Do you and how do you interpret your GameGolf stats to determine what to practice?

[RFKFREAK]

In the, "What's your biggest problem in golf," @Shindig mentioned that at the beginning of summer he was putting as a 25 HC as determined by GameGolf even though he's a 14 HC and it got me to thinking that I don't really use my GameGolf stats much because I'm somewhat unclear as to how I can use it to my advantage.

For example, In looking at my data, GameGolf has me at a 29.1HC and I thought it'd be good to compare myself to a 25HC.  In the strokes gained part of the website, I'm losing 1 stroke off the tee, 4 strokes from short game, and in approach and putting are negligible differences, meanwhile, in the insights part of the site, unless I'm interpreting it wrong it has me losing 2.7 strokes off the tee, 6.5 strokes from short game and gaining 2.3 in putting.

 

It's still negligible in the approach category, however, it says I'm 33% on the green as opposed to 46% from 100 and in, 21% as opposed to 29% from 101-150, and actually better at 25% versus 18% from 150+.

So, just curious which part people focus on and if it there is a way to reconcile this apparent difference between the two parts of the site that I may be missing.

Edited September 5, 2018 by RFKFREAK

[billchao]

I use the Game Golf insights page more to compare my progress than I do to compare to benchmarks. The reason is because I don't trust other people's data.

That and I think the system is flawed and doesn't assign the proper blame to the skills. I played a round recently where I drove the ball very poorly, often putting myself behind or under trees that hindered my ability to hit the green with my approach shot. When I look at the strokes gained numbers for that round, Game Golf says I lost twice as many strokes on approach shots as I did on driving. I understand how they came to that conclusion, I just don't agree with it.

I'm pretty good at assessing my own game, though, so I use the Game Golf information as additional feedback rather than relying on it completely.

[iacas]

8 hours ago, billchao said:

That and I think the system is flawed and doesn't assign the proper blame to the skills. I played a round recently where I drove the ball very poorly, often putting myself behind or under trees that hindered my ability to hit the green with my approach shot. When I look at the strokes gained numbers for that round, Game Golf says I lost twice as many strokes on approach shots as I did on driving. I understand how they came to that conclusion, I just don't agree with it.

That's just because there aren't any ways to really map out what "bad trees" are, or whatever.

GAME knows about:

• greens
• tees
• fairways
• bunkers
• water hazards
• OB

Anything outside of the above is just "rough."

[billchao]

25 minutes ago, iacas said:

That's just because there aren't any ways to really map out what "bad trees" are, or whatever.

Right, and I don't expect there to be a solution for that. There's no easy way to quantify exactly how many strokes you lose being behind, near, or under a tree, etc., and it's even harder to map.

That's why I use Game Golf to supplement my own analysis. The information they give me isn't complete enough, but that's no knock on them.

[iacas]

1 minute ago, billchao said:

Right, and I don't expect there to be a solution for that. There's no easy way to quantify exactly how many strokes you lose being behind, near, or under a tree, etc., and it's even harder to map.

Right. In some ways, you can just combine the driving and approach shots stuff into one number: "full swing."

[billchao]

7 minutes ago, iacas said:

Right. In some ways, you can just combine the driving and approach shots stuff into one number: "full swing."

That's a pretty good way to look at it. When you need to distinguish between the two, it should be pretty easy based on course observations to tell whether you're losing more strokes with your driving or your iron play. At least it is in my own experience.

[RFKFREAK]

12 hours ago, billchao said:

That's a pretty good way to look at it. When you need to distinguish between the two, it should be pretty easy based on course observations to tell whether you're losing more strokes with your driving or your iron play. At least it is in my own experience.

On an average day, I'm not good at differentiating where I'm losing more strokes, tbh.  In general, though, I find much more volatility with my driver than my iron play so maybe for people like me that's why they differentiate it.

[billchao]

33 minutes ago, RFKFREAK said:

On an average day, I'm not good at differentiating where I'm losing more strokes, tbh.

Ok then the Game Golf stuff is a good place to start. There's a pretty good article in the members content section of lowestscorewins.com that can help point you in the right direction.

38 minutes ago, RFKFREAK said:

In general, though, I find much more volatility with my driver than my iron play so maybe for people like me that's why they differentiate it.

