Share your New Strokes Gained Data from GAME Golf!

[RandallT]

10 hours ago, InTheRough said:

I wouldn't want to have to tag these things while I'm on the course but an option in the round review would definitely be nice.  Could be something as simple as a drop-down box when you enter a penalty with options like: OB Right, OB Left, Other Penalty...etc.  Also, an option to pick the club you hit it could be a good addition with so you can track how many strokes certain clubs actually cost you per round. I'm sure that most people know that they struggle with certain clubs but, coming from personal experience seeing my GG stats, sometimes actually seeing the numbers can be eye opening. 

I agree with you that they are more than likely keeping it simple and what the members of this site, who are golf enthusiasts, want is not always realistic, but with all of the data that GG can grab it would be cool to see more in depth analysis possibilities in the future.  GG could then turn into something like Excel...some people will just want it to do simple lists and spreadsheets and others will be able to use it for more complex analysis.

Yes, I have been generally disappointed with the golf tracking market thus far (I haven't purchased Game Golf yet, but I might because it's appearing to tie in closely here). I was a beta tester for one of the iPhone apps, and I got some visibility into their enhancement request analysis. The overwhelming thought then was to keep it simple, so I get that.

One key thing that could distinguish a product, however, is to provide an option to give us "Advanced" tracking features. They could mostly be hidden to general users, say the 80%. But for the smaller group of stats enthusiasts, we could handle things in far more detail, as long as the reporting from that detailed data entry revealed some interesting insights.

The trick with that, however, is obviously that those extra features for that small group would likely be a non-trivial amount of effort, so it might involve a higher cost. If the price is fair, it might work. If the price is steep, it might now, because as @Dave2512 has mentioned, the end result is usually that our ball-striking needs work.

For Strokes Gained in particular, I'd pay for tools that tracked detailed performance over time, let me select the area and the time frame- it's gotta be more than just the last 10, as that is just a static thing. I'd like to see how each area of my game progresses over the course of a season, as well as across different seasons. Strokes gained, to me, is far more valuable than FIR/GIR/scramble %/putts per round, when I want to look at my driving, approach play, short game and putting.

[iacas]

15 hours ago, InTheRough said:

I agree with you that they are more than likely keeping it simple and what the members of this site, who are golf enthusiasts, want is not always realistic, but with all of the data that GG can grab it would be cool to see more in depth analysis possibilities in the future.  GG could then turn into something like Excel...some people will just want it to do simple lists and spreadsheets and others will be able to use it for more complex analysis.

To be fair… while members of this site are golf enthusiasts… so are GG users.

The one thing I think makes me feel good is that they HAVE the stats. They're tracking all the stuff. We're simply talking about ways to expose the data, ways to massage the data into usable representations. It's not like they're failing to get some of the stats and so they'd have to first start collecting them.

For example, when I was building and selling Scorecard, you entered five stats (per hole): score, # putts, distance of first putt, and then fairway hit/right/left and GIR/SS/UD. From those five stats we could tell you over 35 things, like "scoring average from right rough" and so on. And that was the general stats: we could also tell you how various stats related to one another (i.e. as you'd expect, GIR and score were closely correlated), and we could show you things like how well you play on par threes on Tuesdays in courses within 50 miles of your home territory, if we wanted to.

For example, GAME Golf could show you whether you score better in the morning or afternoon. They have the data. They just aren't exposing it to the public yet. (I picked that stat because it is not one I'd even really care to see, but serves as an example of something they "have".)

4 hours ago, RandallT said:

Yes, I have been generally disappointed with the golf tracking market thus far (I haven't purchased Game Golf yet, but I might because it's appearing to tie in closely here).

You should, yes. At the very least sign up for an account, get the free iPhone app, and add the username to your profile.

4 hours ago, RandallT said:

One key thing that could distinguish a product, however, is to provide an option to give us "Advanced" tracking features. They could mostly be hidden to general users, say the 80%. But for the smaller group of stats enthusiasts, we could handle things in far more detail, as long as the reporting from that detailed data entry revealed some interesting insights.

I'm not sure the dichotomy exists. Are 80% of GG users NOT stats enthusiasts? I'd suggest it's a much lower percentage. After all, that's kind of what the platform DOES, right?

