Putting from Fringe Scoring/Stats Question

[BuckeyeNut]

lemme guess....an 8.3 index equates to a 10HC on many courses.......I'm guessing you hit 50% GIR based on your stat keeping...Nice job!........LOL

I don't mean to bust your chops...but I guess I am.

[Golfingdad]

Why bother to keep stats if they are bogus?

You answered your own question in your next post...

The point of keeping stats is to evaluate your game and better yourself.

Right.  So how are the stats bogus if you're the one keeping them, you're the only one that looks at them, and since you are the one keeping them, you obviously know what your own parameters are, so there is no right or wrong.

But I'm keeping stats for a specific reason, and that's to properly evaluate the state of my game.  I believe I'm better able to do that in this manner.

Exactly.  And this is all that matters.  There does not need to be a standardized system for stats, because they aren't used for anything other than our own knowledge.

[Righty to Lefty]

Bogus to who?  My ranking on the PGA Tour?

I feel that keeping the stats this way gives me a better measure of the current state of my game.  If I hit five official GIR, but have five more greens where I hit the ball on the fringe close enough to putt and have a reasonable shot at birdie, I feel that should be reflected.  That's a better ball striking round than hitting seven official GIR, yet have zero fringe hits that result in makeable putts.

I agree. I want to truly know when I begin to putt really well so when I hit the fringe I count it as a GIR. I say this because if I hit say 6 greens and 4 fringes I assure you that more often than not my score is going to be much more reflective of hitting 10 greens than it would be if I hit 6. The fringe of the green can't be more than 3 feet wide on the course I play so I don't see the problem with it being counted as a GIR. Basically I am inflating my putting numbers because I want to  know when I truly begin to putt well and I'd rather do it that way than inflate my scrambling stats when all I'm doing is putting from the fringe. But that is just my opinion.

[dbrock504]

For accurate stat keeping purposes...................a fringe is a missed green, and a putt from a fringe is not a putt!!    If you miss the green and land on a fringe.........then 2 putt for par.  It counts as a missed green and 1 putt.

This is what I do as well. There's only one way to score in golf; the right way

[saturday]

Not a dumb question. I don't count them because if I did, then I'd be fudging my GIR stats.  But when evaluating my stats, I also recognize that I'm not counting them, so I don't look at my stat sheet and see 4 GIR and 27 putts, and go "Yay!!!" :-P It doesn't really matter how you choose to track the stats, as long as you take into account however you are doing it. :)

^^ Well said. I agree.

[Dave2512]

I look at it this way. For me stats are most useful for evaluating the total state of my golf not individual rounds. For example I could have back to back rounds with identical scores but massively different stats. I'm not going to care if I shoot my index if I got lucky hacking around the course. But two months later when that round is forgotten I want my stats to be as accurate as possible. It may lead to course management changes. I can sort my stat tracker by last 10, 20, course played etc. I wouldn't want my GIR stats to be wrong even if I have a putter in my hand. I see stats in the same light as score, it's either right or wrong and I want mine to be correct.

[Dave2512]

I look at it this way. For me stats are most useful for evaluating the total state of my golf not individual rounds. For example I could have back to back rounds with identical scores but massively different stats. I'm not going to care if I shoot my index if I got lucky hacking around the course. But two months later when that round is forgotten I want my stats to be as accurate as possible. It may lead to course management changes. I can sort my stat tracker by last 10, 20, course played etc. I wouldn't want my GIR stats to be wrong even if I have a putter in my hand. I see stats in the same light as score, it's either right or wrong and I want mine to be correct.

Meant to add more but was at home with tablet and boy how I hate typing on that thing, at work now. Anyway unless you keep detailed PPR stats, length of putts, where the miss ends up etc. it probably isn't telling you much other than a number. Without that info likely won't change the way you practice putting. But GIR % can tell you a lot but only if accurate. Think of it this way every fringe putt that looks like GIR negates a worse missed green because the percentage is artificially high. If you think you are hitting 40% GIR when it's really 20% you may think your approach shots are better than they really are. Could definitely affect course strategy. I see inaccurate stats as a robbing yourself of the opportunity to improve.

[Righty to Lefty]

Meant to add more but was at home with tablet and boy how I hate typing on that thing, at work now. Anyway unless you keep detailed PPR stats, length of putts, where the miss ends up etc. it probably isn't telling you much other than a number. Without that info likely won't change the way you practice putting. But GIR % can tell you a lot but only if accurate. Think of it this way every fringe putt that looks like GIR negates a worse missed green because the percentage is artificially high. If you think you are hitting 40% GIR when it's really 20% you may think your approach shots are better than they really are. Could definitely affect course strategy. I see inaccurate stats as a robbing yourself of the opportunity to improve.

If you don't count a fringe as a GIR you run into a bigger problem down the road in my opinion which is that your putts per round will not accurately reflect how you are actually putting and it will make your scrambling percentage look way better than it really is because is putting from the fringe really a reflection of your scrambling ability? Putting from the fringe is no more difficult than putting on the green and the fringe around a green is only likely to add 3 or 4 feet to the putt and thus you have in esscence hit the green. No one is going to comment on your ability to get up and down on a  putt from the fringe and I'd rather  have my number of putts be higher so that when I truly begin to putt well I want my stats to show that trend. I also want my scrambling stats to reflect me getting up and down with my wedges. Nick Faldo was asked the question on air and he even said that a fringe putt is a GIR in his opinion because hitting the fringe doesn't add any difficulty to the next shot, especially to a pro. If you have to putt through a foot of fringe did you really miss the green....technically yes...but we are arguing semantics and it depends on what stat you want to be most accurate of how you are actually playing whether it be your scrambling stats or your putting stats.

