• Announcements

    • iacas

      Introducing TST "Clubs!"   08/28/2017

      No, we're not getting into the equipment business, but we do have "clubs" here on TST now. Groups. Check them out here:

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'stats'.

More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Welcome
    • Welcome, Everyone
    • The TST Blog
  • The Clubhouse
    • Golf Talk
    • Tour Talk
    • Member Outings & Meetups
    • Golf Courses and Architecture
    • Destinations and Travel
    • Rules of Golf
  • The Practice Range
    • Instruction and Playing Tips
    • Member Swings
    • Swing Thoughts
    • Reading Room
    • Fitness and Exercise
  • The Pro Shop
    • Clubs, Grips, Shafts, Fitting
    • Balls, Carts/Bags, Apparel, Gear, Etc.
    • Member Reviews
    • Marketplace
  • The 19th Hole
    • Disc Golf, Foot Golf, Etc.
    • Sports
    • Geek Zone
    • The Grill Room
    • Announcements & Tech Support
  • Michigan Golf's Golf Course Reviews
  • Upstate New York's Topics
  • Apple Fans's Discussions
  • General Architecture Fans's Discussions
  • Oklahoma Golfers's Discussions
  • Michigan Golf's Topics
  • Central Florida Golfers's Discussions


There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.


There are no results to display.

There are no results to display.

Found 15 results

  1. Looks like there's a new Game Golf system coming out that finally gives live feedback on your round, as many, myself included always wanted. I wonder how this will affect the free tagging feature of the app. I suspect that will shift to a for-pay format. http://www.wareable.com/golf/new-game-golf-live-adds-real-time-smartphone-insights-for-your-round-1854 New Game Golf LIVE adds real time smartphone insights for your round Game Golf, the round tracking wearable, has been updated to add a host of new features. The new tracker dubbed Game Golf LIVE gets its name from the new smartphone paired app, which enables you to get more information when out on the course. For the uninitiated Game Golf consists of a wearable receiver that clips to your waistband and a bunch of sensors that plug into the top of your clubs. You tap the top of the club on your belt before you play a shot, and when you get back you'll see a map of your shots, as well as stats on average distances with each club, success rates, putting data and a whole lot more. However, the previous Game Golf only got useful when you got home from a round, and as we mentioned in our review, built up a few rounds of history. Game Golf LIVE adds real time insights by connecting to a smartphone app. You can use it for yardages to the pin, a major omission from the last model and a real bone of contention for those who need to fork out for a GPS watch and the Game Golf system. It's also added Google Maps imagery in addition to Bing and Apple's own cartography. There are also additions to the post-round analysis as well. There's now a feature called Stroke Gained analysis that helps players find weaknesses in their game to work on during lessons or at the range. It will also put you up against scratch golfers to see which element is contributing to your downfall. Game Golf LIVE is set to retail for $249.99 and previous owners of the Game Golf Classic (as it's now being marketed) can upgrade for $99 if they get in before 11 November.
  2. I've written up an analysis of @Slowcelica's stats analysis- the data was from late last season. Here's the link: https://thesandtrap.com/b/the_numbers_game/deep_dive_analysis_of_slowcelicas_golf_game As is the case with @Fairway_CY's analysis, the intent is to take members who are near bogey golf and sincerely looking to shave a significant number of strokes over the next season or two. When the member achieves that goal, perhaps we can look back and see more definitively where they improved. The articles mostly document where I think they can improve, but hey- I'm really just hoping the players can improve their games, so we can gain some insights into where that improvement comes. So with that said, any comments you have are fair game: Any suggestions for either player on their future improvement that you may have? Any suggestions for the author to improve future articles that you may have? For the players, is the analysis helpful, or is it not really a surprise? Was there anything unexpected? What the most "expected" result for you? Whatever else you want to comment on. Now that I've got two under my belt, I'm interested in comparing/contrasting them a bit. SlowCelica: Lost about 15 strokes per round full swing, 10 strokes inside 60yds (mostly putting) Fairway_CY: Lost about 18 strokes per round full swing, 9 strokes inside 60yds (half putting, half short game) I think Fairway_CY had more to gain by improving his full swing (particularly approaches), whereas SlowCelica's data showed that he could likely make some quick gains from improving his putting. That's how the numbers shook out for me, anyway. Interested to see how it all turns out, so pressure is on those two guys to deliver! Also interested to hear if anyone who wants to argue a different conclusion from the data they see. There's a lot of charts and graphs in each, and my hope was to spawn a good discussion of each area of their games, not necessarily try to preach the right answer. For those brave enough to slog through the lengthy articles, congrats and have at it!
  3. Realistic Expectations

