Bogey Golfers Only (Index 16-22) / Breaking 90 Topic

[Meltdwhiskey]

I am with billchao on this.  To me, the easier way to reduce total putts is through chipping (getting the ball closer to pin) and getting the 1st putt into tap-in range.  Yesterday, I had 30 putts without a 2 putt.  Made most putts less than 5 feet.  But I don't think I've made any putt longer than 10 feet.

I'm with billchao too.  It is hard to expect to make 8 footers especially if it isn't breakless and right up the hill.  I think 7'10" is where the pros hit 50%.  You didn't mention you GIR, but if you get a lot of them, that can lead to 3 putting since you didn't get the chance to chip it close.

[Meltdwhiskey]

[quote name="Lihu" url="/t/70872/bogey-golfer-only-thread-handicap-index-from-16-22-what-are-you-going-through-working-on-sob-stories/420#post_927418"] Yeah, but they don't make 3 putts either. Even 2 would have been a small percentage of the total opportunities. I'll see how I do tomorrow morning.

They do, just not as often as we do. If you're leaving yourself with eight feet to go on the green, it's less of an issue that you need to make more putts from eight feet as much as you need to get those first putts closer. That's why pros rarely three putt, they get those first putts to gimme distances.[/quote] Tiger 3 putted from under 5 feet yesterday. Bubba missed a 2 footer. And they are at the top of the pack in the tourney. It happens.

[M2R]

I think you are looking too much at PGA tour stats and trying too hard to correlate them to your own game.   I suspect that if a PGA tour player was to spend the season just aiming for the center of the green instead of trying to hit it close, they would probably be hitting the greens something north of 80% regardless of the iron.

I think this is more realistic than some of the other suggested possibilities, look what happened on the 15th at the Northwestern Mutual yesterday. Like I was trying to point out in an earlier post, once a player has the skill set, a large part of the errors and misses are just errors in judgement as to conditions and how everything is going to interact - not bad shots (bad shots do happen too of course at times).

I saw Tiger three putt twice, once from what the announcer called inside five feet. Bubba missed what looked like a 2 to 2.5 foot putt on the 18th to three putt. I think the reason the pros three putt less is the same reason they make more birdies.  First putt distance to the hole averages 17 feet across all handicap levels (Mark Broadie: Assessing Golfer Performance Using Golfmetrics: Columbia University). However, for a pro the putt is often for birdie and ours is for something worse than par. First priority hit more GIR, second priority get distance to the pin on GIR down, unfortunately I am experiencing a wide disparity between theory and practice

OK just saw MeltdWhiskey posted pretty much the same things before I got this typed.

[rkim291968]

I had a strange round yesterday.   It's cold here (California), with strong wind & wet ground.  For the first time, I had 3 birdies in a round (4 GIRs, 3 of which I converted).   It happened on 4 hole span (#2, #3, & #5).  For the 4 holes, I felt like a champ.  I (again) had visions of breaking 80.   But, alas, I broke down completely and absolutely afterward and finished with the worst round this year (107).   So, my stat read like this: 3 birdies, no pars, 3 bogeys, and 12 big numbers.   In another 10 minutes, I am off to another round to redeem myself.   Will report back later.

[Lihu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rkim291968

I am with billchao on this.  To me, the easier way to reduce total putts is through chipping (getting the ball closer to pin) and getting the 1st putt into tap-in range.  Yesterday, I had 30 putts without a 2 putt.  Made most putts less than 5 feet.  But I don't think I've made any putt longer than 10 feet.

I'm with billchao too.  It is hard to expect to make 8 footers especially if it isn't breakless and right up the hill.  I think 7'10" is where the pros hit 50%.  You didn't mention you GIR, but if you get a lot of them, that can lead to 3 putting since you didn't get the chance to chip it close.

