Leave the Flagstick In (and Tend it Too)

[pumaAttack]

3 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

 

The Pope use to think the world was flat. Come on, winning on the PGA tour doesn't make them right 100% of the time. Faldo is a multi-major winner and he was constantly wrong about the ball flight laws. Winning does not equal actual statistical comprehension.

And science changes all the time, so how long until this is debunked?

Yes, a PGA golfer is not 100% accurate on the science and that is my point.  There is more to golf than hard science.  Feel and touch and insight play a huge role too.  If it only took science, we would see the same swing from every tour pro.  If a certain visual helps a pro make shots and win tournaments, then they are right in doing so.  

9 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

 

These aren't the post of someone who is agreeing with the data. 

You are right, I am not agreeing with the data being 100% universally right.  That is what I have stated all along.

Too often you all deal only in absolutes.

[boogielicious]

4 minutes ago, pumaAttack said:

And science changes all the time, so how long until this is debunked?

Yes, a PGA golfer is not 100% accurate on the science and that is my point.  There is more to golf than hard science.  Feel and touch and insight play a huge role too.  If it only took science, we would see the same swing from every tour pro.  If a certain visual helps a pro make shots and win tournaments, then they are right in doing so.  

You are right, I am not agreeing with the data being 100% universally right.  That is what I have stated all along.

Too often you all deal only in absolutes.

Saying that the odds are more in your favor leaving the flag stick in is not an absolute.

[pumaAttack]

2 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

Saying that the odds are more in your favor leaving the flag stick in is not an absolute.

 

"I've literally told my golf team members that if I see them playing a shot from off the green with the flagstick out, they strongly run the risk of sitting out the next round because it's just stupid to do otherwise." - @iacas

Edited March 16, 2016 by pumaAttack

[boogielicious]

1 minute ago, pumaAttack said:

 

"I've literally told my golf team members that if I see them playing a shot from off the green with the flagstick out, they strongly run the risk of sitting out the next round because it's just stupid to do otherwise." - @iacas

That is not an absolute either. That is coaching advice. Same as I used to give my boys and girls in soccer. "Aim for the far side of the net! The keeper can more easily defend the near side." The odds are in your favor and if you want to help the team, you need to work with the options that will more likely score or you are not helping the team.

[saevel25]

12 minutes ago, pumaAttack said:

Yes, a PGA golfer is not 100% accurate on the science and that is my point.  There is more to golf than hard science.  Feel and touch and insight play a huge role too.

They know more about their own golf swing. Many golfers today are using statistics to help enhance their games. Evan Jordan Spieth uses advanced golf statistics to prioritize his own training.

If Haas want's to be stuck in the dark ages of golf then fine. He'll be losing strokes doing so.

 

 

[pumaAttack]

1 minute ago, boogielicious said:

That is not an absolute either. That is coaching advice. Same as I used to give my boys and girls in soccer. "Aim for the far side of the net! The keeper can more easily defend the near side." The odds are in your favor and if you want to help the team, you need to work with the options that will more likely score or you are not helping the team.

No, its forcing a personal preference onto somebody because you like it better.  Its not a hard fact.

 

[iacas]

2 minutes ago, pumaAttack said:

No, its forcing a personal preference onto somebody because you like it better.  Its not a hard fact.

It's not a personal preference.

[boogielicious]

2 minutes ago, pumaAttack said:

No, its forcing a personal preference onto somebody because you like it better.  Its not a hard fact.

 

He's the coach. Did you argue with your coaches like this? It's a hard fact that the odds are MORE IN YOUR FAVOR leaving the flag in. The probability is greater. Why not take the odds?

 

[pumaAttack]

3 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

He's the coach. Did you argue with your coaches like this? It's a hard fact that the odds are MORE IN YOUR FAVOR leaving the flag in. The probability is greater. Why not take the odds?

 

No I don't argue with them but I will question them on it.  Again, I am not talking about a Joe Smoe golfer, I am talking about a golfer who has won 7 times on the PGA Tour.   I wonder who has more anecdotal evidence??  If he likes it out, then that is his "smart" choice.

[boogielicious]

Just now, pumaAttack said:

Exactly.

I am objecting to the fact he called him dumb and to the arrogance that goes with that. To imply you know what's better than a tour pro does for their own personal preference is really off-putting. 

You need to give it up. You are also showing a side of just plain contradiction and you are ignoring the data. Tour Pros are athletes. Coaches and top ranked instructors are there to make them better. Coaches and top ranked instructors spend their careers studying data trying to figure out how to help their players become even better. Tour Pros don't have the time to study the data because they are playing all the time. If better information becomes available, it should be given to the player. Otherwise, the player will not improve.

BTW, Bill Haas lost the tournament. If he left the flagstick in, he could have sunk the putt, picking up a stroke and would have won the tournament. He missed out on ~$500,000 dollars. If you told him the odds before that shot, he might have left it in.

[pumaAttack]

Just now, boogielicious said:

You need to give it up. You are also showing a side of just plain contradiction and you are ignoring the data. Tour Pros are athletes. Coaches and top ranked instructors are there to make them better. Coaches and top ranked instructors spend their careers studying data trying to figure out how to help their players become even better. Tour Pros don't have the time to study the data because they are playing all the time. If better information becomes available, it should be given to the player. Otherwise, the player will not improve.

