40 Putts per Round, Average of 96 (Dave Pelz)?

[Fourputt]

In respect to the 40 putts per round... that seems a bit much to me, but then I can usually more than cancel out any 3 putts with 1 putts.  I don't count anything from off the green as a putt, even when I use the putter for the shot.  I usually get up and down with a wedge more often than I 3 putt on the green.

I also agree with the thought that a player who shoots in the mid 90's is losing it with full shots at least as much as he is around the green.  I know that my own game depends on getting close to the green in regulation to score at my average or better.  Then the short game kicks in and the difference in whether I'm above or below what I call average depends on the quality of my chipping on that day.  If my long game is not getting it done, then I'm going have a hard time playing to my average unless my short game is smoking. 

I've had rounds where an above average short game made up for a bad day in the long game, but that isn't something I want to depend on.  I'd rather be chipping to get up and down for pars than for bogies.  There nothing more disheartening than looking back on a round where I shot in the low 90's and only had 27 putts.  That means that my short game was hot, but it was wasted on a day when I couldn't keep the ball in play in the long game.  

[Lihu]

14 minutes ago, Fourputt said:

In respect to the 40 putts per round... that seems a bit much to me, but then I can usually more than cancel out any 3 putts with 1 putts.  I don't count anything from off the green as a putt, even when I use the putter for the shot.  I usually get up and down with a wedge more often than I 3 putt on the green.

I also agree with the thought that a player who shoots in the mid 90's is losing it with full shots at least as much as he is around the green.  I know that my own game depends on getting close to the green in regulation to score at my average or better.  Then the short game kicks in and the difference in whether I'm above or below what I call average depends on the quality of my chipping on that day.  If my long game is not getting it done, then I'm going have a hard time playing to my average unless my short game is smoking. 

I've had rounds where an above average short game made up for a bad day in the long game, but that isn't something I want to depend on.  I'd rather be chipping to get up and down for pars than for bogies.  There nothing more disheartening than looking back on a round where I shot in the low 90's and only had 27 putts.  That means that my short game was hot, but it was wasted on a day when I couldn't keep the ball in play in the long game.  

So true, but not necessarily "hot" per se? Statistically, even the average 96 golfer can likely chip near the hole >1/4 of the time to 1 putt from there 10% of the time.

 

Oh, yeah, I can see @billchao's POV about scrambling being a glaring weakness for a mid handicap making 40 putts. . .

Edited October 10, 2017 by Lihu

[Fourputt]

17 minutes ago, Lihu said:

So true, but not necessarily "hot" per se? Statistically, even the average 96 golfer can likely chip near the hole >1/4 of the time to 1 putt from there 10% of the time.

 

Oh, yeah, I can see @billchao's POV about scrambling being a glaring weakness for a mid handicap making 40 putts. . .

I have a problem with such statistics, because they don't always reflect actual distances.  Most mid 90's golfers I know do not get up and down 25% of the time.  But then the guys I play with are usually missing the greens by more than a few feet too.  It's a big difference if they are 5 feet off the green vs. 25 feet, and 25 feet or more is closer to what I usually see.  When my long game is adequate, my misses are still fairly close, 5-15 feet.  When it's off, then my misses are measured in yards rather than feet, and that makes even a reasonably good short game a lot more difficult.

Edited October 10, 2017 by Fourputt

[Lihu]

Just now, Fourputt said:

I have a problem with such statistics, because they don't always reflect actual distances.  Most mid 90's golfers I know do not get up and down 25% of the time.  But then the guys I play with are usually missing the greens by more than a few feet too.  It's a big difference if they are 5 feet off the green vs. 25 feet, and 25 feet is closer to what I usually see.  When my long game is adequate, my misses are still fairly close, 5-15 feet.  When it's off, then my misses are measured in yards rather than feet, and that makes even a reasonably good short game a lot more difficult.

I made up the getting up part as 25% of the time based upon make putt percentages, but the 10% up and down is from some database.