    From 110 yards out, how many strokes does it take the average scratch golfer to hole out? How about the average PGA Tour player? How close do they hit the first shot in each case? From 35 feet away, how many putts does the average scratch golfer take? The average PGA Tour player? What percentage of the time do they hole the putt? This speaks to Separation Value™, and it speaks to the proper expectations a golfer should have, and it speaks to your mindset and approach on the golf course. I've asked players - average players who aren't necessarily super tuned in to the world of stats - at what range a PGA Tour player is 50/50 to make a putt. I haven't kept track of the specific number, but it's over 30 people and may be over 50… and a surprising trend surfaced: not a single person guessed 8 feet (or less). I had guesses out to twenty feet - by an 11-handicapper - and most guesses fell between 10 and 12 feet. From 12 feet a PGA Tour player makes only about a third of their putts. Yeah, that'd get them into Cooperstown, but it's not an otherwise impressive statistic. I've told this story a few times. I was having my college kids play the forward tees one day (I recommend everyone do this from time to time). The eighth hole was a 460-yard par five from these tees (kind of a brute for women), and a player had hit a good drive and a very solid second shot to 20 feet. He missed the "eagle" putt and tapped in his "birdie." Stomping off the green I said "Hey, what's up?" He replied, "I should have made that putt. I really wanted the eagle there." This blew my mind. Here I had a kid - not in the starting five, mind you - who had played a hole nearly perfectly. Better than the average player on the PGA Tour would play (and score) on the hole. And he's leaving the hole disappointed with his score and upset with his play. The PGA Tour player takes between 2.83 and 3.05 strokes to hole out from 110 yards (depending on whether they're in the fairway or not). They only hit the green from this range about 3/4 of the time. The average scratch golfer takes about 3.1 strokes from that range. From 35 feet, the average PGA Tour player takes just over two strokes (about 2.03). Sure, they hole one about 5% of the time, but they three-putt about 8% of the time. The average scratch golfer's slash line (of sorts) from 35 feet: 2.04/5%/9%. In other words, if you're 110 yards out, and you hit your shot to 20 feet, that's not only an okay shot, it's a good shot, and one that should make you proud. If you miss that 20 footer and tap in for par, take comfort in the knowledge that a PGA Tour player only makes a putt of that length about 15% of the time, and averages 1.87 putts from that distance, and that's on better putting surfaces than you're likely putting on, and with a detailed green map. Golf is Hard®. The hole is really, really small, and even getting the ball into it from 20 feet is pretty difficult. Do yourself a favor: stop beating yourself up for great shots. If you lag a 30-footer up close, don't leave the green angry with your putt, muttering about how you "really wanted that one." Tell yourself you did great, PGA Tour level, and if you keep putting that well they'll drop occasionally. If you hit the green with a wedge from 120 out and have a 30 footer left for birdie, tell yourself it was a good shot. Because it is. Look, to be honest, you'll get creamed off the tee and with the long approach shots. PGA Tour players will wipe the floor with you in those categories. You have enough to feel bad about, if you choose, in those areas of the game. There's no need to beat yourself up for the shots that are actually GOOD shots. Know the stats, and feel better about yourself. If you hit your pitching wedge to 20 feet, pump yourself up a bit. It was a good shot. Maybe even a great shot, depending on your skill level. Take pride in that. Feel good about it. Golf will beat you down often enough… there's little sense in you doing it to yourself when the truth is the opposite.
  4. Stats tracking

