|
Post by Richie3Jack on Nov 7, 2014 12:17:53 GMT -5
I wrote about this on my Twitter feed last night. I am almost done with the player-by-player analysis for 2014 Pro Golf Synopsis. The general trend I know of players that are using the Express method for quite a while on Tour is that it has had a very positive effect on their make % outside 15-feet. Here's a list of the players I've gone thru that I know used AimPoint Express in the 2013-2014 season and their performance from outside 15-feet. (note, I based Russell Knox's previous numbers on the 2012 season since he was not a Tour member in 2013). (click to enlarge) In fact, we see a trend of improvement from putts outside 10-feet. There is a very hard trend on Tour that regardless of the Tour player's putting skill, the make % from outside 15-feet moves towards the mean over time. It's a very 'volatile' metric in the sense that a great putter like Luke Donald can make a lot of putts outside 15-feet one season and then struggle to make any the next season. The same goes for a weak putter like Boo Weekley. So, if a player putts well in Putts Gained but is doing it because their putting outside 15-feet is excellent, they are forecasted to see their Putts Gained get worse the following season because the 15+ foot putts should regress towards the mean. A player that struggles from outside 15+ feet one season is likely to progress from outside 15+ feet the next season. This happens an amazingly high rate of the time. We obviously do not have enough data to go on here. There were a few other players I believe use Express, but I couldn't quite verify it and their putting outside 15-feet improved as well. The other part is that we need to see if over time the player's make % from outside 15-feet gravitates towards the mean. But, so far we have some indication that AimPoint Express is helpful on those 15+ foot putts. 3JACK
|
|
|
Post by teeace on Nov 8, 2014 4:27:08 GMT -5
I wrote about this on my Twitter feed last night. I am almost done with the player-by-player analysis for 2014 Pro Golf Synopsis. The general trend I know of players that are using the Express method for quite a while on Tour is that it has had a very positive effect on their make % outside 15-feet. 3JACK So now they make 3-4 putts more per season from that distance. Only after all that practice and aim point etc. That shows perfectly how putting is overestimated factor in golf.
|
|
dhc1
'88 Apex Redlines
Posts: 178
|
Post by dhc1 on Nov 8, 2014 10:28:52 GMT -5
Rich,
Does anyone look at the distribution of metrics? Given the asymmetrical distribution of prize money, it would seem to me that there would be a strong difference between two players with the same season long stroke gained metric but one was much more volatile.
For example, if two players were average at SG putting but one was always average in every tournament and the other was either top 10% or bottom 10% in equal proportion, the latter would probably have a much higher ranking. I realize this is a unlikely scenario between the two players but perhaps the frequency in each tournament that a player ranks within the top 10-20% could be statistically significant?
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Nov 8, 2014 10:33:03 GMT -5
Not quite.
These guys are averaging roughly 8 putts per round from 15+ feet. Example....Mahan had 583 attempts in 85 rounds which equals 6.9 per round. However, these attempts are recorded by ShotLink. Mahan had 10 rounds where ShotLink was not used, so it at 583 attempts in 85 rounds which equals 7.8 attempts per round.
For rounding off purposes, I will say that the pre-AimPoint has a make % of 9% and post-AimPoint has a make % of 11%. Let's assume that the AimPoint players had 8 attempts per round and played 80 rounds of golf.
Breaking that down on a per round basis, it would mean that the post AimPoint people would make 0.88 putts from 15+ feet per round versus pre-AimPoint users at 0.72 per round. We would start to see a 0.16 difference per round in Scoring Average. That may not seem like much, but it's worth round 12-25 spots on the Money List.
Overall for the season, this player with the improved 11% make percentage would make 70 putts in the season while pre-AimPoint with the 9% make % they would make 58 putts, so it's a difference of 12 putts for the entire season.
The other factor that should be mentioned is that since we are now talking about putts longer than 15-feet, the players that were at the 9% make percentage are more likely to 3-putt those 15+ putts, so the increased make % even works out a bit more when it comes to strokes gained on the field. Although it's likely not much more...perhaps moving the Scoring Average difference to 0.18 or so.