[onthehunt526]

I average in the 80s. Though it seems I tend to throw away 8 to 10 shots a round from around the greens, I realistically am probably throwing away 6 or 7 in driving and approach shots... Because no matter how good of a short game you have, you aren't going to get up and down every single time. Though I am working on it, the most shots I will gain from say 60 yards and in, is what maybe 2?

[iacas]

On 10/9/2017 at 2:03 PM, Lihu said:

My average score these days is about 89, and I've been averaging 40 putts or more.

On 10/9/2017 at 2:03 PM, Lihu said:

Haven't spent much time at all on putting nor short game. I doubt I'd ever get down to 30 putts per round. I feel like it would be easier for me to learn to hit my irons closer to the pin than being a 30 putt per round putter by putting practice alone.

Get down to only 34 and you're averaging 83.

Read, bead, or speed. I'd wager the latter, mostly.

On 10/9/2017 at 2:03 PM, Lihu said:

I doubt the average golfer is going to be getting penalties on a putting green that often.

@Lihu, do you read things before you post? C'mon man… I felt it was pretty clear that he was saying Pelz didn't seem to account for penalties in the 96 shots, not the 40 shots they take with putters.

22 hours ago, Lihu said:

But hey, if you holed all 19 wedge shots, you'd eliminate 40 shots per round.

Pelz also said that in the segment I saw. It was a dumb thing to say. Especially since you'd eliminate more than 19 wedge shots… because there are only 18 holes. So a few (at least one!) of those wedge shots is coming after a different wedge shot.

2 hours ago, Lihu said:

I didn't miss your point at all

I like you just fine @Lihu, but you really did miss his point.

2 hours ago, Lihu said:

At a quick glance these seem more accurate than Dave Pelz's stats. And 39.06 still isn't 40, and that's for someone averaging 10 strokes per round higher than Dave's average.

[Lihu]

22 minutes ago, iacas said:

Get down to only 34 and you're averaging 83.

That would be nice, and you make it sound so easy too.

I hope to get down there before the end of my golf season, but no expectations.

 

Quote

Read, bead, or speed. I'd wager the latter, mostly.

Agree, likely the latter. . .then read would be next. My bead isn't that horrible.

 

Quote

Pelz also said that in the segment I saw. It was a dumb thing to say. Especially since you'd eliminate more than 19 wedge shots… because there are only 18 holes. So a few (at least one!) of those wedge shots is coming after a different wedge shot.

That's who I was quoting. I should probably have used quotation marks. It was pretty hilarious.

 

Quote

I like you just fine @Lihu, but you really did miss his point.

What I was attempting to discuss was that a 25 handicapper making 40 putts is more likely to benefit from long game improvements to get his score down rather than just short game and putting improvements even though putting looks like a glaring weakness. He was discussing something else, which I admitted was correct as well.

 

Quote

At a quick glance these seem more accurate than Dave Pelz's stats. And 39.06 still isn't 40, and that's for someone averaging 10 strokes per round higher than Dave's average.

So, I just quoted this from the article I posted earlier.

https://www.golfdigest.com/story/how-many-putts-does-the-average-golfer-make-new-data-shows-you-need-more-time-on-the-practice-greenand-the-range

"According to Game Golf, we use the putter 41.3 percent of the time (including from the fringe). "

For 96 strokes that's about 39.648 putts per round.

So, it didn't state for who the 41.3% applies? Is that number the average for all golfers in GG?

If what you are saying is true that it's for someone averaging 106 strokes, then what are the numbers for other scoring categories?

[NJpatbee]

This can really vary by golfer.  My last official round was a 91 with 37 putts, but not a single one putt.  I am on GIR only 3 or 4 times and fail most times to get up and down from within 10 yards from the green because of a chip that is way too short or long.  I could use some chipping and pitching practice and also just need some better full swings to get on in regulation.  I do not spend more than 5-10 minutes practicing putting because it hurts my back but also because with the limited time I have to practice I need to get the full swing in some kind of reasonable shape.  An excellent round for me is in the mid-80's and it can usually be attributed to better ball striking.

Just for the record I have 4 putted more than once playing on a course for the first time with very fast greens.