    Hi all, Just wondering how people go about tracking the stats from golf rounds and practice sessions. I count how many shots over par I am on each hole, and then make a note of the main reason why I went over par, ie bad drive, bad short putt, bad mid iron. When I get home I put it all on a spreadsheet and which ever category cost me the most shots is what I work on until my next games. Does anyone else a system they like to work with ?
  5. Somewhat recently GAME GOLF changed up the info you see when you click "Insights." http://www.gamegolf.com/insights What used to be the old view: Now requires you to click "View Insights." Instead you see a view like this: This is a little confusing at first, but here's your quickie guide to how this works: This is where you set up your comparison. You can compare yourself to yourself or to other golfers, like scratch golfers or 15 handicappers. You can compare your last round, your last 5, 10, etc. You can narrow it down to a date range, and do all sorts of other things. These numbers are the somewhat confusing part. The smaller grey number is the second thing, the "base" against which you are comparing yourself. In this image, the smaller grey number is the "3 Rounds" number - I lost 0.64 strokes off the tee, gained -0.47, -0.77, and -0.52 strokes in the other areas (presumably against a scratch golfer). So the grey numbers are the standard for comparison, and then the white numbers with the arrows are what you're comparing: in this case, the "Last Round." You can see I improved to saving -0.19 strokes off the tee, and that is a positive trend, so it's got a downward green arrow. I previously saved -0.77 strokes with my short game, but only managed -0.57 the last time, so even though it's still negative (a gain), I've trended negatively so I get a red upward arrow. These are where the grey and white numbers (with red or green arrows) show up in a bar chart form. Simply that. The grey numbers above are represented by the grey bars. The white numbers are represented by the green or red bars that correspond to a green or red arrow. So that's the top part. Below that, we get some interesting grids and graphics: This section's a bit easier to digest. The blue numbers correspond to the blue shapes, the grey to the grey. Pretty straightforward. Unfortunately some of my feedback has yet to be incorporated. See the "0%" in the middle graphic? Is this because I missed 6 greens from which I had a 101-150-yard shot? Or maybe I had 0 approach shots from that distance? Maybe I was 0-for-1? GAME GOLF should add (the sooner the better!) some actual data here. 0% (0/0) would concern me a lot less (and 0% (0/6) would concern me a lot more!) than just saying "0%". Scrolling down we see some more relatively easy-to-understand graphs, that also have some similar flaws: The new Notes area is pretty nice. You can add time-stamped notes that remind you when you put that new driver into play, when you began working on your hips not swaying backward, etc. 254 yards or 257, which is it? Well, I hit a hybrid 236 yards and a 3-wood 253 yards, so both are correct. But I can see how this might confuse some people, and honestly… well, I'm not entirely sure of the validity of the stat, but it's easily ignored if you don't value it. There are going to be times when you play a soggy course and hit a bunch of drivers that plug on landing, and other times when you hit a bunch of hybrids off the tee but get roll out. Is there more important information that could go there? Related to "Off the Tee"? I guess not. Again, hopefully sooner rather than later we'll get some numbers here rather than just percentages. I happen to remember that I played 12 holes my last "round" so the 75% number is easy to figure out - I missed three greens. But did I get up and down 1 out of 1 times, and fail to get a sand save 2/2 times for my 0%, or was I never in a bunker and scrambled 3/3 times? The numbers don't tell me… But it would be so easy for them to say it. Just add "(3/3)" beneath the "100%" or "(0/0)" beneath the 0%. So, I hope that helps. Again, to visit this area on your own account, visit http://www.gamegolf.com/insights. P.S. One last note…Clicking the right arrow on a few of the regions takes you to the appropriate "old" screen that you're used to.
  6. When I record my scores on ghin.com, I use the hole-by-hole and advanced scoring. I like reading the Average/Similar Golfers report. But what I'd really like to see is how I compare to the next lower handicap group. I have two questions: 1. If you work at GHIN, can you put me in touch with your web app team so I can make a suggestion? I can't find a way to do that on the site. 2. If you're between a 5.6 and 6.6 index and use advanced scoring, would you mind posting your Average/Similar Golfers numbers so I can do the comparison myself? Thanks
  7. Rare Stats