Putting isn't overrated. It's a key part of the game because everybody has to putt. In the past, putting outside 15-feet has been greatly overrated because:
1. The best putters on Tour putted consistently the best from 3-15 feet.
2. No putter on Tour, regardless of their putting skill, could consistently putt well or poorly from 15+ feet
I am reserved in proclaiming the Express green reading method as a revolutionary way to make putts from outside 15-feet because we will need more than 1 season with Express users to get an accurate picture of what is going on. But, if it is the real deal on long putts it certainly changes things a bit. The putts from 3-15 feet are still more important in the long run.
3JACK
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Nov 8, 2014 10:46:58 GMT -5
Rich, Does anyone look at the distribution of metrics? Given the asymmetrical distribution of prize money, it would seem to me that there would be a strong difference between two players with the same season long stroke gained metric but one was much more volatile. For example, if two players were average at SG putting but one was always average in every tournament and the other was either top 10% or bottom 10% in equal proportion, the latter would probably have a much higher ranking. I realize this is a unlikely scenario between the two players but perhaps the frequency in each tournament that a player ranks within the top 10-20% could be statistically significant? You're on the right path. As I've mentioned before, 80% of a players earnings on Tour usually comes from 20% of their events. Obviously, the best method for a player would be to play well in every event where they rarely finish out of the top-25 in an event and get about half of their rounds in the top-10. But that's usually reserved for top-5 players in the world. For the rest, they are going to need to have some big events. Typically, to ensure to keep your card on Tour you will need to have 3 top-10's in regular Tour events. When it comes to winning an event the winner usually has to gain AT LEAST +0.5 strokes per round (or 2+ strokes for the 4-round event). And typically it is more like 1+ stroke gained per round (or 4+ strokes gained per event). It normally doesn't matter too much who the golfer is and how well they strike the ball, they do have to putt pretty well to win. Now, Justin Rose won this past season with +0.22 strokes gained per round, but that was at Congressional which was playing incredibly tough. Matsuyama actually *lost* strokes on the green and won, but that was extremely rare to see happen and it was at Muirfield Village which is one of the toughest ballstriking courses and he struck it brilliantly and has a good even with his Short Game. In essence, if you want to win you're going to have to putt very well in order to do so. And that is when the players' largest earnings tend to come from. The caveat is you can't hit it like a dog and putt great and expect to win or even make the cut for that matter. If you putt average, you're likely to make cuts, but your odds of winning or getting in the top-10 are diminished. That's why I think Greg Chalmers is the greatest putter in the world. He usually ranks in the top-10 in Strokes Gained. The others in the top-10 can gain 1+ stroke per round for an event in about 30% of their events. Chalmers does it in roughly 40% to 50% of his events. I wouldn't say he can rely on great putting, but he is pretty much going into every other event knowing he's going to putt great and if his ballstriking was not so weak, he would win quite a bit. 3JACK
|
|
|
Post by teeace on Nov 9, 2014 2:34:02 GMT -5
Not quite. These guys are averaging roughly 8 putts per round from 15+ feet. Example....Mahan had 583 attempts in 85 rounds which equals 6.9 per round. However, these attempts are recorded by ShotLink. Mahan had 10 rounds where ShotLink was not used, so it at 583 attempts in 85 rounds which equals 7.8 attempts per round. For rounding off purposes, I will say that the pre-AimPoint has a make % of 9% and post-AimPoint has a make % of 11%. Let's assume that the AimPoint players had 8 attempts per round and played 80 rounds of golf. Breaking that down on a per round basis, it would mean that the post AimPoint people would make 0.88 putts from 15+ feet per round versus pre-AimPoint users at 0.72 per round. We would start to see a 0.16 difference per round in Scoring Average. That may not seem like much, but it's worth round 12-25 spots on the Money List. Overall for the season, this player with the improved 11% make percentage would make 70 putts in the season while pre-AimPoint with the 9% make % they would make 58 putts, so it's a difference of 12 putts for the entire season. I am reserved in proclaiming the Express green reading method as a revolutionary way to make putts from outside 15-feet because we will need more than 1 season with Express users to get an accurate picture of what is going on. But, if it is the real deal on long putts it certainly changes things a bit. The putts from 3-15 feet are still more important in the long run. 3JACK I don't really follow your thoughts now Richie. I was talking about difference between 2013 and 2014. It's about 3-10 putts more made per season from that zone. Clear and simple math that shows it got no difference as an average. If it has helped someone to make more putts in one tournament, it's great but in stats that is even strongly inside of error margin So we are facing once more this average of average problem in stats world. IMO round red round and tournament by tournament details would be better way to see how wins are made and how top10's. The second question is then is there really something you can do for that with players
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Nov 10, 2014 9:24:40 GMT -5
My thinking is simple, I'm showing the math that it is more than 3-4 putts made per season which you originally claimed. It's a difference of about 12 putts per season.