 

[rehmwa]

53 minutes ago, NJpatbee said:

My last official round was a 91 with 37 putts, but not a single one putt.  I am on GIR only 3 or 4 times and fail most times to get up and down from within 10 yards from the green

Seems like you are his target audience.  How does the rest of your game stack up against Pelz's assertions (I assume one would have to consider a hybrid a wood?  and I don't even know what a 'random' shot is)

• 90 score...vs 91
• 40 Putts...vs 37
• 19 wedges...vs ??
• 14 irons...vs ??
• 21 drivers or woods...vs ??
• 2 random shots...vs ??

Edited October 10, 2017 by rehmwa

[Lihu]

34 minutes ago, rehmwa said:

Seems like you are his target audience.  How does the rest of your game stack up against Pelz's assertions (I assume one would have to consider a hybrid a wood?  and I don't even know what a 'random' shot is)

• 90 score...vs 91
• 40 Putts...vs 37
• 19 wedges...vs ??
• 14 irons...vs ??
• 21 drivers or woods...vs ??
• 2 random shots...vs ??

I'm also currently in that target audience, but putting and short game are the least of my worries. . .tee shots trimming trees and a wide dispersion of drawing hooking shots from 101 to 150 yards are the main culprit. 100 and in are not full shots and I open the face a bit. I think that shows as well. Pretty neat actually. Some of my individual drives are pretty nice, but the average is only 241 yards versus 252 scratch. These stats appear to include the tree shots.

Actually, now that I look more carefully at this, GG seems to indicate a deficiency in my tee shots and approach shots. For some reason, the last time I checked it, it was putting?!?

Anyway, GG tells all and knows all. . .

Edited October 10, 2017 by Lihu

[mcanadiens]

The putts from the fringe make this a really weird number for me. Poor play with irons and wedges has me putting a lot of balls from the fringe. Counting those would make that 40 number pretty reasonable.

Without those fringe putts counting, its no worse than a 2.0 average.

[sjduffers]

9 hours ago, Lihu said:

I feel like the biggest differentiator between scores in the 10 to 25 handicap range is their long games. The better end of that spectrum putt less because their long games give themselves a chance to putt less. Of course, the players below 10 don't putt that much. The good players end up one putting a lot more than the rest of us because their long games are better. However, even they 3 putt sometimes. No one is totally immune to bad putts.

I hate to pick on you, but this thinking is flawed in my opinion.

Better players have way less than 36 putts on average, and if they are on the green half the time, they are not nearly close enough to 1-putt from there and they certainly don't get 9 birdies, and most do not even get 2 or 3 birdies from those GIRs. But, they have a decent short game and probably get up-and-down half the time (with 1 chip and 1 putt) from the greens they have missed with their long game. Throw in a 3-putt per round at the most, and you see that to get to 30 putts per round, the long game is not the only answer, by far, unlike what you think.

Every part of the game is important, including the short game (yes the long game is much more important, until you can reasonably get the ball near the green), but even the pros aren't closer than 20-25ft from the hole on average, and the make percentage from that distance (i.e. birdie with 1 putt) is nowhere near 50%, more like 15 or 20%. The pros that have a good short game, better than the average of their peers, end up with a 70-80% up-and-down rate: with 12-13 greens from which they get 2-3 birdies, they also get 4-5 1-putts from the 5-6 up-and-down attempts they make from off the green.

In my case, I am off the green a lot (only 5-6 greens leading to a birdie less than once per round on average), but usually close enough, even on the fringe (which is not counted as GIR or a putt), chip 12-13 times (including several times with the putter in my hand), and make nearly half of these attempts with 1 putt, resulting in a total of around 30 putts per round. In extreme cases, I can end up with 24-26 putts in a round, but that usually involves even fewer GIRs, more converted birdies, perhaps a chip-in or two and a good up-and-down ratio (50% or better).

So work on your long game by all means, but don't neglect your short game, including your putting. 40 times with the putter is bad, period. All IMHO of course.