In all but two of the times I made GIR, I was at or over 8 feet from the pin. On one I parred from an 8 foot putt to a gimme, the other one was a bogey because I missed a 2 footer by an inch. After this one, my playing partners needed to see the ball go within 1 foot for a gimme

I had one opportunity at 30 yards from the pin on a short par 4 to chip to the pin, and I blew it by leaving myself a 20 foot putt. Then I putted too far up the hill, and finally got it in for a bogey. So, I went from an Eagle chance on a chip in to a bogey because of the my putting.

Seems like the weather affects putting a lot more than the long game. Have any of you noticed this, or am I just a really bad putter (note that I would not be insulted if you said "yes" as I spent south of 1% of my practice time putting)?

[billchao]

I am with billchao on this.  To me, the easier way to reduce total putts is through chipping (getting the ball closer to pin) and getting the 1st putt into tap-in range.  Yesterday, I had 30 putts without a 2 putt.  Made most putts less than 5 feet.  But I don't think I've made any putt longer than 10 feet.

I'm with billchao too.  It is hard to expect to make 8 footers especially if it isn't breakless and right up the hill.  I think 7'10" is where the pros hit 50%.  You didn't mention you GIR, but if you get a lot of them, that can lead to 3 putting since you didn't get the chance to chip it close.

This is a good point. Generally speaking, pros hit more putts when they make more GIR and less putts when they miss the green. That's why the number of putts in a round is not a very good statistic for analysis.

OTHO, on Friday, I forgot to bring my putter and had to use my wife's.   41 putts, LOL!  It is the most ever putt I've made since I kept record.   She has a mullet putter (I don't), regular grip (I have jumbo grip), and bright pink color which I was blinded by every time I hold it close to my eye .   With a completely different putter, I just could not lag it close, missed come-backers which led to six 3 putts.   Lessen leaned?   Bring your putter .

I had the same problem when I rented a set of clubs on vacation, once. I couldn't even get the ball started on my intended line. A properly fit putter is pretty important, yet so many people don't even bother and they just buy whatever off the rack. I'm hoping to get myself an Edel putter if I can ever convince my wife to let me....

Also, too bad you didn't putt better with your wife's putter, then you'd have to explain to your wife why she needs a new putter. Not to mention the looks you'd get on course

Seems like the weather affects putting a lot more than the long game. Have any of you noticed this, or am I just a really bad putter (note that I would not be insulted if you said "yes" as I spent south of 1% of my practice time putting)?

The weather affects the condition of the greens, so yes, it will affect your putting.

[rkim291968]

Originally Posted by Lihu

Seems like the weather affects putting a lot more than the long game. Have any of you noticed this, or am I just a really bad putter (note that I would not be insulted if you said "yes" as I spent south of 1% of my practice time putting)?

Strong wind, wet field, cold (hand freezing without glove on) all effects the final score.   I don't know if it should effect putting more than others.  Just got back from another round.   When I started, some water on the ground was still frozen, there were still some frost, and cold wind made it much colder than what it was (40 degrees).  Anyway, I made 36 putts.  Some days, I think the hole puncher becomes a sadist.  A few hole locations were impossible (located on steep mound near edge).   Many of our putts ended up off green. I've got away with only one 3-putt.   I think the others putted well over 40.

[Lihu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lihu

Seems like the weather affects putting a lot more than the long game. Have any of you noticed this, or am I just a really bad putter (note that I would not be insulted if you said "yes" as I spent south of 1% of my practice time putting)?

Strong wind, wet field, cold (hand freezing without glove on) all effects the final score.   I don't know if it should effect putting more than others.  Just got back from another round.   When I started, some water on the ground was still frozen, there were still some frost, and cold wind made it much colder than what it was (40 degrees).  Anyway, I made 36 putts.  Some days, I think the hole puncher becomes a sadist.  A few hole locations were impossible (located on steep mound near edge).   Many of our putts ended up off green. I've got away with only one 3-putt.   I think the others putted well over 40.

That's about what I did, that is to say, 42 putts..

36 would have been good for me. Got to work on short game a bit more than 1%.

[Lihu]

More of the same on Sunday. Got a couple awesome drives, but could not take advantage of the position. Scored better, but not worth mentioning as it was pure luck that got me there. There's something seriously wrong with my strategy for me to be so close and still lose this many strokes.