    To know my weeknesses i record my stats with a stroke gained approach. After 15 rounds i can see clear that i was bad with long irons and short irons. But what was rare is that my average spected score of my mid irons (7.8.9) where better than my short irons (P,W,G). Avg Wedges: 2,92 Avg Short Irons: 3,25 Avg Mid Irons: 3,21 Avg Long Irons: 3,54 I agree the fact that closer is better but in my case beetween a 7 iron and a Gap wedges there practically no different, moreover it´s better to have a mid iron in hand than a short iron. I know i have to work to improve my short irons but how could you explain that numbers? Note: the average only take in consideration the iron shot, not the result of the chip/putt after that.
  8. As @david_wedzik and I begin more formally working with GAME GOLF, I'm curious what stats golfers might like to see exposed that aren't already. By "stats" I don't necessarily mean a statistic alone, either - I mean a view of the data that would be helpful in analyzing your game. If it helps you, imagine that the stats available now are free, and the rest will be available with an inexpensive subscription. Dave and I have a list in mind already, but perhaps there are some other decent stats that I'm overlooking. I won't share much from my list (it would give away too much), but here's an example of two such things that I think don't give much away: nGIR % Left rough/right rough tendency. Scoring from the left rough, right rough, and fairway. I don't imagine I'll be able to comment on much here, for obvious reasons, but go ahead and share your thoughts. If the idea's good, there's a good chance it winds up on my list and ultimately implemented.
  9. @Fairway_CY was brave enough to be a guinea pig for an idea to analyze his game, with the goal being that we amateurs can combine aspects of GAME GOLF (GG) and Lowest Score Wins (LSW) to map out a course for better golf. Here was the first effort: https://thesandtrap.com/b/the_numbers_game/deep_dive_analysis_cy Keep in mind, I'm not a trained statistician (or in any way connected to a profession related to golf!), so the idea is to see how we laymen can make sense of our own games, using tools at our disposal. Even better when those tools (GG/LSW) are ones that are popular here on TST. While Erik will surely review the articles to make sure they're not going to detract from his LSW brand, the main idea was to mostly do see what we amateurs can come up with ourselves. Erik should always feel free to chime in and tell us we have gone a bit astray with the direction we've taken the analysis, of course. I make no claim to be omniscient, and I can frequently head the wrong direction with where I think the numbers are taking me. My hope is that he (and Dave, of course) will get some gratification seeing people apply the analysis in the book for real-world examples. If you're interested in being a subject of a future article, let me know. I've had one person volunteer after CY. The priority for me (for the first few, anyway- that could change after feedback) will be someone who needs significant improvement- maybe bogey golf or worse. The person needs to have read LSW and to have at least 8 very representative rounds accurately recorded in GG (typically requiring moving your shots and pin locations). For example: Initial putts should be extremely accurate, and All other shots should be reflected to a decent level. The golfer should be someone with longevity here on the site and who appears to be on a trajectory that shows a desire to improve. Some humility and a sense of humor help too! Another hope is to come back next season after we find our strides in the season and do a follow-up on the same golfers to see if the improvement plan has helped. If so, where were the strokes shaved? Are the analysis and plan holding up? Any other feedback on the direction of the feature is welcome, of course. If you read the first article linked above, feel free to help me figure out what to cut out, what to supplement with. This is meant to evolve to be useful and right-to-the-heart-of-the-matter stuff. I'll try to limit fluff in the write-ups. The first one was long, admittedly. Thanks in advance.
  10. I created the table below based on how the PGA Tour calculates Strokes Gained putting, using my most recent round. For some reason, GameGolf is telling my my Strokes Gained (or lost) was -4.62 strokes for this round against a scratch golfer. Seems quite a bit off considering the actual calculation is -3.02 against the PGA Tour Average. That's over a 1.5 stroke difference. I don't know that I would take the time to do this for every round I play, but it seems that GG is quite a bit off when I spot checked a few more rounds.
  11. My Swing (TripleEagle)