[iacas]

3 hours ago, Lihu said:

That's who I was quoting. I should probably have used quotation marks. It was pretty hilarious.

I know that.

3 hours ago, Lihu said:

What I was attempting to discuss was that a 25 handicapper making 40 putts is more likely to benefit from long game improvements to get his score down rather than just short game and putting improvements even though putting looks like a glaring weakness. He was discussing something else, which I admitted was correct as well.

With any and all due respect, @Lihu, no that's not what happened. I believe fully that you believe that's what happened. But as @billchao noted… no.

3 hours ago, Lihu said:

So, it didn't state for who the 41.3% applies? Is that number the average for all golfers in GG?

Their average golfer takes 34 strokes in a round, which they say is 41.3%. That means their average golfer shoots 82.3.

That's a pretty different data set than Pelz's, because if nothing else GAME GOLF users are self selected better golfers. The once-a-month beer-drinking guy who shoots 110 and factors into the Pelz number isn't using a GAME GOLF.

Plus this assumes the 41.3% number is pretty static across all golfers. We know golfer to golfer that's not going to hold up, of course, but across scratch golfers, 96-shooting golfers, 110-shooting golfers… I doubt the number holds steady around 41%.

2 hours ago, rehmwa said:

Seems like you are his target audience.  How does the rest of your game stack up against Pelz's assertions (I assume one would have to consider a hybrid a wood?  and I don't even know what a 'random' shot is)

• 90 score...vs 91
• 40 Putts...vs 37
• 19 wedges...vs ??
• 14 irons...vs ??
• 21 drivers or woods...vs ??
• 2 random shots...vs ??

Pelz said 96. Why are you using 90?

Maybe I missed something.

[JonMA1]

8 hours ago, lastings said:

I would have to say..  strokes obviously can come from different places for different people, and you have to identify a glaring weakness before you revert to standard practice ratios.

Exactly. We know more than other non-experts what we need to work on. Stats are very helpful, but I have to believe we should pay attention to what we see as a weakness.    

I still practice my iron full swing more frequently than even the standard ratios. My logic being that it's just a harder part of the game to develop (that, and I enjoy good iron play when it occurs). Also, any gains I make are easier for me to lose when I'm not working on it every day. Heck, even devoting more time to my driver has cost my iron game.

The bottom line is that I don't have the time, discipline or skill needed to improve ALL the parts of my game. To make matters worse, after last year the desire started to waiver a bit as well. My game is exactly where it should be.

As far as the concept of getting so good at my irons that I'll somehow be able to eliminate three putts... that sounds great for someone with that kind of potential. But if I lack the skill to successfully lag putt from 30', or make 5' putts with any regularity, how in the world would I expect to get good enough with my irons to hit them that close. If improvement happens great, but c'mon.... I just don't see that being a reasonable goal for some of us. 

Edited October 11, 2017 by JonMA1

[Buckeyebowman]

On 10/9/2017 at 10:18 AM, phillyk said:

I saw a quick introduction to wedge week from Dave Pelz.  He started with saying the average score is 96 and then moved to saying the average golfer takes 40 putts per round.... WHAT! The AVERAGE is 40?! Where'd he get that number from?  That means some golfers are taking like 45 putts.  That seems ridiculous.  Then he said there are 19 wedges, 14 irons, 21 drivers or woods, and 2 random shots.  The first search result online is from March 2017, a golf digest article saying GameGolf calculated the average putts per round at 34 from its users.  That's more believable for putting.  I'm not sure where he got the stats on the other shots, but I'm pretty sure they're off a bit too.

Then of course, he goes into the conversation about adding putts and wedges to say, well since you have 64% of strokes here, clearly that's what you practice.    It's annoying when you have GC going around saying these instructors are the best of the best and you should listen to them, and then they give you BS.  I think Pelz short game instruction is great, but short game is not nearly as important to practice as he says it is.

Rant over... I am looking forward to seeing the other stuff, though, but I have a feeling some information will go in one ear and out the other.