I am (im)patiently awaiting the arrival of the LSW book from Erik. In the meantime, I'll start seriously looking at Key 5, and go for another lesson with Mike and Dana after the holidays.

[Meltdwhiskey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Meltdwhiskey

I'm guessing your HC is going to turn out better than you think.  Maybe your course is really hard?  But it sounds like you are hitting it really accurately.

My HC is a little below 18, but if I was to describe by dispersion pattern, I'd have to call it all over the place.  Except maybe long and right over the pin.  That doesn't happen often.  Unless it is really ugly there.  But otherwise, kind of all over the place.  I'd feel great about getting a significant amount of 6i's within 60 feet of the pin.

If you actually measure your 6i it might not be as bad as you think. 60 feet of the pin is usually NOT on the green. It is good for an up and down or a bunker shot of some kind. You need to be less than 20 feet of the pin to get on the green consistently.

This is probably one of the main things that differentiates us bogey guys with the low single digit/scratch guys.

Many of the good golfers are talking about 5 yard accuracy up to 150 yards and 7-8 yard accuracy to 175 yards.

I agree that 60 feet from center is usually off the green.  That is why I say I wasn't sure what you meant by dispersion pattern.  If that means most of the shots were within 60 feet - then most still hit the green.  If it means the average shot was 60 feet away, then still almost half hit the green.  Both of these are great scenarios!  I'd take that any day.

Maybe my 6i is better than I think and I'll take note next time I get to play.  But I feel pretty confident that my 6i's are not within or averaging 60 feet.

In between the rain storms this weekend, I was able to play the par 3 at my local course and get about 50 holes worth of data on this.  It is a really small data set, but I played lights out, so it should be indicative of my play or probably better.  However, it is really short, so only for a clubs.  Here is what I got:

S wedge: 65-90 yards / average 11 yards / 3 closest / 22 farthest

U wedge: 100 yards / average 12 yards / 3 closest / 13 farthest

P wedge: 115-117 yards / average 11 yards / 4 closest / 23 farthest

9 iron: 112-120 yards / average 18 yards / 9 closest / 36 farthest

7 iron: 145 yards / average 41 yards / 4 closest / 90 farthest  (I only have 5 shots worth of data here and it is wild - would probably throw this out)

So, compared to you (and RKIM), and assuming that dispersion is average and not the 'within' definition:

My best club (S wedge) is twice as bad as your U wedge

My U wedge is over twice as bad as yours

You are better with 9i than I am with S wedge or any other for that matter

you are almost as good with 6i as I am with 9i

If we are talking about dispersion meaning the 'within' definition - you would be killing me even more!  I just say all this to say I'd think you would be killing me at golf with this kind of ball striking.  But instead, I actually have a little better handicap.   If I could get 6i results out of my 9i - I would be one happy golfer. With a U wedge in hand, you are averaging (or within) 15 feet - while I'm at 36 feet.  With a 9 iron in hand, you are at 30 feet or better and I'm at 54 feet.  That sounds huge to me.  What are we missing?  Am I just a much better putter?

I envy you.  I'd give up the putting to hit the ball like that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Meltdwhiskey

I might green one from 6i distance once every few rounds.  I'll lean on the PGA tour stats again.  My 6i is in the 150-175 category.  Ian Poulter, Brandt Snedeker, Matt Kuchar etc green it from this distance about 60% of the time.  I'd think a bogey golfer is looking at maybe 5% from this range? 10%? 20%?

I think you are looking too much at PGA tour stats and trying too hard to correlate them to your own game.   I suspect that if a PGA tour player was to spend the season just aiming for the center of the green instead of trying to hit it close, they would probably be hitting the greens something north of 80% regardless of the iron.

