Jump to content
IGNORED

Infographic - Up and down percentages by handicap


Note: This thread is 2368 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!

Recommended Posts

What happened to the 73-77 and 84-90 ranges?

38% [quote name="AbsoluteTruths" url="/t/78678/infographic-up-and-down-percentages-by-handicap/0_10#post_1085886"]     What about the 100 and up range? :-D [/quote] 13%

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

[quote name="Lihu" url="/t/78678/infographic-up-and-down-percentages-by-handicap/0_10#post_1085867"] What happened to the 73-77 and 84-90 ranges?

38% [quote name="AbsoluteTruths" url="/t/78678/infographic-up-and-down-percentages-by-handicap/0_10#post_1085886"]     What about the 100 and up range? :-D [/quote] 13%[/quote] My question was a joke, but how do you know it's linear?

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

My question was a joke, but how do you know it's linear?

I knew that, and my answer was just in jest.

it would be an anomaly if the 74 - 76 range was better than the 71 - 73 range and worst than the 77 - 79 range don't you think?

Also, it would be hard to convince anyone that the 100+ have a better up and down % than the 90 - 99 range.

I don't think I need to go into statistics to convince you of the above two?

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

[QUOTE name="Lihu" url="/t/78678/infographic-up-and-down-percentages-by-handicap/0_20#post_1085921"] My question was a joke, but how do you know it's linear?[/QUOTE] I knew that, and my answer was just in jest.  [SIZE=13px]it would be an anomaly if the 74 - 76 range was better than the 71 - 73 range and worst than the 77 - 79 range don't you think?[/SIZE] [SIZE=13px]Also, it would be hard to convince anyone that the 100+ have a better up and down % than the 90 - 99 range.[/SIZE] [SIZE=13px]I don't think I need to go into statistics to convince you of the above two?[/SIZE] :)

Nah, but I did find it odd that they had gaps in the ranges. ;-)

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

God that makes me feel bad.... I'm in the 84-89 range and my scramble percentage is in the low teens! UGH!!!!!!! I knew I sucked at that but damn!
Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Pretty much spot on for me. All about where you miss greens. Better players are nGIR often and they hit more greens. If you only have to scramble 9 times a round your stats are going to be better than the guy that hits zero GIR. My last 20 U&D; stat is 33.3%, YTD is 35.4%.

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

God that makes me feel bad.... I'm in the 84-89 range and my scramble percentage is in the low teens! UGH!!!!!!! I knew I sucked at that but damn!


Unfortunately, I'm pretty good at scrambling. Be happy that you're not. ;-)

I made a lot of near greens but not so many GIR in the last two weeks. It' pretty ugly.

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

It's to the point where I get so antsy trying to get an up and down that I usually will miss even within 6 feet. I'm less nervous wiht a birdy putt! It's like super in my head now!!!!!
Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

It's to the point where I get so antsy trying to get an up and down that I usually will miss even within 6 feet. I'm less nervous wiht a birdy putt! It's like super in my head now!!!!!


Yeah but if you are shooting mid 80's golf and not getting up and down it means you are making more conventional pars than other golfers in your handicap range. I haven't looked at the stats lately but if I remember right the mid 80's golfer usually hits about 3-5 GIR. I make par or better 56% during a round and have to scramble for a third of those.

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

  • Administrator

Weird stat… "Inside 100 yards"? How many players were tested? How many shots?

Inside 100 yards could have huge fluctuations if one group hit from an average of 74 yards while another group from 62 yards, on average.

Here's to hoping the numbers are "hundreds of golfers, thousands of shots" for each segment.

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

Weird stat… "Inside 100 yards"? How many players were tested? How many shots?

Inside 100 yards could have huge fluctuations if one group hit from an average of 74 yards while another group from 62 yards, on average.

Here's to hoping the numbers are "hundreds of golfers, thousands of shots" for each segment.

True, scrambling from 100 yards would be really good!


For some reason I gleaned over the 100, and assumed it must mean 10-30 yards.

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

I missed the hundred yards part. The numbers would be flawed based on that. I don't known any sub 10 or so golfer missing greens so bad they are getting down at better than 30% near 100 yards. My stats for that are probably less than 5%.

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

Weird stat… "Inside 100 yards"? How many players were tested? How many shots?

Inside 100 yards could have huge fluctuations if one group hit from an average of 74 yards while another group from 62 yards, on average.

Here's to hoping the numbers are "hundreds of golfers, thousands of shots" for each segment.

What is the percentage of up and down from just off the green....from rough vs. from fairway?

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

  • Moderator

Weird stat… "Inside 100 yards"? How many players were tested? How many shots?

Inside 100 yards could have huge fluctuations if one group hit from an average of 74 yards while another group from 62 yards, on average.

Here's to hoping the numbers are "hundreds of golfers, thousands of shots" for each segment.

Agree.  I dislike when summaries are published without reference to the actual data.

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

Note: This thread is 2368 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!

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • Support TST Affiliates

    TourStriker PlaneMate
    Golfer's Journal
    Whoop
    SuperSpeed
    FlightScope Mevo
    Use the code "iacas" for 10% off Mevo and the code "iacasjun21" for 10% off SuperSpeed.
  • Posts

    • I don't tweet much, although I do have an account for following other people, including Erik. I think the key will be stokes gained approach.
    • Matt, good stuff lately. 
    • For me, this highlights the 2019 rule change that no longer limits this type of penalty to 4 strokes (or the error/mistake being active for 2 holes), but instead carries on, per hole, until the problem is corrected.  That is something I just learned now, so thanks, I guess? FWIW, this means that if you forget a 15th club in your bag and play the whole round with it, you need to add a cool 36 strokes to your (let's call it not great to begin with) 95, to end up with an absurdly high smooth 131!  Wow.  The only silver lining I see is that since you get to only record a net double for handicap purposes, that round may end up being recorded with ESC as a 104 instead...  🙂
    • Day Eighteen, June 12, 2021. Played 18 today. First ever bogey free round. 1 eagle, 1 birdie, and 16 pars, 68.
    • I don’t see why the PGA/LPGA/Champions don’t play a mixed tournament from 3 different tees. Each tour competing against itself, but playing a 3-some, one person from each.  I think it’d be one hell of a tournament with something for everyone. 
  • Today's Birthdays

    1. Jayclay
      Jayclay
      (64 years old)
    2. Joe4
      Joe4
      (48 years old)
    3. Linville
      Linville
      (41 years old)
    4. mitchell10
      mitchell10
      (35 years old)
    5. monkeys
      monkeys
      (23 years old)

×
×
  • Create New...

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...