From there, I wanted to figure out how much 12-putts per season is worth and it does have some value to it.
I also don't agree with your assessment that 'putting is an overestimated factor in golf.'
I do agree that in general, putting from over 15-feet is overestimated, but not putting in itself. But, if the Express method does legitimately improve golfers on putts from over 15-feet, then that is helpful because not only are players likely to 1-putt more often from over 15-feet, but they should 3-putt less often from over 15-feet.
With all of that said, the statistics show that putting from 3-15 feet is still critical in golf, regardless of handicap. The bombers on Tour can get away with worse putting from 3-15 feet because their expected birdie % is likely to be better than the shorter hitters. But that still doesn't account for the fact that when a bomber putts pretty good from 3-15 feet, their chances of contending increase tremendously.
There is no problem with the 'average of the average.' You seem to think that and have yet to make a good argument against it and seem to use that excuse when the math shows you're wrong.
3JACK
|
|
|
Post by teeace on Nov 10, 2014 11:59:47 GMT -5
My thinking is simple, I'm showing the math that it is more than 3-4 putts made per season which you originally claimed. It's a difference of about 12 putts per season. There is no problem with the 'average of the average.' You seem to think that and have yet to make a good argument against it and seem to use that excuse when the math shows you're wrong. 3JACK Count that Mahan again. And read what I said in my last message: It's about 3-10 putts more made per season from that zone. Clear and simple math that shows it got no difference as an average. And you never proved I was wrong. You just couldn't admit that your claim of one wedge shot per round was total mistake. There is 8-12 them per round as I proved. And they got really strong correlation to the score when you take them round per round. That's why average of average is bad, as you got all those lousy rounds included and I want to understand how player plays when he plays well. Edit: And if it's 12 putts per season, it means about 0,5 or less per tournament. Bit more than 0,1 per round. That means average of average as we all know, when they are hot they make more of them
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Nov 10, 2014 15:19:31 GMT -5
Why are you just looking at Mahan? Why are you not looking at all 8 players listed as using them as a whole? I could tell you to 'look at Adam Scott' who saw a 2.9% increase in putts made.
And you DID NOT SAY IT WAS 3-10 PUTTS MADE PER SEASON, you said it was 3 to *4* putts more made per season (http://richie3jack.proboards.com/post/43031/thread)
I rounded off to make things more clearly, but you obviously can't follow.
It's 12 **MORE** putts made per season. It's NOT '12 putts made per season'.
If you increase the make percentage as shown and you play 80 rounds per season (which is about what the average Tour player who has exempt status on Tour plays), that will come out to roughly making 70 putts from 15+ feet for the season instead of the old make % which would make 58 putts for the season.
At 58 putts made in an 80 round season, it's making 1 putt from outside 15+ feet in every 1.40 rounds of golf, or roughly 1 putt made for every 25 holes played.
At 70 putts made in an 80 round season, it's making 1 putt from outside 15+ feet in every 1.14 rounds of golf, or roughly 1 putt made for every 21 holes played
When a player gets hot with the putter, they are really making more putts from 5-15 feet and out-performing everybody else from that distance. The odds of making a putt outside 15-feet are very small and there is little in the way of deviation from player to player outside 15-feet, regardless of how well they are putting.
