Golf Statistics nGIR

[klund]

I have went about to make my own statistic software since the scorecard software stopped working with updated windows.

I have added the nGIR stat to this and read in a couple of different threads about this. In one it was 20yards for me i have only counted balls within a yard or 2 of the green.

What is you definition of nGIR?

[saevel25]

1 minute ago, klund said:

What is you definition of nGIR?

To quote the book of lower scoring to help you winning,

"we're defining a near-GIR (or nGIR) as getting your ball within the relative safe areas around the green up to about 20 yards from the green surface. It does not, as you will read later, include bunkers."

 

[klund]

22 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

To quote the book of lower scoring to help you winning,

"we're defining a near-GIR (or nGIR) as getting your ball within the relative safe areas around the green up to about 20 yards from the green surface. It does not, as you will read later, include bunkers."

 

Would you not think that this differs depending on the level of the player? Some people for example count up and downs for each chip+1putt others only when it is for par or better.

A 20 yard "miss" for a lower hcp is very bad but it might be ok for a 20hcp?

In my mind it is for a shot that is good but just misses the green or hits it and rolls off.

Edited April 7, 2016 by klund

[SavvySwede]

8 minutes ago, klund said:

Would you not think that this differs depending on the level of the player? Some people for example count up and downs for each chip+1putt others only when it is for par or better.

A 20 yard "miss" for a lower hcp is very bad but it might be ok for a 20hcp?

In my mind it is for a shot that is good but misses the green.

I don't think the quality of the approach matters, a good shot that gets a bad break can leave a tricky up and down. I define nGIR as the ball being in a position that sets up a generally easy par save.

[klund]

Just now, SavvySwede said:

I don't think the quality of the approach matters, a good shot that gets a bad break can leave a tricky up and down. I define nGIR as the ball being in a position that sets up a generally easy par save.

I like this one.

[ajw426]

9 minutes ago, SavvySwede said:

I don't think the quality of the approach matters, a good shot that gets a bad break can leave a tricky up and down. I define nGIR as the ball being in a position that sets up a generally easy par save.

Same.  For me it is a slight extension of the GIR stat in order to account for situations where I leave myself in very good position to get up and down for par.  GIR is an important stat, but being 1 yard off of the green and 15-20 feet away deserves as much "credit" as a GIR leaving you 30+ feet away.  

I follow my GIRs to tell myself how many opportunities I gave myself for easy pars (and birdie chances), and I add a few "just off the green, but in great position" nGIRs to follow those opportunities even more accurately.

[saevel25]

15 minutes ago, klund said:

I like this one.

That is covered here, 

39 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

"we're defining a near-GIR (or nGIR) as getting your ball within the relative safe areas around the green up to about 20 yards from the green surface. It does not, as you will read later, include bunkers."

Also, there is this thread, 

If you are in a safe area that isn't totally funky, like maybe a 30 degree downslope type of situation, then most shots within 20 yards of the green are simple short game shots. 

31 minutes ago, klund said:

Would you not think that this differs depending on the level of the player? Some people for example count up and downs for each chip+1putt others only when it is for par or better.

Scrambling is getting par after missing a GIR. There is no chip + 1 definition. That is just bonkers. 

It's a 20 yard simple short game shot. It's not going to change much being 15 yards, 10 yards or 5 yards. 

32 minutes ago, klund said:

A 20 yard "miss" for a lower hcp is very bad but it might be ok for a 20hcp?

The reason why it's from just off the green up to 20 yards is to encompass a lot of situations. What if you are behind a tree and have to shape a low runner. Maybe within 20 yards is a heck of a good shot for a low handicapper. In most cases they will be just off the green. In some cases within 20 yards is a very good shot. I think the definition is fine. 

I get it, a low handicap might see a shot ending up 20 yard short with a mid-iron to be bad. Still they are in a pretty safe spot to get up and down for par. The odds of that happening is very slim to begin with. I just write it off as an aberration. 