[Dave2512]

If you don't count a fringe as a GIR you run into a bigger problem down the road in my opinion which is that your putts per round will not accurately reflect how you are actually putting and it will make your scrambling percentage look way better than it really is because is putting from the fringe really a reflection of your scrambling ability? Putting from the fringe is no more difficult than putting on the green and the fringe around a green is only likely to add 3 or 4 feet to the putt and thus you have in esscence hit the green. No one is going to comment on your ability to get up and down on a  putt from the fringe and I'd rather  have my number of putts be higher so that when I truly begin to putt well I want my stats to show that trend. I also want my scrambling stats to reflect me getting up and down with my wedges. Nick Faldo was asked the question on air and he even said that a fringe putt is a GIR in his opinion because hitting the fringe doesn't add any difficulty to the next shot, especially to a pro. If you have to putt through a foot of fringe did you really miss the green....technically yes...but we are arguing semantics and it depends on what stat you want to be most accurate of how you are actually playing whether it be your scrambling stats or your putting stats.

The problem I see is the high handicap golfer is probably hitting the fringe less often than he doesn't even get it close. So an inflated GIR % more damaging regarding game analysis than inflated scrambling stats because they miss so many greens and 1 putt so often anyway.

[Aguirre]

I really don't have a problem with insisting that the ball be on the putting surface to count as a GIR.  But some of you seem be looking at this as some kind of adhering to the rules of golf position.  Like it's dishonorable to count a fringe hit as a GIR.  That's weird.

[bubble]

putts from the fringe dont count as putt, they are approches. chips played on the green are putts as well.

Shots from the fring are in the scrambling section as I missed the green. The scrambling is easier since I almost hit the green. That's life.

The same way a 1 foot birdie putt is a birdie although the work was really done the shots before.

A recovery under bushes with the putter is not a putt either.

[Aguirre]

putts from the fringe dont count as putt, they are approches. chips played on the green are putts as well.

Shots from the fring are in the scrambling section as I missed the green. The scrambling is easier since I almost hit the green. That's life.

The same way a 1 foot birdie putt is a birdie although the work was really done the shots before.

A recovery under bushes with the putter is not a putt either.

Nobody is disputing any of this.

[David in FL]

I really don't have a problem with insisting that the ball be on the putting surface to count as a GIR.  But some of you seem be looking at this as some kind of adhering to the rules of golf position. Like it's dishonorable to count a fringe hit as a GIR .  That's weird.

Not at all. You can count a ball hit into the middle of the lake as a fairway hit too. Equally weird that anyone would want to, but to each his own.

[Righty to Lefty]

Not at all. You can count a ball hit into the middle of the lake as a fairway hit too.

Equally weird that anyone would want to, but to each his own.

Really....you just compared a ball hit into a hazard in the same regard as a ball that will be putted through a couple feet of fringe, and said they were the same thing?  If you just did that then I'm definitely done following this thread and will move to the next one for my golf fix for the day.

[David in FL]

Really....you just compared a ball hit into a hazard in the same regard as a ball that will be putted through a couple feet of fringe, and said they were the same thing?  If you just did that then I'm definitely done following this thread and will move to the next one for my golf fix for the day.

The point being, you can self-define anything you like, as anything you like. That doesn't make it so, but it doesn't harm anyone else, so knock yourself out. It's still weird though.

[MS256]

The point being, you can self-define anything you like, as anything you like. That doesn't make it so, but it doesn't harm anyone else, so knock yourself out. It's still weird though.

I'm certainly not a "stats" guy, and don't keep track of any of them, but I don't think it's weird at all to count balls through a few inches of fringe as a green hit or balls a few feet out of the fairway as a fairway hit for personal records.

I've heard plenty of pros say they keep their personal stats that way because it gives a better indication of how well they may or may not be hitting the ball when they look at the stats. After all there is a huge difference between missing a green by a few inches or missing a fairway by a foot than there is in missing by much wider margins.

Official stats are of course a different story.

[Aguirre]

Not at all. You can count a ball hit into the middle of the lake as a fairway hit too.

Equally weird that anyone would want to, but to each his own.

Hurrr durrrr durrr hurrr durrr

[Maddog10]

Your stats only matter to you, so keep them in a way that best summarizes your game and indicates your strengths and weaknesses. I've counted fringes as both made and missed GIR's. People say that's dumb/weird/stupid or whatever but I don't care. If I hit a 180 yard approach shot exactly like I wanted to that is 2 inches into the fringe but only 20 feet from the hole, that's a GIR and I'm counting my putt as well. If I hit a 100 yard wedge that lands 2 inches into the fringe and is 50 feet from the hole, that's a missed GIR. Maybe my stats aren't up to PGA standards, but when the PGA comes asking for my stats I will adjust to their proper guidelines. Until then, I'm going to keep my stats in a manner that allows me to analyze my game in the best way possible. I would recommend you do the same, but to each their own.