This leads to one of the strongest trends on Tour...that golfers, regardless of how good of a putter they are...have their make % from outside 15-feet move towards the mean. Which is why we still need a lot more data on AimPoint Express users...we need to see if over time their make % from outside 15 moves towards the mean as it almost always does over time with everybody else.
From 3-5 feet the hot putters are putting very well, but they are not going to gain as much strokes because the average make % from 3-5 feet is 87% on Tour. So the field as a whole is making nearly 9 of 10 putts from that distance. But from 5-10 feet the average make % is 55.6% (5-6 out of 10) and from 10-15 feet is it 30% (3 out of 10).
From 5-15 feet as a whole, the make % is 45% and the average Tour player is average over 6 attempts per round from 5-15 feet.
So, if you play a 4-round event that is 24+ attempts from 5-15 feet. And if a player makes 70% of their putts which is great putting from that distance, they can gain roughly 6 strokes on the field from that distance.
Conversely, the average attempted per round from 15+ feet is 7.5 per round. In a 4-round event that is 30+ attempts. The Tour average make % was 9.9%. If a player got 'hot' that would be making putts at about 15% make percentage from 15+ feet. And that equates to only about 2 strokes gained versus the field from that distance range.
Essentially, even a 'hot putter' doesn't make many putts from outside 15-feet and it has some impact on their game so it can't be diminished as to how much it helps them. But, what separates the good putters from the bad is from 3-15 feet.
And in general, it is usually separated by how well they putt on birdie putts from 3-15 feet than it is on par or worse putts because the make % for birdie putts from that distance is much lower than the make % on par or worse putts from that distance.
There is nothing wrong with looking at the average of a Tour player when you're trying to understand the game as a whole. You need the average to serve as a baseline to determine what is good (better than the average) versus what is not so good (worse than the average). And what the purpose of this thread was to show when all was said and done, the Express users each made a higher rate of putts from 15+ feet. If you wanted to know what the greatest putters in the world were doing (i.e. Chalmers, Baddeley, Summerhays, etc.), then we would need to analyze what the best players in the world were doing and not what the AimPoint Express users were doing. That's why your 'average of the average' argument is completely nonsensical in this thread.
3JACK
|
|
|
Post by teeace on Nov 11, 2014 3:08:42 GMT -5
Why are you just looking at Mahan? Why are you not looking at all 8 players listed as using them as a whole? I could tell you to 'look at Adam Scott' who saw a 2.9% increase in putts made. Because you talked about Mahan
And you DID NOT SAY IT WAS 3-10 PUTTS MADE PER SEASON, you said it was 3 to *4* putts more made per season (http://richie3jack.proboards.com/post/43031/thread) Really?? /quote]I don't really follow your thoughts now Richie. I was talking about difference between 2013 and 2014. It's about 3-10 putts more made per season from that zone. Clear and simple math that shows it got no difference as an average.
[/font] I rounded off to make things more clearly, but you obviously can't follow. It's 12 **MORE** putts made per season. It's NOT '12 putts made per season'. [/quote] And I really thought 3-10 putts MORE per season. And if it's 12 more and they play 24 tournaments, it's 0,5 per tournament that means about 0,1 more per round. So that means as an average it can't make any difference. How can you say it would if that is divided equally to every round? No way Richie and that's just the average of average problem in stats and that's what I understood about stats and this game at middle of 90's. At the time when I made my own stats data because there was no one useful and I haven't found since. That's why I stopped collecting data at all as I really understood it doesn't help at all when done by that. And this is not against stats, but about how we read those and make assumptions. It have to be observed round by round and tournament by tournament. Then by 10% best rounds and 10% worst. Maybe quartiles sometimes, but that is only way to see what went well and what didn't on course. That pops out even in missing left / right stats. Average only makes them more equal and hides the truth that in some courses your misses can be 80% left and sometimes at right. To really understand this game and player, you have to go out there with this guy and see why in some situations something breaks that average. If you want to do it really well, you do it hole by hole and think why something happens at that situation... also day by day etc. So I'm interested to see those who are at top10 at one tournament or even at one round. I'm also interested to see players I work with when they make their best rounds (against field) and when not. Unfortunately it's clear in 95% of cases even without any written word or number. And I can tell you that is it if you really want to start understand this game as a whole
|
|
|
Post by teeace on Nov 11, 2014 3:16:03 GMT -5
So, if you play a 4-round event that is 24+ attempts from 5-15 feet. And if a player makes 70% of their putts which is great putting from that distance, they can gain roughly 6 strokes on the field from that distance. 3JACK That's it Richie, that's it.... and one week another guy gains it, another week someone else. Sometimes they make all like Bubba in play off last sunday, sometimes nothing drops. Same player, same technique, opposite results... Golf. If I'm at tournament coaching or caddying player, I have to be able to handle both those days and everything between those also.