So, I think the definition is fine as it is. 

 

[klund]

10 minutes ago, saevel25 said:

That is covered here, 

I forget to quote @SavvySwede i meant to say i liked his definition and the one followed by @ajw426

Regarding scrambling vs up and down i believe there is a difference. My scrambling % (par when missing GIR and includes UD) is higher than my UD%(which in my mind is a chip+1 putt for par or better some people count his even if it is for more than par)

When writing the above i realize that my thinking of nGIR is the same as when i count a UD. I would not call it a UD opportunity from 20yards off the green.

But as you say many variables in this stat which opens for a lot of different definitions.

[iacas]

nGIR is a shot within about 20 yards of the green that provides a good opportunity for an up-and-down.

If you're D1 college player or a Tour player, that may include a bunker. For almost any other level of player, it does not.

[Buckeyebowman]

I can appreciate this, but I can't understand klund's contention that some people don't consider 1 chip and 1 putt made as an "up and down" unless it's for par. Sounds like some sort of weird skins game. 1 chip "up", 1 putt "down", what else could it be? Of course, he's from Kuala Lumpur, and maybe they do things differently there.

I once read an article where the author described that the state of many amateurs games made the GIR stat almost meaningless. Unless they were very good amateurs. There game was such that they would hit a pretty good drive. Maybe in the short grass, maybe in the first cut, but with a reasonable approach to the green. The approach shot would be pretty good, but end up just off the green. So, the player needs an up and down to save par. Along comes the nGIR stat to save the day. To tell you the truth, the only "stat" I'm interested in is my score! I can analyze my scorecard at the end of the round and figure out how I got there.

I also think course design might affect the parameters, but it seems that the lines have been drawn. A bunch of us went to have an extended weekend, 4 days of golf 3 nights in a hotel, at a golf course near Zanesville, OH, called Eaglesticks. This place has more Mounds than Peter Paul! At home our approach shots that missed close, ended up close. Not so here! The ball would ricochet off one of those damn mounds and wind up in jail!

[klund]

10 minutes ago, Buckeyebowman said:

I can appreciate this, but I can't understand klund's contention that some people don't consider 1 chip and 1 putt made as an "up and down" unless it's for par. Sounds like some sort of weird skins game. 1 chip "up", 1 putt "down", what else could it be? Of course, he's from Kuala Lumpur, and maybe they do things differently there.

I once read an article where the author described that the state of many amateurs games made the GIR stat almost meaningless. Unless they were very good amateurs. There game was such that they would hit a pretty good drive. Maybe in the short grass, maybe in the first cut, but with a reasonable approach to the green. The approach shot would be pretty good, but end up just off the green. So, the player needs an up and down to save par. Along comes the nGIR stat to save the day. To tell you the truth, the only "stat" I'm interested in is my score! I can analyze my scorecard at the end of the round and figure out how I got there.

I also think course design might affect the parameters, but it seems that the lines have been drawn. A bunch of us went to have an extended weekend, 4 days of golf 3 nights in a hotel, at a golf course near Zanesville, OH, called Eaglesticks. This place has more Mounds than Peter Paul! At home our approach shots that missed close, ended up close. Not so here! The ball would ricochet off one of those damn mounds and wind up in jail!

It was a lot of discussions in the scorecard thread regarding up and down and in regards to par or not so it is not a "Malaysian thing". This software was great and easy to use but stopped working for windows. For the record i live in Kuala Lumpur but i am from Sweden.

 

[Buckeyebowman]

43 minutes ago, klund said:

It was a lot of discussions in the scorecard thread regarding up and down and in regards to par or not so it is not a "Malaysian thing". This software was great and easy to use but stopped working for windows. For the record i live in Kuala Lumpur but i am from Sweden.