3 hours ago, RandallT said:

For Strokes Gained in particular, I'd pay for tools that tracked detailed performance over time, let me select the area and the time frame- it's gotta be more than just the last 10, as that is just a static thing. I'd like to see how each area of my game progresses over the course of a season, as well as across different seasons. Strokes gained, to me, is far more valuable than FIR/GIR/scramble %/putts per round, when I want to look at my driving, approach play, short game and putting.

I agree.

First step, though: get Strokes Gained in GG to make sense. I'm not sure that can be said right now. We'll play a role in helping to improve that, though: that much I believe I can say.

[InTheRough]

14 hours ago, RandallT said:

 

The trick with that, however, is obviously that those extra features for that small group would likely be a non-trivial amount of effort, so it might involve a higher cost. If the price is fair, it might work. If the price is steep, it might now, because as @Dave2512 has mentioned, the end result is usually that our ball-striking needs work.

For Strokes Gained in particular, I'd pay for tools that tracked detailed performance over time, let me select the area and the time frame- it's gotta be more than just the last 10, as that is just a static thing. I'd like to see how each area of my game progresses over the course of a season, as well as across different seasons. Strokes gained, to me, is far more valuable than FIR/GIR/scramble %/putts per round, when I want to look at my driving, approach play, short game and putting.

Based on @iacas response below it might not really be all that expensive for them to get the more advanced data that we want...just a little more difficult to represent it in a way that makes sense to people.  If it really is a financial burden on GG though i think i would be willing to pay a small amount for the analytics.  With that it would also be cool to see the integrate with the USGA and R&A to give official handicaps to those that track the more in depth stats (and are then more likely to follow the rules and be more stringent when reviewing rounds) 

10 hours ago, iacas said:

To be fair… while members of this site are golf enthusiasts… so are GG users.

The one thing I think makes me feel good is that they HAVE the stats. They're tracking all the stuff. We're simply talking about ways to expose the data, ways to massage the data into usable representations. It's not like they're failing to get some of the stats and so they'd have to first start collecting them.

For example, when I was building and selling Scorecard, you entered five stats (per hole): score, # putts, distance of first putt, and then fairway hit/right/left and GIR/SS/UD. From those five stats we could tell you over 35 things, like "scoring average from right rough" and so on. And that was the general stats: we could also tell you how various stats related to one another (i.e. as you'd expect, GIR and score were closely correlated), and we could show you things like how well you play on par threes on Tuesdays in courses within 50 miles of your home territory, if we wanted to.

For example, GAME Golf could show you whether you score better in the morning or afternoon. They have the data. They just aren't exposing it to the public yet. (I picked that stat because it is not one I'd even really care to see, but serves as an example of something they "have".

to your first point...fair enough, though how many of those other GG users/other golf enthusiasts post and discuss their stats on golf forums 

It is cool to hear that GG is collecting all of the more advanced information and that the possibilities for future analysis are much more expansive but, just out of curiosity, why hold them back now?  Most people don't need anything complicated (like what more than likely has gone into the stokes gained data) but seeing that when they miss right, or left, or when their tee shot with their driver ends up 30 yards shorter than their typical distance that their average score on a par 4 goes from a 4 to a 4.5 could do a lot to help them focus their practice.  Why not separate GG from other tracking apps/products like Golfshot by giving the consumers more than what the other products offer? (asking since you have much more communication with GG employees and could probably give a more in depth insight than most)

[iacas]

In short, @InTheRough, everything takes time. Development time, prioritization, etc.

[iacas]

On November 14, 2015 at 10:28:49 AM, Jeremie Boop said:

Well, hell, I never would have guessed that my putting was costing me the most... Just doesn't seem correct.

@Jeremie Boop, please have a look at some of your rounds. Or all of them. For example:

http://www.gamegolf.com/player/jeremie/round/620251?shot_id=38478318&hole_id=20330408

Did you really have a 9-foot putt (3 yards) that you hit about 1 yard with the first attempt? On the next hole, did you hit a series of three-foot putts?

http://www.gamegolf.com/player/jeremie/round/620251?shot_id=38478419&hole_id=20330445

And on the next hole, did you really hit a 12-foot putt three feet, then make the 9-footer?

http://www.gamegolf.com/player/jeremie/round/620251?shot_id=38478427&hole_id=20330446

You seem to have a lot of bad data for your putting. Your shots that end up on the green end up being VERY close to the flag, from which you regularly two- or three-putt.

Or are you just tapping multiple times when you take your ball out of the hole for the number of putts you took? Because… that would throw off your rounds quite a bit.

Credit to @RandallT for finding this, uhhhh, "anomaly" in your tagging.