Again, I find the way they do it is very limited. Say you play a short hole, like 330, and you hit a poor tee shot into the woods about 100 yards out. You can play out of there, but you have to punch it back on the fairway to about 60 yards out. From there, you put it on the green and 2-putt for bogey. What cost you strokes there?

Unfortunately, Game Golf can't distinguish the fact that trees are bad m'kay? So it sees that you took 2 strokes to get on the green from 100 yards and tells you that your approach shot was the problem.

This happens quite often if you drive the ball anything like I do. I'm often not in a position with a clean look at the green and it adversely affects my strokes gained/lost approach numbers. That's why I like to go back and look at individual rounds to see what happened instead of relying solely on the numbers.

Right now I'm in a poor driving funk so I'm avoiding the driver and some hybrids until I sort it out. Played pretty well my last round doing this, but it's a small sample size. What I learned is that I lose more strokes putting myself in bad places off the tee than I gain from being closer to the green. That's my game. YMMV.

[RFKFREAK]

43 minutes ago, billchao said:

Ok then the Game Golf stuff is a good place to start. There's a pretty good article in the members content section of lowestscorewins.com that can help point you in the right direction.

Wow, good article - thanks for pointing it out!

 

48 minutes ago, billchao said:

Unfortunately, Game Golf can't distinguish the fact that trees are bad m'kay? So it sees that you took 2 strokes to get on the green from 100 yards and tells you that your approach shot was the problem.

This happens quite often if you drive the ball anything like I do. I'm often not in a position with a clean look at the green and it adversely affects my strokes gained/lost approach numbers. That's why I like to go back and look at individual rounds to see what happened instead of relying solely on the numbers.

Right now I'm in a poor driving funk so I'm avoiding the driver and some hybrids until I sort it out. Played pretty well my last round doing this, but it's a small sample size. What I learned is that I lose more strokes putting myself in bad places off the tee than I gain from being closer to the green. That's my game. YMMV.

Currently, GG says I'm losing 12.69 strokes on approach shots and 7.4 from the tee but considering a greater percentage of my shots are probably classified as approach ones, I would interpret that as the weakness off the tee being greater.  Although, as I type that, I'm not sure what they would classify Par 3's as they fit both categories as I would define them.

[billchao]

1 hour ago, RFKFREAK said:

Although, as I type that, I'm not sure what they would classify Par 3's as they fit both categories as I would define them.

http://support.gamegolf.com/customer/portal/articles/2215255

[RFKFREAK]

1 minute ago, billchao said:

Thanks.  Missed that definition on the site.

[JonMA1]

It looks like you got some good information already @RFKFREAK, but I like this topic so I thought I'd put in my 2¢. 

GameGolf does a really good job of confirming or disproving what I see on the course as a trending weakness, but sometimes I have to do more than just look at the insights stats.

As far as what I practice, I still very much like the 65/20/15 ratio - even if I don't always apply it. I feel like this is the first year that I don't have a glaring weakness. My overall game isn't very good, but everything is at a fairly close ratio. GG stats shows my short game is the worst at 3 and my tee shots, approach and putting at or below 1.5 of my target score. 

I just think our games have to be assessed with what we see as we're playing in addition to what GG shows.

For example, my course has some pretty tight greens with a lot of trees very close. So I may be hitting approach shots relatively close to the green and still leaving myself with a poor chance to succeed with my short game. The stats may show the weakness as chipping, but poor approach shots might be a root cause (no pun intended).

In addition, just because I hit a lot of fairways doesn't necessarily mean I won't put in a little extra work with the driver. For a few rounds in a row, I was adjusting for the slice and keeping it in play... not something I'm really that ok with.

Finally, I putt from off the green a lot. If I putt poorly from off the green that goes against my short game stats even though the skill that requires work is lag putting.

 

(For the record, my short game really isn't very good.)

 

[RFKFREAK]

2 hours ago, JonMA1 said:

It looks like you got some good information already @RFKFREAK, but I like this topic so I thought I'd put in my 2¢. 

GameGolf does a really good job of confirming or disproving what I see on the course as a trending weakness, but sometimes I have to do more than just look at the insights stats.