    I've been Playing Golf for: off and on 4 years, never actually started to play until last year My current handicap index or average score is: 85.12/72, 84.11/71, 82.93/70 My typical ball flight is: straight-draw with my irons, fade with my hybrid, fade-slice with my driver The shot I hate or the "miss" I'm trying to reduce/eliminate is: Fixing my driver above all, getting more distance, being more consistent on eliminating miss hits (usually tops) Videos: 5 Iron- Back View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uq_bZT4GGTw Info: The ball was a little pulled to the left and had a nice little draw on it, not my typical iron shot but it does happen non the less. Club is a Callaway Forged X 5 Iron. Estimated distance is about 155 yards. 5 Iron- Side View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIWcyQdxxEQ Info: The ball went dead straight, but popped a little higher up in the air than I would've liked. Club is a Callaway Forged X 5 Iron. Estimated distance is about 150 yards. 3 Hybrid- Back View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eiFhOaXCV3g Info: (Sorry for the barking my parents had just gotten home and my dogs went crazy) I definitely swung down on the ball, it was low and had a decent cut to the right- not my typical hybrid shot at all. Club is a Callaway X Hot 3.0 Hybrid. Estimated Distance is about 170 yards (I typically hit it about 185 with my hybrid). 3 Hybrid- Side View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxIr0048VMU Info: I hit the ball higher than i'd like but it flew pretty straight, had a slight fade likely from the wind. Club is a Callaway X Hot 3.0 Hybrid. Estimated Distance is about 185. Driver- Back View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e2UlY55p_FE Info: The shot went a little high, because of how high I was teed up (I didn't want to scratch my club on my lawn). All together it was pretty good, high, a little pushed, a little draw. Club is a Callaway Big Bertha Alpha 9.0 Driver (adjusted to D and +2). Estimated Distance is about 210 yards. Driver- Side View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3t8uYd8RqUU Info: Still a little high for the same reason. Pretty straight and had a nice little draw on it. Club is a Callaway Big Bertha Alpha 9.0 Driver (adjustments are D and +2). Estimated distance is about 220 yards.
  12. I've written before about how golfers don't seem to understand losing or gaining partial shots. We can't ever hit a shot that counts as only half or three tenths of a shot, after all. A missed five-foot putt counts the same as a drive we pure 285 down the middle. So, I'd like to take a few minutes here to cover partial shots and work our way toward "strokes gained" or lost as it applies to golfers of all levels - including you. The simplest way of looking at strokes gained and partial shots is with putting. From one inch away, every golfer in the world is expected to take 1.0 strokes to hole out. Nobody ever two-putts, nobody three-putts, etc. The same is pretty much true from one foot away, as well: virtually everyone takes 1.0 putts (the true number, even on the PGA Tour, is probably something like 1.00000000000000001, but you get the picture…). From three, the number jumps to something like 1.04 - PGA Tour pros only make about 96% of their three-footers. The other four times, they two-putt. So (96 x 1) + (4 x 2) = 104. 104 strokes for 100 attempts is 1.04 strokes per attempt. In other words, if you have a three-foot putt, and you make it, you actually gain 0.04 strokes against your standard (if your standard is a PGA Tour player). By the standard, you should have taken 1.04 strokes to get the ball in the hole from three feet. You only took one stroke, so you "saved" the 0.04. If you somehow manage to make 100 three-foot putts in a row, that 0.04 strokes saved each time multiplies out to four strokes saved in total. Let's back up a bit farther. From eight feet, a PGA Tour player is about 50/50 to make it. They still almost never three-putt from this range, so let's just keep thing simple and consider that they're either going to hole it or two-putt. If they have 100 eight-foot putts, it would take the average PGA Tour player 150 putts to hole out. So, imagine that this 1.5 is your standard, and you make an eight-foot putt. You've "gained" half a stroke on the average. You were expected to take 1.5 strokes, but you took just one. If you miss an eight-footer on the next hole, you played two eight-footers in three strokes: dead on what you're expected to do. What if you happen to have six eight-foot putts in a row, on the golf course, and you miss them all? While it may feel as though you've given away six strokes, because all of those putts likely felt "makable," you've only given away about three strokes: 12 putts - 6 attempts * 1.5 putts/attempt = 3 strokes "lost." And that's if your standard of comparison is a PGA Tour player. If you want to compare yourself to a bogey golfer, you've actually lost only half that: 1.5 strokes (a bogey golfer takes about 1.75 strokes from eight feet, so 6 * 0.25 = 1.5). From 33 feet, the numbers are 2.0 for a PGA Tour player and about 2.2 for a bogey golfer. You're expected to take two strokes if you're a PGA Tour player, and 2.2 if you're a bogey golfer. Now, again, you can't take 2.2 strokes to hole out, but you can take 11 strokes over five attempts from 33 feet, and 11/5 = 2.2. Every five 33-foot putts, the PGA Tour player will gain a full stroke: it will take them 10 and the bogey golfer 11. Now that this part is understood, let's start