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Nov 11, 2014 9:18:46 GMT -5
There is no 'average of the average' problem because that wasn't the point of this thread. The point was looking at the *known* AimPoint Express users and how they performed on putts from outside 15-feet. If you wanted to know what the best putters from outside 15-feet perform, then you need to start a thread asking that question.
Instead, *YOU* claimed that a 1.6% increase in putts made will only mean 3-4 more putts made per season. I showed where you were wrong and now you're changing it to 3-10 putts which is still incorrect.
When analyzing a part of a Tour player's game, it is critical to understand the averages because their success over the course of a season is dependent upon that. You're going to get rounds where players drive it extremely well or putt it really well or hit their irons extremely well and rounds where they do those poorly. But, they rarely do everything very well or doing everything very poorly. If they shoot a low score, they may drive it decent and putt it decent, but get very hot with the irons. Or they may strike it poorly, but get up-and-down well and get hot with the putter. Or they may drive it brilliantly and putt it great and be decent with the irons.
Most of the time what you will see is that their performance at an event is dependent upon how well they play from certain areas that the course really stresses and they generally have to be at +0.5 Putts Gained or better per round (2 putts gained or more for the entire event)
For instance, Ben Martin, Kevin Streelman and Russell Knox performed decent in most of the key metrics as they finished 1st, 2nd and 3rd at TPC Summerlin. Martin gained +1.653 putts per round, Streelman gained +1.173 per round and Knox gained +0.991.
But the other part to that is where these guys performed the best was from 150-175 yards. Each of them where in the top-4 for the field in that event. That's the distance range that at TPC Summerlin, separates the contenders from the pretenders.
The averages give us a better indication of how the player performs by *their* standards. Boo Weekley having a bad driving tournament is likely to be better than Mike Weir having a great driving tournament. Weekley is galaxies better off the tee than Weir. And we can use the averages anyway because we can figure out what the range of a player's performance is with standard deviation, but we need the average to give us that range of performance.
If I were advising Boo Weekley, I wouldn't worry about his driving that much, if at all. We know how well he drives it and how effective he is off the tee. He could have a bad tournament driving the ball, but the odds of it killing him on a course are very low because his average performance off the tee is usually elite. Instead, I would worry more about his putting because he's generally not a good putter. I would also look at shots from less than 175 yards (he's decent from under 175-yards) if the course he's playing really stresses those shots. Sure, he could get hot from under 175 yards, but in all likelihood he's going to be a little better than average and if he's on a course where more strokes are gained and lost from performance from 125-175 yards, being decent from that distance is not likely going to be enough to put him in contention.
That's why I am interested in the AimPoint Express data. If it legitimately increases make % for it's golfers on an average of 2%, it raises their standard of putting from outside 15+ feet which means they are making more putts from that distance and even if it is 12 strokes over the course of a season, that can be the difference between winning and not winning, keeping your Tour card and going back to the Web.com Tour and qualifying for East Lake and not qualifying for East Lake.
