Entries

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Bangarang
      Bangarang
      (31 years old)
    2. Mjrowe1
      Mjrowe1
      (35 years old)
    3. Shooting29
      Shooting29
      (37 years old)

×

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...