As far as what I practice, I still very much like the 65/20/15 ratio - even if I don't always apply it. I feel like this is the first year that I don't have a glaring weakness. My overall game isn't very good, but everything is at a fairly close ratio. GG stats shows my short game is the worst at 3 and my tee shots, approach and putting at or below 1.5 of my target score. 

I just think our games have to be assessed with what we see as we're playing in addition to what GG shows.

For example, my course has some pretty tight greens with a lot of trees very close. So I may be hitting approach shots relatively close to the green and still leaving myself with a poor chance to succeed with my short game. The stats may show the weakness as chipping, but poor approach shots might be a root cause (no pun intended).

In addition, just because I hit a lot of fairways doesn't necessarily mean I won't put in a little extra work with the driver. For a few rounds in a row, I was adjusting for the slice and keeping it in play... not something I'm really that ok with.

Finally, I putt from off the green a lot. If I putt poorly from off the green that goes against my short game stats even though the skill that requires work is lag putting.

 

(For the record, my short game really isn't very good.)

 

Yeah, I'm using the Separation Value spreadsheet on the LSW website and I've done the last 2 times I've played and it's really illustrating to me how badly I did in the SV 4 and 3 skills and how in my last round the only SV 2 skills I did above average on were 3-15 foot putts and, ironically enough, trouble shots of which I had 9 of.

[billchao]

2 hours ago, JonMA1 said:

Finally, I putt from off the green a lot. If I putt poorly from off the green that goes against my short game stats even though the skill that requires work is lag putting.

Your worst putt is better than your worst chip, so if anything putting from off the green makes your short game look better. I get what you're saying though.

I think of shot selection as part of short game skill. Choosing the right shot for the right situation is an important part of getting the ball close.

10 minutes ago, RFKFREAK said:

and, ironically enough, trouble shots of which I had 9 of.

Well you better work on your trouble shots then 😜

[JonMA1]

7 minutes ago, billchao said:

I think of shot selection as part of short game skill. Choosing the right shot for the right situation is an important part of getting the ball close.

So true.

I don't have much in the way of an arsenal, so often times it's an easy choice. But it is a rewarding feeling when you put some thought into a shot or club selection and obtain the result you were after.

23 minutes ago, RFKFREAK said:

Yeah, I'm using the Separation Value spreadsheet on the LSW website and I've done the last 2 times I've played and it's really illustrating to me how badly I did in the SV 4 and 3 skills and how in my last round the only SV 2 skills I did above average on were 3-15 foot putts and, ironically enough, trouble shots of which I had 9 of.

I'm not familiar with that spreadsheet, but I've always liked the separation value concept.

Bill may have been joking about working on trouble shots, but I work on those quite a bit and I believe he does as well.

Even players like you and I have the ability to learn how to punch a shot with just enough curve to leave us in a better position than by just punching out sideways. If that skill can help me get 20 or 30 yards closer on my next shot without much risk, it's worth developing.

[Missouri Swede]

2 minutes ago, JonMA1 said:

Even players like you and I have the ability to learn how to punch a shot with just enough curve to leave us in a better position than by just punching out sideways. If that skill can help me get 20 or 30 yards closer on my next shot without much risk, it's worth developing.

Goodness knows we have enough chances to use that shot.

[JonMA1]

1 minute ago, Missouri Swede said:

Goodness knows we have enough chances to use that shot.

Lol. I was going to type something like "even if I only used it once in a round" and then thought, no one's going to buy that.

[billchao]

6 minutes ago, JonMA1 said:

I don't have much in the way of an arsenal, so often times it's an easy choice.

Exactly. Your lack of arsenal speaks to weakness in the skill. If you're short sided with a bunker to carry with the green sloping away from you, the only chance to hit it close is to flop it. What if you can't hit a flop? You're likely not hitting it close.

I've played with people who are really good with controlling distance on a low running pitch shot because that's really the only shot they can hit. With plenty of room to work with, they're lights out. Once they have to carry a bunker or the green slopes away from the pin, they're not getting it close. They're good at that one particular shot but not as good in short game skill overall.

12 minutes ago, JonMA1 said:

Bill may have been joking about working on trouble shots, but I work on those quite a bit and I believe he does as well.

I don't. I've had a lot of on course practice though 😉