putting some pieces together. Consider a golfer putting from B, above, 33 feet away from the hole. If he two-putts, he's going to finish neutral - he won't lose or gain strokes to a PGA Tour player. But let's imagine three scenarios. In the first, he hits his first putt to a foot and then taps in. In the second, he hits it to three feet. He takes his time and makes that. In the third, after horribly judging the speed, he hits his putt eight feet past the hole, but makes it coming back. In each instance he took two putts, but where he gained and lost strokes changes: a) 33', 1' b) 33', 3' c) 33', 8' The math on those start the same: from 33', the player is expected to take 2.0 strokes. It "costs" the player 1.0 strokes to hit the first putt, so at each of the second positions he has already expended one putt. If we look at the strokes gained for each of those distances, we find: a) 2.0, 1.0 b) 2.0, 1.04 c) 2.0, 1.5 In a, the player took one stroke to shave his "expected" strokes from 2.0 to 1.0. He's neither lost nor gained strokes, on either of his two strokes. He was expected to take 2.0 putts from 33', and he put it to a spot from which he's expected to take 1.0 more strokes. In the b and c, though, the numbers don't work out the same. If a player hits his 33' putt, as he does in b, to about three feet, we already know he's expected to take 1.04 strokes from there. So he was at 2.0 expected strokes, and he "spent" a full stroke to get to a position from which he is expected to take 1.04 strokes. He "lost" 0.04 strokes. That he then holed the three-foot putt is great - he "gained" that 0.04 strokes back. He was expected to take 1.04, but it only took him one stroke. c is even worse (and then better) for our player: from 33' he's expected to take 2.0 strokes, but he "spends" a stroke to hit his ball to a position from which he's expected to take 1.5 strokes. He's already hit a putt, and still has "1.5 putts" left, by the averages. So, going from 33' to 8' means our player LOST half a stroke on that putt. If he then holes the eight-foot putt, well, he gains it right back. Just as we saw above. This is how strokes gained (or lost) works: you look at the average number of strokes it takes a certain level of player to hole out from where they were before and after a stroke. If they're 33 feet away on the green (2.0), and they hit it to a position from which they're expected to take 1.2 strokes to hole out, they've lost 0.2 strokes with their first putt. It's the same thing from the tee, or an approach shot, too: even though a player is unlikely to hole out. Standing on the tee, a player is expected to take perhaps 4.0 strokes, and if they advance their ball with their tee shot to a position from which they're expected to take 3.18 strokes, they've lost 0.18 strokes with their tee shot. If they then hit their ball to 20 feet on the green (from which they might be expected to take 1.87 strokes), they've gained back 0.31 strokes (3.18 expected - 1 stroke taken - 1.87 expected strokes from new position). I've told this story a few times. @mvmac and I were playing a soggy course with a little wind coming from the south. The 10th and 12th holes on this course are 460 and 480 yards, and he had a hybrid and a 3-wood, while I had two hybrids, into each of the greens. We managed to hit our shots to about 15-25 feet, and we jokingly said to each other "strokes gained!" after each. Why? Because from 200 to 230 yards, hitting the green at all - let alone getting the ball to only 15 or 25 feet - is a substantial gain in strokes for a single shot. Heck, a PGA Tour player is going to average 1.87 strokes from 20 feet, and averages 3.32 from 220 yards out in the fairway, so that one stroke that took @mvmac and I from 220 yards to 20 feet cost us one stroke but saved us almost half a stroke (against a PGA Tour player): 3.32 - (1 + 1.87) = 0.45 strokes gained. Two-putting from there cost only the 0.13 strokes (2.0 - 1.87). Let's take a look at a hole: Let's imagine the hole is a certain distance and a hole on which you are likely to average 4.2. (If you're a scratch golfer, maybe the hole is 475 yards long, or if you're an 18 handicaper, maybe it's 355 yards long). Standing on the tee at A, you're expected to hole out in 4.2 strokes, which is of course impossible on any given single playing of the hole. That means that you're going to lose or gain 1.2, 0.2, 0.8, 1.8, or 2.8 strokes almost every time you play this hole. You can't break even on any single playing of the hole. But anyway, that's the important number: 4.2. Let's say you hit a good shot from the tee into the fairway to B. Again, to remain somewhat agnostic with respect to various handicaps, let's say you're going to average 3.0 from there. Your tee shot, which "cost" you one stroke, moved you from a spot where you were going to average 4.2 to a spot from which you average 3.0. You've shaved 1.2 strokes by "spending" only one stroke. Let's say that the rest of the positions work out as follows: B: 3.0 C: 3.2 D: 2.7 E: 3.6 Strokes gained (and "expected shots") is based primarily on two things (because adding in other factors could complicate things to the point of being ridiculous): the distance remaining to the hole and the lie of the ball. On the putting green, the lie of the ball is obviously "on the putting green." But from 180 yards, players average lower expected shots from the fairway than they do from the trees, or a fairway bunker. So again, a player expecting to average 4.2 from the tee (A), hits it into B, C, D, and E. If we limit the distances to