I look at them because they help paint a picture and they are all we have.  I understand what you are saying and there are definitely places that stats can get misleading.  But this one would be as apples to apples as almost any stat.  If it is Snedeker or if it's me, we both have a 150 yard shot and we both want to be on the green.  If they never hunted a pin, I'm sure they'd get some more.  But every time they hit it, they certainly want to be on the green.  Also, they do aim for the center or the safe spot of the green a good bit.  If the pin is on the right, they'll often play it a little left as to not short side themselves - AKA toward the middle.  I don't think this is a bad stat to look at.

Having said that, the best guy on tour got 72%.  So your 80% assertion might be a really good across the board number.  So use it.  My point is that I'd think our stats would be WAY worse on this.  If you adjust the Snedeker stat from above from 60% to 70%, I'd still think we are somewhere in those ranges I mentioned.  And if you are closer to the Snedeker stat, you are playing exceptional golf.  Golf I wouldn't expect to see in the bogey golfer thread.

I'll take this one step further and say that if their goal was simply make fairways and GIR, they'd probably be able to make 100%.

I'd love to see something to support that.  Until then, we'll just have to agree to disagree.  These stats are what we have and GIR is one of the top indicators of how well they will do.  And basically everyone advocates putting over chipping, so there is a real premium on hitting greens.  If a player could get 100% GIR, I'd think they would get pretty close to it.  The worst guy on tour would be giving up 45% greens as part of his strategy?  I don't think it would be that high.

[Lihu]

I agree that 60 feet from center is usually off the green.  That is why I say I wasn't sure what you meant by dispersion pattern.  If that means most of the shots were within 60 feet - then most still hit the green.  If it means the average shot was 60 feet away, then still almost half hit the green.  Both of these are great scenarios!  I'd take that any day.

Maybe my 6i is better than I think and I'll take note next time I get to play.  But I feel pretty confident that my 6i's are not within or averaging 60 feet.

In between the rain storms this weekend, I was able to play the par 3 at my local course and get about 50 holes worth of data on this.  It is a really small data set, but I played lights out, so it should be indicative of my play or probably better.  However, it is really short, so only for a clubs.  Here is what I got:

S wedge: 65-90 yards / average 11 yards / 3 closest / 22 farthest

U wedge: 100 yards / average 12 yards / 3 closest / 13 farthest

P wedge: 115-117 yards / average 11 yards / 4 closest / 23 farthest

9 iron: 112-120 yards / average 18 yards / 9 closest / 36 farthest

7 iron: 145 yards / average 41 yards / 4 closest / 90 farthest  (I only have 5 shots worth of data here and it is wild - would probably throw this out)

So, compared to you (and RKIM), and assuming that dispersion is average and not the 'within' definition:

My best club (S wedge) is twice as bad as your U wedge

My U wedge is over twice as bad as yours

You are better with 9i than I am with S wedge or any other for that matter

you are almost as good with 6i as I am with 9i

If we are talking about dispersion meaning the 'within' definition - you would be killing me even more!  I just say all this to say I'd think you would be killing me at golf with this kind of ball striking.  But instead, I actually have a little better handicap.   If I could get 6i results out of my 9i - I would be one happy golfer. With a U wedge in hand, you are averaging (or within) 15 feet - while I'm at 36 feet.  With a 9 iron in hand, you are at 30 feet or better and I'm at 54 feet.  That sounds huge to me.  What are we missing?  Am I just a much better putter?

I envy you.  I'd give up the putting to hit the ball like that.

The numbers you are posting are from actual course conditions, not a repeatability experiment under a controlled condition (on the nice level grass at a driving range). The numbers I presented were within the initial landing point (carry), and not total distances. I am assuming you are talking about final resting position.

Our club distances are different, but your dispersion for a particular distance (up to the 9i) sounds better than mine where mine should be better. Of course, it also means that I need much more work on my irons.

I also noticed that your PW and 9I are almost the same distances. I have about a 10 yard differential between the two clubs. That is, I always hit the 9i 10 yards more than the PW.

Sometimes, I don't get that much spin on the U and it rolls further than I want. I am going to try the MP32 and add the 52 wedge back, and get rid of the 21 degree hybrid (in lieu of the 3i).

