2017 SBS Tournament of Champions Discussion

[DeadMan]

21 minutes ago, Golfingdad said:

Pretty sure if they did the same study on amateurs that the only changes to the tee, fairway and rough numbers is that they'd all go up.  But the relationship would probably be similar.

I think an amateur will get proportionally worse, compared to a PGA Tour player, the further away from the hole you get. I'd also guess that an amateur will fare similarly out of the rough vs. the fairway, just because we don't rely on spin and precision as much as a PGA Tour player. This chart is from Every Shot Counts:

80's shooter loses .3 strokes by being 50 yards further back and in the fairway, whereas a PGA Tour player doesn't lose any strokes from that situation. I don't know where to find the data, but I know there's no way I'm as good from 180 yards and in the fairway vs. 120 yards and in the rough. The gap might be 20 yards, but even that I'm not sure. It would depend on the course, I suppose.

[iacas]

7 hours ago, DeadMan said:

It's really amazing that these announcers are so misinformed about simple decisions like this. Just pick up Broadie's Every Shot Counts (or Lowest Score Wins for that matter), and you'll see that being closer the hole is the most important thing in golf. It'd be an hour or two of effort. But nope.

I think when JT and Hideki were teeing off on 16, the announcers made a comment about how driver doesn't make sense off this tee. I didn't understand the reasoning, but both players hit driver. But it seemed like they thought the default should be hitting 3 wood off the tee on any hole, when it really should be the opposite.

The nice thing about all of this is that at least through things like LSW (we have trained a lot of instructors, and many of them are coaching college players, high school players, junior players) and other sources of this information, the kids are being brought up today with better information.

It'll take awhile before they're taking over for Mark Rolfing, but some day when I'm old and grey I'm going to hear a TV commentator talk about how stupid that someone was for laying up there when they could have easily gotten near the green by hitting a 5-wood or 3-wood or something, and I'll smile, and know that I played a role in that information more acceptable and understood.

2 hours ago, DeadMan said:

I don't think you're applying it to regular golfers, @RandallT, but I wouldn't extrapolate that data out for us amateurs. I know I wouldn't hesitate at being 120 yards out in the rough vs. 180 yards out in the fairway.

The gap decreases dramatically, and for mid- to upper-level handicappers, the lines actually cross: they're better from the rough than the fairway. Assuming it's not super nasty rough, that is. More margin for error, more cushion under the ball.

[natureboy]

12 hours ago, RandallT said:

Generally speaking, the PGA average from 100yds fairway is 2.8 strokes to hole out. The PGA average from 40-45yds in the rough is about 2.8 strokes to hole out.

So Rolfing saying 2 birdies/2pars from 100yds is BS. It's one birdie, three pars. 

So the PGA numbers don't back up Rolfing- unless there's something specific about this hole that plays different than a typical hole that would account for the stats above. 

Quite probably.

One caveat to his estimate of birdies from the top of the hill is that the pretty significant drop (10+ yards?) in elevation makes that spot effectively closer than the 100 on the ground. I'd expect that hole feature to lower the expected score somewhat vs. the 'average' that assumes being level with the pin at 100 yards, but not sure. I also thought the 50/50 idea wasn't completely unreasonable as a possibility figuring Rolfing might know a bit about how the hole specifically plays from certain spots.

But I can totally see 1 birdie and three pars being more likely.

11 hours ago, Golfingdad said:

No, that rough is plenty thick enough that at most it bounces a yard or two farther right (where the brown area is) but no farther.  Certainly no risk of reaching the hazard.

That's what I thought.

7 hours ago, RandallT said:

Perhaps OT for this tourney thread and I risk turning this into a stats nerd-fest, but since we're discussing Rolfing's comment, here's a general rule of thumb I'm seeing from the data below

Excellent post. 

Edited January 10, 2017 by natureboy

[iacas]

26 minutes ago, natureboy said:

One caveat to his estimate of birdies from the top of the hill is that the pretty significant drop (10+ yards?) in elevation makes that spot effectively closer than the 100 on the ground. I'd expect that hole feature to lower the expected score somewhat vs. the 'average' that assumes being level with the pin at 100 yards, but not sure.

The opposite effect: it'd tend to raise the scoring average a little. They're having to account for a very different than usual situation.