relative descriptors, we can start to see how these make sense: B: 3.0 - Fairway, medium distance from the hole C: 3.3 - Fairway, long distance from the hole D: 2.7 - Rough, very short distance from the hole E: 3.6 - Fairway bunker, short-ish distance from the hole These four examples demonstrate two things that make strokes gained a pretty reasonable way to assess the value of a shot: the farther a shot is from the hole, the more shots you're expected to hole out, and the worse the lie, the same: the more strokes you're expected to take to hole out. Let's step through a full example. A player standing on the tee at A is going to hit it to C, miss the green in the rough short and right, chip to eight feet, and miss the par putt before tapping in for bogey. Shot Expected Result Expected Strokes Gained ---- -------- ------ -------- -------------- 1 4.2 C 3.3 -0.1 2 3.3 Grsd Rough 2.6 -0.3 3 2.6 8' Green 1.5 +0.1 4 1.5 3" Green 1.0 -0.5 5 1.0 Holed 0 0.0 -------------- Total: -0.8 The tee shot was played from a spot with 4.2 expected shots to a spot with 3.3 expected shots. This cost the player one stroke, but only reduced his expected score by 0.9. Thus, he lost 0.1 strokes. From there, the player hit a mediocre shot: they were in a position to average 3.3, but advanced the ball into a position from which they're expected to take 2.6. They gained only 0.7 strokes at a cost of another full shot. They lost 0.3 strokes. The player hit a slightly better than expected chip - they gained 0.1 strokes by hitting it from a 2.6 position to a 1.5 position (for this one position I'm just using the PGA Tour distance) at a cost of just one stroke - but the player is 1.1 strokes closer. But, then he missed the putt (1.5 expected strokes) and tapped in, losing 0.5 strokes on the two-putt exchange. In total, the player lost 0.8 strokes, but we know that just knowing the expected score from the tee and the score they made: 5 - 4.2 = 0.4 - 0.1 + 0.5. Though the player hit five shots, only two were "neutral" with respect to strokes gained or lost. The player lost partial strokes on the approach shot (which missed the green) and their putt (which missed the hole), but gained a very small 0.1 on a slightly better than expected chip shot. Let's do one more example: A to D to 3 feet and holed for a birdie. Shot Expected Result Expected Strokes Gained ---- -------- ------ -------- -------------- 1 4.2 D 2.7 +0.5 2 2.7 5' Green 1.25 +0.45 3 1.25 Holed 0.0 +0.25 -------------- Total: +1.2 This player hit a big tee shot (maybe it hit the cart path a couple of times) to D. He went from 4.2 to 2.7 expected strokes with one stroke, making up 0.5 strokes with his tee shot. Then, from short range, he hit his shot to five feet from where he's expected to take 1.25 strokes (he's expected to make 75% of his five-foot putts), again saving nearly half a stroke: 2.7 to 1.25 with a cost of one stroke is 2.7 - (1 + 1.25) = 0.45. Then, to wrap up the great hole, he holes the five-footer. These two examples highlight just how many different shots go into making up a score on any given hole: virtually every shot that isn't a tap-in results in an exchange - positive or negative - to the expected strokes. If you play a poorer shot than your comparison standard, you lose strokes. Play a better one than expected and you gain. The funny thing is, too, how people tend to see these shots. Though the player lost shots in the first example on both the tee shot and the approach shot, they're likely to blame a poor chip and a missed putt for the bogey. Yes, they lost strokes with the putt, but they actually gained a 0.1 strokes with the chip. The drive and the approach shot cost them, and the putt - a 50/50 proposition - simply landed heads up instead of tails up. In the second example, the players will likely give themselves credit for the approach shot, but overlook that they got a bigger advantage hitting the ball off the cart path and into the rough, where they gained a full half stroke. They'll also credit their clutch putting, but even if they'd two-putted, the strength of their first two shots would still have netted them 0.2 strokes gained for the hole. So that's it in a nutshell: both strokes gained and how partial shots work when playing golf. The next time you're out there, and you miss a 50/50 putt, take consolation in the fact that you're "owed" one. The next time you hit it to 25 feet from 162 yards, tell yourself that you gained some strokes with that shot (it's better than the PGA Tour average, after all). The next time you hit a good drive, take pride in saving 0.2 strokes or whatever. And, for Pete's sake, if you two-putt from 30 feet, stop kicking yourself for "never making them." Almost nobody does, and for players at your level, that two-putt probably saved you a partial stroke.
  13. 2016 TST Partner GAME GOLF has a new ad (above). It replaces some of their more recent ads, and I had the pleasure of seeing it on TV earlier today. What do you think? Also, for a limited time (through the end of April) for U.S. residents GAME GOLF Live is $50 off! The reduced price will already be included in the cart after you add it to your cart. This special price should also be availaable at all retail outlets in the U.S. P.S. Scottish people are tough to understand. I've told people the story of my first experience upon landing in Scotland… trying to figure out what in the heck the bus driver and his friend were talking about. I could understand about every tenth word. And they were speaking English… just… Scottish English.
  14. Favorite Apps