Let's see how that works.

[Meltdwhiskey]

The numbers you are posting are from actual course conditions, not a repeatability experiment under a controlled condition (on the nice level grass at a driving range). The numbers I presented were within the initial landing point (carry), and not total distances. I am assuming you are talking about final resting position.

Our club distances are different, but your dispersion for a particular distance (up to the 9i) sounds better than mine where mine should be better. Of course, it also means that I need much more work on my irons.

I also noticed that your PW and 9I are almost the same distances. I have about a 10 yard differential between the two clubs.

Sometimes, I don't get that much spin on the U and it rolls further than I want. I am going to try the MP32 and add the 52 wedge back, and get rid of the 21 degree hybrid (in lieu of the 3i).

Let's see how that works.

The numbers you are posting are from actual course conditions, not a repeatability experiment under a controlled condition (on the nice level grass at a driving range). The numbers I presented were within the initial landing point (carry), and not total distances. I am assuming you are talking about final resting position. Our club distances are different, but your dispersion for a particular distance (up to the 9i) sounds better than mine where mine should be better. Of course, it also means that I need much more work on my irons.

It was from final resting to the pin - which I aimed for every time for the sake of this experiment.  Also, wedges only roll so far, so I'm not sure how much difference it would actually make.  But on a par 3, I got to hit off of a tee box every time (sans the tee).  This data isn't full of bad lies or anything.  But it sounds like maybe you are saying that yours is range data to a landing point and your course data to final resting is actually worse than my stats?  And I must reiterate - stellar day out there.  That was some fun par3in.

I also noticed that your PW and 9I are almost the same distances. I have about a 10 yard differential between the two clubs.

Yeah, some holes were uphill (9i) and some were downhill (PW).  It was also fairly cold.

[Lihu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lihu

The numbers you are posting are from actual course conditions, not a repeatability experiment under a controlled condition (on the nice level grass at a driving range). The numbers I presented were within the initial landing point (carry), and not total distances. I am assuming you are talking about final resting position.

Our club distances are different, but your dispersion for a particular distance (up to the 9i) sounds better than mine where mine should be better. Of course, it also means that I need much more work on my irons.

I also noticed that your PW and 9I are almost the same distances. I have about a 10 yard differential between the two clubs.

Sometimes, I don't get that much spin on the U and it rolls further than I want. I am going to try the MP32 and add the 52 wedge back, and get rid of the 21 degree hybrid (in lieu of the 3i).

Let's see how that works.

The numbers you are posting are from actual course conditions, not a repeatability experiment under a controlled condition (on the nice level grass at a driving range). The numbers I presented were within the initial landing point (carry), and not total distances. I am assuming you are talking about final resting position. Our club distances are different, but your dispersion for a particular distance (up to the 9i) sounds better than mine where mine should be better. Of course, it also means that I need much more work on my irons.

It was from final resting to the pin - which I aimed for every time for the sake of this experiment.  Also, wedges only roll so far, so I'm not sure how much difference it would actually make.  But on a par 3, I got to hit off of a tee box every time (sans the tee).  This data isn't full of bad lies or anything.  But it sounds like maybe you are saying that yours is range data to a landing point and your course data to final resting is actually worse than my stats?  And I must reiterate - stellar day out there.  That was some fun par3in.

I also noticed that your PW and 9I are almost the same distances. I have about a 10 yard differential between the two clubs.

Yeah, some holes were uphill (9i) and some were downhill (PW).  It was also fairly cold.

This is why the precise dispersion experiment only makes sense on a grass range. However, for your PW to be that much further than your 9i, 112 versus 115, you might have hit the 9i fat. I did the same thing on the course the other day, and fell just short of the green instead of by the pin.

I did note your argument with BillChao, and thought that the intent of the PGA pros is not necessarily to hit the GIR.