Our current working theory involves more than I'll say here, but we think…:

• GG doesn't really handle penalty shots well (or at all?).
• GG doesn't handle partial rounds very well.

For the second, we're talking about SG, but it's interesting to note (as @RandallT did) that your "best round" is a two-hole "round" you managed to play in even par: http://www.gamegolf.com/player/jeremie .

[DrvFrShow]

The last thing I'm thinking about on the green is tagging my putter. So putting distances are totally random since I tag the putter usually when I reach my approach shot, and after I hole out (the appropriate number of tags). So the putting information other than number of putts per round is useless. I know I need to work on my short-mid range putting.

I need to work on my whole game, but it's too cold to even practice at the range right now. I need a lesson, and that's useless until the weather gets a little warmer so I can practice what I learn. - my house is too small to even do mirror work.

[Jeremie Boop]

7 hours ago, iacas said:

@Jeremie Boop, please have a look at some of your rounds. Or all of them. For example:

http://www.gamegolf.com/player/jeremie/round/620251?shot_id=38478318&hole_id=20330408

Did you really have a 9-foot putt (3 yards) that you hit about 1 yard with the first attempt? On the next hole, did you hit a series of three-foot putts?

http://www.gamegolf.com/player/jeremie/round/620251?shot_id=38478419&hole_id=20330445

And on the next hole, did you really hit a 12-foot putt three feet, then make the 9-footer?

http://www.gamegolf.com/player/jeremie/round/620251?shot_id=38478427&hole_id=20330446

You seem to have a lot of bad data for your putting. Your shots that end up on the green end up being VERY close to the flag, from which you regularly two- or three-putt.

Or are you just tapping multiple times when you take your ball out of the hole for the number of putts you took? Because… that would throw off your rounds quite a bit.

Credit to @RandallT for finding this, uhhhh, "anomaly" in your tagging.

Our current working theory involves more than I'll say here, but we think…:

• GG doesn't really handle penalty shots well (or at all?).
• GG doesn't handle partial rounds very well.

For the second, we're talking about SG, but it's interesting to note (as @RandallT did) that your "best round" is a two-hole "round" you managed to play in even par: http://www.gamegolf.com/player/jeremie .

Here's the thing, I was thinking about this and I realized that because I use the phone app it doesn't really do a good job of tracking my putts and I rarely go in to fix that. I meant to reply back to this thread and mention that but I got caught up in my preparations for my vacation.

[iacas]

59 minutes ago, Jeremie Boop said:

Here's the thing, I was thinking about this and I realized that because I use the phone app it doesn't really do a good job of tracking my putts and I rarely go in to fix that. I meant to reply back to this thread and mention that but I got caught up in my preparations for my vacation.

You should take better care to edit your rounds to more accurately reflect where you take shots from. The putting stats not only affect your putting stats but the shot that leads to the first putt as well.

[RFKFREAK]

7 hours ago, DrvFrShow said:

The last thing I'm thinking about on the green is tagging my putter. So putting distances are totally random since I tag the putter usually when I reach my approach shot, and after I hole out (the appropriate number of tags). So the putting information other than number of putts per round is useless. I know I need to work on my short-mid range putting.

I need to work on my whole game, but it's too cold to even practice at the range right now. I need a lesson, and that's useless until the weather gets a little warmer so I can practice what I learn. - my house is too small to even do mirror work.

Really?  I just made it part of my routine. 

[dsc123]

2 hours ago, iacas said:

You should take better care to edit your rounds to more accurately reflect where you take shots from. The putting stats not only affect your putting stats but the shot that leads to the first putt as well.

The problem gg has is there was absolutely nothing to gain from being more careful until last week.  

[mvmac]

5 hours ago, Jeremie Boop said:

Here's the thing, I was thinking about this and I realized that because I use the phone app it doesn't really do a good job of tracking my putts and I rarely go in to fix that. 

Yeah I'd recommend going back and editing your rounds before you sign them. Only going to help you get accurate stats.

[Abu3baid]

1 hour ago, dsc123 said:

The problem gg has is there was absolutely nothing to gain from being more careful until last week.  

Not only that, but I just edited my round, and I was careful to mark at each and every putt.. What I found is that almost none of my markings were even close to reality.. i.e. They are either on one side of the green or the other, and pretty much always bunched together.  

When I want to edit it, the zoom is never large enough to make it easy to edit, and you really have to start writing down your exact distances and what happened to even remember was the first putt short or was it long?  