    This has got to be the place to ask - What everyone's favorite apps? Right now my favorites are V1 for swing analysis and Skydroid for GPS. I'm on the Android system. I'd like to find a stats app giving me similar info as the Strokes Gained stuff. I've contemplated GolfShot and would welcome comments from users. Am interested in the Lowest Score Wins app, but can't seem to find it. Might just go with the Game Golf program but the Federal Return just cramped my golf funds. Thoughts?
  15. My Edel putter story: Short version: Switching to an Edel putter saved me an average of 1.6 putts per round, based on a comparison of 10 years of hole by hole data, all taken from league play at my home course. Best golf money I have ever spent. Long version: For Christmas 2014, my marvellous wife bought me an Edel Putter. My fitting was with Ryan at The Golf Lab in Toronto. Of note: instead of the mirror test, they do the whole thing using a SAM putt lab...which is brilliant. Super accurate, and I got to go home with some fancy charts and graphs showing the difference between my original Ping Craz-E, and the new Edel flatstick. My initial putts showed that I lined up about 1.5 degrees closed, then my swing path goes about 2.5 degrees outward. Face angle relative to path stayed roughly constant at impact, so the net effect was about a 0.9 degree push to the right on every putt. As per Dave Pelz, that means either I miss a lot of putts to the right, or read my break a little more left than reality as a subconscious compensation. Probably a mix of both. Frankly for a 17 handicapper, 1 degree is decent: you can still catch the lip on a 10 foot putt with a 1 degree push (insert high school trigonometry). The bigger thing the stats showed was that my pace was all over the place. Median was 1710 (mm/sec) for the 15 foot putt, but I was very inconsistent: anywhere from 1500 to 1900. and the results showed it: several putts left short, others long. This was after 30 minutes of warm up on their indoor green. Ryan fixed my pace in his first attempt: adding a 300g weight to the head end of the club, and suddenly I was stroking everything at a very consistent pace. The average was 1678, so almost the same as before, but the variance was tiny. Showed up in the putts as well as the stats. Damn near magic. Also really tightened up the impact dots on the club face. Before: After: Before: After: Aim was less magical. We went through about 15 variants over 45 minutes. He was trying to trick my brain into aiming 2.4 degrees closed, which if I used my existing path, would end up perfect. However somewhere around the 2 degrees closed mark, something subconscious would kick in and my path would change. Interesting was: the shape of my path was nearly identical, but at some point the closed setup would trick me into starting that path outside, instead of down the line, undoing the gain. In the end, we got it to around 1.9 degrees closed, with an ultimate effect of 0.5 degrees open at impact. Before: After: Then the hardest part: waiting for my putter to arrive, and then waiting for our Canadian snow to melt. Fast forward 10 months: how did the putter perform? I loved it from day one, but would it make a numerical difference in my scores? Here's the cool part: I play in a Sunday Morning Golf League at the local muni. It's a social league, with handicaps ranging between 5-25, but we take the rules seriously, and of note: we've kept per-hole stats for every player going back for 25 years. That includes strokes and # of putts for every single hole. I bought my Craz-E in 2004, and used it every year since. The entire 2015 season was with the Edel: SeasonAvg Putts / roundLeague Ranking - PuttsAvg 3 putts / roundLeague Ranking - 3 PuttsAvg Gross200432.898 / 112.2210 / 1198.17200532.158 / 111.778 / 11101.31200632.607 / 111.808 / 1196.25200732.297 / 111.719 / 1199.12200832.125 / 121.416 / 1299.18200931.575 / 111.798 / 1193.43201032.507 / 111.175 / 1195.17201131.083 / 100.923 / 1088.38201232.338 / 121.567 / 1290.00201332.146 / 101.938 / 1088.21201432.175 / 121.836 / 1290.61201530.551 / 121.201 / 1287.95 Avg putts per round with the Craz-E over 11 years was 32.17, this season was 30.55...an improvement of 1.62 putts per round. I reduced my 3-putt average from 1.65 to 1.20 disasters per round. And far more importantly: I went from being middle of the pack in our league, to being the number one putter. woo! My league gross dropped from 90.61 in 2014 to 87.95...a one season improvement of 2.6 strokes. It looks like 1.6 of that is directly related to putting, but I believe (but can't prove) the rest comes from putting too. On a regular basis this year, if I found myself short sided or some other ugly situation, I would just gouge the ball out to the fat part of the green and be ultra confident I could two putt from anywhere. In the past I would try to get too fancy from bad spots trying to get it close, and end up double-chipping or worse. Good putting breeds confidence. I love my Edel putter, and I'm seriously considering picking up an Edel wedge set this winter. Appendix: If you look, I also had a good putting year in 2011. That's actually an interesting comparison. That was the year I took an excellent 10-week short game + putting clinic at Whistle Bear golf club, and practised like crazy. Obviously it made a big impact that year, but I stopped practising and lost my sharpness. This year I had a lot of good intentions for regular practise, but it never happened.