For example, If the pin is tucked towards the end of a long uphill green, it seems a better strategy to overshoot the green a little to get a chip in opportunity. Some of the pro greens are 100 feet long, and the chances of sticking it where you want are pretty slim, but the rough or fringe around it have a better chance of holding. IDK, because I am pretty new to this game, and don't such have a deeper understanding for strategy. Which is why I need Erik's book.

[Lihu]

Does anyone else want to try a dispersion experiment?

The thought is that we can post our left-right dispersions on a grass driving range, and not really care about the distance so much.

Each time we post (maybe once a month) we can quote our previous results, the gain or loss of distance in % from the initial attempt and a rough indication of average score.

This will allow us to see if just hitting accurately in direction alone could improve our bogey game.

Would you give up distance for accuracy? Or does your distance go up with accuracy? Does the game improve by simply hitting the ball in the exact direction of the pin (or best landing zone on a green) all the time no matter how far you hit?

This is a serious oversimplification, but it could be fun to try.

[rkim291968]

That's about what I did, that is to say, 42 putts..

36 would have been good for me. Got to work on short game a bit more than 1%.

Sounds like you have issue with lag (getting it to tap in range), knocking in short putts (less than 5 feet), or both (gasp).   FYI, see below chart.    My ranges are in bold.   I would love to know what others' are (cut and paste and bold your stat).

	AVERAGE SCORE									Relationship
CATEGORY	71	75	79	81	85	89	91	95	99
GIR	12	10	8	7	5	3	2	0	0	Strong
% Fairways	81	71	61	56	46	36	31	21	11	Weak
Iron Accuracy	80	68	53	47	33	20	13	0	0	Good
Putts per Round	29.0	30.3	31.7	32.3	33.7	35.0	35.7	37.0	38.3	Weak
Pitch/Chip/Sand	5.1	7.4	9.8	10.9	13.3	15.6	16.8	19.2	21.5	Strong
Birdies	3.2	2.4	1.8	1.5	0.8	0.1	0	0	0	Strong
Pars	11.8	10.3	8.8	8.1	6.6	5.1	4.3	2.8	1.3	Strong

[Meltdwhiskey]

I did note your argument with BillChao, and thought that the intent of the PGA pros is not necessarily to hit the GIR.

For example, If the pin is tucked towards the end of a long uphill green, it seems a better strategy to overshoot the green a little to get a chip in opportunity. Some of the pro greens are 100 feet long, and the chances of sticking it where you want are pretty slim, but the rough or fringe around it have a better chance of holding. IDK, because I am pretty new to this game, and don't such have a deeper understanding for strategy. Which is why I need Erik's book.

This is why the precise dispersion experiment only makes sense on a grass range.

I'm saying that being within 60 feet of the pin with a 6i most of the time - even if it is uphill, downhill or flat - is really good golf for a 16-22 handicapper.  Every way I can find to slice it.

However, for your PW to be that much further than your 9i, 112 versus 115, you might have hit the 9i fat. I did the same thing on the course the other day, and fell just short of the green instead of by the pin.

That data was from 20+ shots - not just a fatted 9i.  The club choice was matched to the distance before I ever took a swing.  That was distance to target, not distance I hit the club.

I did note your argument with BillChao, and thought that the intent of the PGA pros is not necessarily to hit the GIR.

For example, If the pin is tucked towards the end of a long uphill green, it seems a better strategy to overshoot the green a little to get a chip in opportunity. Some of the pro greens are 100 feet long, and the chances of sticking it where you want are pretty slim, but the rough or fringe around it have a better chance of holding. IDK, because I am pretty new to this game, and don't such have a deeper understanding for strategy. Which is why I need Erik's book.

I started looking at these stats more closely when Iacas put out that teaser thread about how to play a certain hole and that they were doing a book about strategies: http://thesandtrap.com/t/69652/235-out-on-this-par-five-whats-the-play

I'm not saying Iacas is the definitive authority on such things, but he used a bunch of PGA tour stats to support his arguments about why we should .  Things like this quote:

But okay, let's say I've laid up to 100 yards. Let's look at what some PGA Tour level players (players WAY better than I am) can do from there:
- The leader (Tiger Woods) hits the green from 100-125 yards only 86.79% of the time. The 100th ranked player (I'm going to use 100 a lot) hits the green only 74.8% of the time (let's call it 75%).
- From 100-125 yards, the leader in proximity is 15'1" (Robert Garrigus). The 100th ranked player is 19'10".