3JACK
|
|
|
Post by teeace on Nov 11, 2014 10:36:37 GMT -5
There is no 'average of the average' problem because that wasn't the point of this thread. The point was looking at the *known* AimPoint Express users and how they performed on putts from outside 15-feet. If you wanted to know what the best putters from outside 15-feet perform, then you need to start a thread asking that question. Instead, *YOU* claimed that a 1.6% increase in putts made will only mean 3-4 more putts made per season. I showed where you were wrong and now you're changing it to 3-10 putts which is still incorrect. 3JACK I corrected that already to about 10 putts and it still makes bit more than 0,1 per round and that's exactly average of average problem. Even if it would be 20, it's still about 0,1-0,2 per round. That's why I as a coach am not interested about that, I have to go much deeper. So those averages are not proving anyone getting better with given amount, or at least making more money on list. That's clearly inside of margin and we didn't see all the list if there is some users that got minus values when using it, which would make the average closer to zero. I believe it would be much more interesting to see best quarter of rounds or best 10% of rounds and compare those stats year by year or compare one tournament to really understand how much putts they made from that distance and what was the affect to their score.
|
|
|
Post by teeace on Nov 11, 2014 11:19:50 GMT -5
When analyzing a part of a Tour player's game, it is critical to understand the averages because their success over the course of a season is dependent upon that. You're going to get rounds where players drive it extremely well or putt it really well or hit their irons extremely well and rounds where they do those poorly. But, they rarely do everything very well or doing everything very poorly. If they shoot a low score, they may drive it decent and putt it decent, but get very hot with the irons. Or they may strike it poorly, but get up-and-down well and get hot with the putter. Or they may drive it brilliantly and putt it great and be decent with the irons. 3JACK I see also paradox here according what we know that players make most of their money (80%) in 20% of tournaments. That should be good enough to prove us we have to look something else than average
|
|
|
Post by Richie3Jack on Nov 11, 2014 15:37:27 GMT -5
When analyzing a part of a Tour player's game, it is critical to understand the averages because their success over the course of a season is dependent upon that. You're going to get rounds where players drive it extremely well or putt it really well or hit their irons extremely well and rounds where they do those poorly. But, they rarely do everything very well or doing everything very poorly. If they shoot a low score, they may drive it decent and putt it decent, but get very hot with the irons. Or they may strike it poorly, but get up-and-down well and get hot with the putter. Or they may drive it brilliantly and putt it great and be decent with the irons. 3JACK I see also paradox here according what we know that players make most of their money (80%) in 20% of tournaments. That should be good enough to prove us we have to look something else than average The goal should be to increase the earnings per event, not to try and count on those 5-6 events of the year to do their best. And there is more than 1 way to win or place well in an event. Some players can putt out of their mind on to winning an event. Others can hit the irons great. Some can drive it great. It depends on the course and if you're trying to look solely at the best rounds, you're not getting a complete and accurate picture of what is going on unless you start looking at the averages. Let's take Justin Rose for example. He played 18 official PGA Tour events for the season, making $3,626,768. 20% of his events accounted for only 62% of his earnings. His top events were Quicken Loans, The PLAYERS, East Lake and Firestone (he made a combined $2.26 million on those events). Having 20% of your events only accounting for 62% of your earnings is normally a *good* thing. It usually equates to the player consistently playing well and earning a lot of money per event. In Rose's case, he earned over $200K per event which is outstanding. He won the Quicken Loans, but that was his 3rd best putting event of the season. He had a t-4th at Sawgrass, and that was his best putting event of the season. But after that, East Lake was his 6th best putting event and Firestone was his 8th best putting event. Conversely, he only had 4 events where he did not finish in the top-25. One of them was at Doral which was the 2nd best event he had all season with the putter. There is no 1:1 relationship on Tour to winning. Due to that, the real goal for players should be to up their average performance. If they can continue to perform well in each event they are going to put themselves in contention more often and sooner or later the law of averages should work in their favor to win the event. By and large, Tour players will only get on a hot streak for about 3 weeks in a row (once in a blue moon, they'll get hot for 4 weeks in a row). Eventually, they'll regress, then progress, then get hot again, then fall back. The players like Rose whose 'lows' still translate to making cuts and their decent play means an automatic top-25 finish and a pretty good start means getting into contention are the players that have far more long-standing success on Tour than the player that is either a hit-or-miss like a Scott Stallings. 3JACK
|
|