I would venture that only 1% of golfers on GG will actually input accurate data, even with all the care I just took I am sure I am only about 25% accurate as to what happened.. Pretty much this renders the information useless to me unfortunately.. GG still will be valuable for me IMO because I don't care if it measures my drive as + / - 5/10 yards long or short on my drive because who cares, but 3 feet / 6 feet matters for calculating strokes gained..  garbage in garbage out as they say!

[Dave2512]

If you have a GG account and use the app can't you log in and use your PC or whatever later to touch it up. 

I get now why I see funky rounds people sign. I assumed the editing was lazy but it seems some feel it's a burden (app users). 

[iacas]

10 hours ago, dsc123 said:

The problem gg has is there was absolutely nothing to gain from being more careful until last week.  

That's not true. It affected your short game stats, your approach shot stats, etc. Every shot that hit the green was affected by how close and where on the green the ball finished.

I've been pretty meticulous and feel that my stats are closest.

54 minutes ago, Dave2512 said:

I get now why I see funky rounds people sign. I assumed the editing was lazy but it seems some feel it's a burden (app users). 

Yeah. It takes me five minutes to edit a round, and it's something I enjoy doing, as I can pretty quickly recap or go over my round.

8 hours ago, Abu3baid said:

Not only that, but I just edited my round, and I was careful to mark at each and every putt.. What I found is that almost none of my markings were even close to reality.. i.e. They are either on one side of the green or the other, and pretty much always bunched together.

I think that a lot of greens are often in trees and don't get the most accurate GPS. But I can move the markers to the spots from which I putted.

8 hours ago, Abu3baid said:

When I want to edit it, the zoom is never large enough to make it easy to edit, and you really have to start writing down your exact distances and what happened to even remember was the first putt short or was it long?

I don't find that to be true at all. But I can remember from where I hit putts and whether I hit it short, long, left, right, etc.

8 hours ago, Abu3baid said:

Pretty much this renders the information useless to me unfortunately.. GG still will be valuable for me IMO because I don't care if it measures my drive as + / - 5/10 yards long or short on my drive because who cares, but 3 feet / 6 feet matters for calculating strokes gained..  garbage in garbage out as they say!

It doesn't matter that much.

First one I could think to find: from 25 feet a PGA Tour pro averaged 1.934 putts. From 28 feet they averaged 1.961 putts.

So if you're off +/- 3 feet every time, not only will they tend to balance out (you're 3 feet long on one, 3 feet short on another), but they'll not result in big changes anyway.

It matters more when you get in closer: the difference between 3 and 6 feet is far more substantial. But that only affects the times when you have those short distances as your first putt, because for all other times the only distance that really matters is the distance of your first putt. With that and the number of putts you took you can figure out your SG putting without knowing about any of your subsequent putts.

[DrvFrShow]

15 hours ago, RFKFREAK said:

Really?  I just made it part of my routine. 

I tag the first one because I mark, lift and clean. After that, there's the putting routine.

* crouch about six feet behind ball and read putt.

* walk putting line

* clean putting line removing any debris.

* pretend I know aimpoint

* pick the breakpoint of the putt

* select intermediate target. 

* re-line up putt to be sure, choose line which is usually the first one

* take three practice strokes

* approach ball & line up putter

* stroke putter.

* add body English if necessary

* if it goes in grab visor brim. if it misses act like I've been cheated (this will usually leave the 3-4 foot second putt from the 25 footer)

Are you going to remember to tag a club in that?

[iacas]

1 hour ago, DrvFrShow said:

Are you going to remember to tag a club in that?

I do. If it's the second putt, it's usually a tap-in, so I tap in, tag, and pull the ball out.

If it's a putt that requires attention, I tag when I get to the ball (do it when you're getting your AimPoint read if you have to).

[billchao]

2 hours ago, DrvFrShow said:

Are you going to remember to tag a club in that?

I usually tag my putt as soon as I get to the ball to mark it, or even when I don't bother to mark it, I'll tag as I'm standing over it waiting for someone else to putt.

I always tag before a read, unless it's just a tap-in, then I'll tag after I putt or sometimes I'll just tag when I put the flag back in after everyone is done.

It's really not that hard. Sometimes I'll tap twice thinking I forgot. It's easy to edit later.

[Dave2512]

Yep tag first then routine. It became part of my routine. Same for editing I have the time and shit that's the entire reason for using something like GG, to review a round.