The post has plenty of stuff like that and they have apparently written a book based on some of this info and you are apparently interested in buying the book.  I'm sure if the PGA players never hunted a pin again, that the number would increase some.  But I don't think the fact that they pin hunt at times totally invalidates these stats and that we in the bogey gallery would routinely be getting numbers in the range of theirs.  That is why I mentioned the stats.

I do think that Billchao's assertion that if they weren't pin hunting that they would green it 100% of the time regardless of the iron used is invalid.

Some of the pro greens are 100 feet long

If the greens are bigger for the pros - I'd think this would help the stats - not hurt them.

[Lihu]

This is why the precise dispersion experiment only makes sense on a grass range.

I'm saying that being within 60 feet of the pin with a 6i most of the time - even if it is uphill, downhill or flat - is really good golf for a 16-22 handicapper.  Every way I can find to slice it.

Some of the pro greens are 100 feet long

If the greens are bigger for the pros - I'd think this would help the stats - not hurt them.

First of all, my ball striking has only improved for the last 2 months, and am finally to a point where my few fats and duffs are still putting the ball into the air a reasonable distance.

The reasoning is that the hole is only a few inches across, but the green is 100 feet. You really don't want to putt from 100 feet away, so being GIR means nothing to your score in this case. The pro would most likely opt to be off the green, but only a few feet away from the pin. GIR means on the green, and not on the fringe or close to the pin.

[Meltdwhiskey]

The reasoning is that the hole is only a few inches across, but the green is 100 feet. You really don't want to putt from 100 feet away, so being GIR means nothing to your score in this case. The pro would most likely opt to be off the green, but only a few feet away from the pin. GIR means on the green, and not on the fringe or close to the pin.

You really don't want to putt from 100 feet away

I understand

The pro would most likely opt to be off the green, but only a few feet away from the pin

I understand

GIR means on the green, and not on the fringe or close to the pin

I understand

If you are trying to say that the stat isn't perfect, I get it and I agree.  But you guys are saying that it is nearly meaningless, and I disagree.  You are saying that the only reason a pro would ever miss a green from about 230 and in is because he opted to risk hitting it on the fringe near a tucked pin instead of near the middle.  But I don't think that's true.  I think there are parts of it that you aren't seeing.

Sometimes pros go for the fat part of the green. I think it is actually pretty often.  You might not see this on TV as much because they show the awesome players hitting the awesome shots mostly.  But I bet if you were to watch a few days of Scott Piercy and Stephen Ames, you would see a lot more aiming for the fat part.  They don't always try to hit it right in the cup.

Even when they do hit at the pin, I bet they hedge the bet toward the center and aim it somewhere between the pin and the center.  You always hear them talking about not wanting to be short sided.  If you guard against short siding - guess where you hit it.  And the irony is that being short sided is actually 'too close' to the pin to do what you need to do.

They also miss other than on the fringe.  They hit it in the rough, bunker, water, trees, the gallery, the bleachers, etc. And that isn't always because of a tucked pin.

The PGA tracks and touts the GIR stat.  Most of the best players are in the top half of it and most of the worst are in the bottom half of it.  It helps to hit the green and they know it.  If proximity was the only important number and GIR didn't matter, I doubt they'd talk so much about it.

Ultimately, they want to be on that green.  And they make plenty of effort to get on it.  Once again, I agree that the numbers would be increased if it was the ONLY thing they cared about.  But it wouldn't be 100% when any iron was used.  That is ridiculous.  Sometimes it doesn't go where they want it to.  Plain and simple.  It is a decent stat to use if you want to make a performance comparison or understand the odds of a person of various sill levels pulling off the shot.

I don't think I've convinced you of anything, but that's OK, We can agree to disagree.