 

OK. That's cool. But I don't care where the discussion came from, one chip "up" and one putt "down" is an "up and down"! Just like one bunker shot and a made putt is a "sandy". Sounds like there was some serious nit-picking and hair splitting going on in the "scorecard" thread. I'm a relative "newb" here, so that is one of the hinterlands I have not yet explored.

[Abu3baid]

For me I only consider it an nGIR around 10 yds off the green and up to 20 if there is no bunker in the way.  20 yards though and bunker to clear is not an easy play for me.

In the end, I don't think it matters how each of us define it though, as it's just a way to measure progress and to each there own.  It's like my friend who calls putts from the fringe as putts while I don't. As long as he is consistent with how he tracks it I don't see it as a big deal.

[DaveP043]

 

In the end, I don't think it matters how each of us define it though, as it's just a way to measure progress and to each there own.  It's like my friend who calls putts from the fringe as putts while I don't. As long as he is consistent with how he tracks it I don't see it as a big deal.

There have been a bunch of threads about definitions for specific statistics, and I'll commonly take the same approach:  Do what makes sense to you, and what you find meaningful and helpful.  However, when you start comparing statistics with other people, you should really all be using the same definition, anything else just leads to confusion.

[saevel25]

7 minutes ago, DaveP043 said:

There have been a bunch of threads about definitions for specific statistics, and I'll commonly take the same approach:  Do what makes sense to you, and what you find meaningful and helpful.  However, when you start comparing statistics with other people, you should really all be using the same definition, anything else just leads to confusion.

Pretty much. I would say if a person talks about nGIR on the forum most people will think of it as 20 yards and in from a safe area around the green. The definition was created by Erik and Dave for LSW. 

If a guy want's to create their own UD% versus scrambling% then fine. I can see how that makes sense instead of lumping that chip in as an approach shot. 

[iacas]

7 hours ago, Buckeyebowman said:

I can appreciate this, but I can't understand klund's contention that some people don't consider 1 chip and 1 putt made as an "up and down" unless it's for par. Sounds like some sort of weird skins game. 1 chip "up", 1 putt "down", what else could it be? Of course, he's from Kuala Lumpur, and maybe they do things differently there.

I once read an article where the author described that the state of many amateurs games made the GIR stat almost meaningless. Unless they were very good amateurs. There game was such that they would hit a pretty good drive. Maybe in the short grass, maybe in the first cut, but with a reasonable approach to the green. The approach shot would be pretty good, but end up just off the green. So, the player needs an up and down to save par. Along comes the nGIR stat to save the day. To tell you the truth, the only "stat" I'm interested in is my score! I can analyze my scorecard at the end of the round and figure out how I got there.

There are a number of ways to shoot the same score, and you're doing your game a disservice and likely getting a lot of stuff wrong if you think that you can accurately assess your game just by thinking back and looking at your score.

You should buy the book which coins the term nGIR, and you should be aware of how powerful GIR/nGIR stats (among a few others) are.

[Dave2512]

I agree GIR/nGIR is an honest was to assess ball striking in general. My scores fluctuate quite a bit. Using Game Golf I can see it for what is and my best days always come down to hitting greens or exceptional scrambling due to missing but being close to greens. 

[jkelley9]

12 hours ago, SavvySwede said:

I don't think the quality of the approach matters, a good shot that gets a bad break can leave a tricky up and down. I define nGIR as the ball being in a position that sets up a generally easy par save.

I like this one too. This would be one of those stats (in my opinion) that would only be able to be calculated at a personal level but is very valuable. You couldn't compare player to player I don't think - it's too vague. But for me, I know when I feel I'm "nGIR" versus not. For example, If I came up short of the green by 30 ft. but I have a middle pin on an uphill slope with lots of room to work with and a good chance at getting up and down - that's an nGIR in my book. If I'm 20 ft. up on a greenside hard downhill (toward the pin) with also a downhill green in front of me... and a bunker between my lie and the green? - Then I probably wouldn't count that as an nGIR.