BTW, Bill Haas lost the tournament. If he left the flagstick in, he could have sunk the putt, picking up a stroke and would have won the tournament. He missed out on ~$500,000 dollars. If you told him the odds before that shot, he might have left it in.

I need to give it up because I have a different opinion?  Wow.  So glad you welcome other view points so openly into your world.

And you honestly think this is some "secret tip" that Haas hasn't been made aware of?  Some data that only a select few can harness?   

So your completely hypothetical scenario is hard fact too?

[boogielicious]

Just now, pumaAttack said:

I need to give it up because I have a different opinion?  Wow.  So glad you welcome other view points so openly into your world.

And you honestly think this is some "secret tip" that Haas hasn't been made aware of?  Some data that only a select few can harness?   

So your completely hypothetical scenario is hard fact too?

Mine is not hypothetical. The data shows it to be better odds. Some choose to ignore it as you seem to have. The same way some think that all putts break toward Ray's creek at the Masters. There are a lot of golf myths that people abide by even when data shows otherwise.

[pumaAttack]

1 minute ago, boogielicious said:

Mine is not hypothetical. The data shows it to be better odds. Some choose to ignore it as you seem to have. The same way some think that all putts break toward Ray's creek at the Masters. There are a lot of golf myths that people abide by even when data shows otherwise.

Again, loose data that tries to apply to all cases universally.  

Why do you think some golfers play better at certain courses and holes?  Because it fits their eye.  Maybe not having the pin in fits a players eye better.  And that is MUCH MORE important than some study conducted over two foot putts.  

[boogielicious]

2 minutes ago, pumaAttack said:

Again, loose data that tries to apply to all cases universally.  

Why do you think some golfers play better at certain courses and holes?  Because it fits their eye.  Maybe not having the pin in fits a players eye better.  And that is MUCH MORE important than some study conducted over two foot putts.  

Tony, you are the only one in this thread arguing against the advice of leaving the flagstick in. You acknowledge the data, but then think players should go with feel instead. Feel is not real. 

And it is not just "fits their eye", it also fits their shot shape, which is scientific and not artistic. But that is off topic for this thread.

Got to run now. I will check up on your 27 counter posts later. 

[pumaAttack]

2 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

Tony, you are the only one in this thread arguing against the advice of leaving the flagstick in. You acknowledge the data, but then think players should go with feel instead. Feel is not real. 

And it is not just "fits their eye", it also fits their shot shape, which is scientific and not artistic. But that is off topic for this thread.

Got to run now. I will check up on your 27 counter posts later. 

If something fits their eye better and allows them to execute better, then gaining a mere 1% chance of going in is not worth it.  The pros usually have a great pre-shot visualization of where the ball will go.  If that flag messes up the picture then it is harming them. 

This is not feel as in "my elbow was in, I swear" this is more mental visualization which is VERY REAL.

[Golfingdad]

46 minutes ago, iacas said:

Why does it matter how many times it would help Bill? Tour pros are, what, 15% from twenty feet? If leaving the flag in makes that 17% do you not think for a chance to win a PGA Tour event, he would take it?

It matters because I don't think it's anywhere close to a 2% gain.  I think you're talking about 15% to 15.0000000000001%.  I might have thrown a couple of extra zeros in there for effect, but my point is that its almost a completely negligible difference.

Also, along those same lines, you discounted the idea that it might be a psychological advantage for some pros to have it out because you thought it shouldn't bother them.  While that is probably true, there's nothing scientific about that, and it's just your opinion.  Perhaps Bill Haas shouldn't be bothered by a flagstick in the hole while lining up his putts, but that's not to say that he isn't.  And considering the miniscule help the flag in offers him on that type of putt, I would argue that it's entirely possible that he is helped by that same percentage, or even more, by the flag not being in the hole.  Whether it be learning Aimpoint or about how Edel fits putters, I've come to realize just how very tricky and deceptive our eyes can be to our brains.

[pumaAttack]

6 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

It matters because I don't think it's anywhere close to a 2% gain.  I think you're talking about 15% to 15.0000000000001%.  I might have thrown a couple of extra zeros in there for effect, but my point is that its almost a completely negligible difference.

Also, along those same lines, you discounted the idea that it might be a psychological advantage for some pros to have it out because you thought it shouldn't bother them.  While that is probably true, there's nothing scientific about that, and it's just your opinion.  Perhaps Bill Haas shouldn't be bothered by a flagstick in the hole while lining up his putts, but that's not to say that he isn't.  And considering the miniscule help the flag in offers him on that type of putt, I would argue that it's entirely possible that he is helped by that same percentage, or even more, by the flag not being in the hole.  Whether it be learning Aimpoint or about how Edel fits putters, I've come to realize just how very tricky and deceptive our eyes can be to our brains.

Exactly!

Excellent post.  The help gained by the better mental picture far outweighs the possible .00001 to 1% gain of leaving the flag in.

What bothers me is that @iacas is applying his opinion that having the flag in outweighs any mental harm as a universal truth.  That simply isn't the case and should be left to personal preference.

Edited March 16, 2016 by pumaAttack

[Golfingdad]

3 minutes ago, pumaAttack said:

Exactly!

Excellent post.  The help gained by the better mental picture far outweighs the possible .00001 to 1% gain of leaving the flag in.

Thanks but that's not quite what I said.  I said it's "entirely possible." ;)