Oh, good grief! When I read the title I thought it was from a member who actually took 40 putts per round! I would have asked them if all the nerves in their hands were dead! If they had absolutely no sense of touch!

Then I see that this is from Dave Pelz, and realize it's simple self promotion! He's the "Short Game Guru", so that's what he's going to try to sell you!

[JonMA1]

6 minutes ago, Buckeyebowman said:

Oh, good grief! When I read the title I thought it was from a member who actually took 40 putts per round! I would have asked them if all the nerves in their hands were dead! If they had absolutely no sense of touch!

Then I see that this is from Dave Pelz, and realize it's simple self promotion! He's the "Short Game Guru", so that's what he's going to try to sell you!

I know, right!! I was like... what kind of loser averages 40 putts per round?! That Dave Pelz and his crazy exaggeration!

Oh, wait... 2.2 x 18 =

...umm, never mind. 

 

[Lihu]

2 hours ago, iacas said:

I know that.

With any and all due respect, @Lihu, no that's not what happened. I believe fully that you believe that's what happened. But as @billchao noted… no.

No a problem on my side. Obviously, I didn't communicate my intent well enough.

2 hours ago, iacas said:

Their average golfer takes 34 strokes in a round, which they say is 41.3%. That means their average golfer shoots 82.3.

That's a pretty different data set than Pelz's, because if nothing else GAME GOLF users are self selected better golfers. The once-a-month beer-drinking guy who shoots 110 and factors into the Pelz number isn't using a GAME GOLF.

Plus this assumes the 41.3% number is pretty static across all golfers. We know golfer to golfer that's not going to hold up, of course, but across scratch golfers, 96-shooting golfers, 110-shooting golfers… I doubt the number holds steady around 41%.

This makes a lot more sense. Thanks for explaining.

3 hours ago, sjduffers said:

I hate to pick on you, but this thinking is flawed in my opinion.

Better players have way less than 36 putts on average, and if they are on the green half the time, they are not nearly close enough to 1-putt from there and they certainly don't get 9 birdies, and most do not even get 2 or 3 birdies from those GIRs. But, they have a decent short game and probably get up-and-down half the time (with 1 chip and 1 putt) from the greens they have missed with their long game. Throw in a 3-putt per round at the most, and you see that to get to 30 putts per round, the long game is not the only answer, by far, unlike what you think.

Every part of the game is important, including the short game (yes the long game is much more important, until you can reasonably get the ball near the green), but even the pros aren't closer than 20-25ft from the hole on average, and the make percentage from that distance (i.e. birdie with 1 putt) is nowhere near 50%, more like 15 or 20%. The pros that have a good short game, better than the average of their peers, end up with a 70-80% up-and-down rate: with 12-13 greens from which they get 2-3 birdies, they also get 4-5 1-putts from the 5-6 up-and-down attempts they make from off the green.

In my case, I am off the green a lot (only 5-6 greens leading to a birdie less than once per round on average), but usually close enough, even on the fringe (which is not counted as GIR or a putt), chip 12-13 times (including several times with the putter in my hand), and make nearly half of these attempts with 1 putt, resulting in a total of around 30 putts per round. In extreme cases, I can end up with 24-26 putts in a round, but that usually involves even fewer GIRs, more converted birdies, perhaps a chip-in or two and a good up-and-down ratio (50% or better).

So work on your long game by all means, but don't neglect your short game, including your putting. 40 times with the putter is bad, period. All IMHO of course.

Yeah, advice taken. I'll work on that when I stop hitting trees off the tee. . .

One of the people I used to play rounds in the morning said I don't play often enough to get good again. He meant as in playing all aspects of golf. Originally, he was impressed with my new found distance, but stifled a laugh when I told him I'm shooting really bad. Not going to quote it here. It's lookupabble and reflected very positively in my handicap (because I think it's way worse than what it was changed to). 

[Lihu]

39 minutes ago, Buckeyebowman said:

Oh, good grief! When I read the title I thought it was from a member who actually took 40 putts per round! I would have asked them if all the nerves in their hands were dead! If they had absolutely no sense of touch!

They call it "fists of stone"