O.T. Math Question Re: Better Ball Tactics

[Ross Tuddenham]

In dave peltz short game bible he put together some putting stats for the probability of holing different length putts.  I think the data is based on pro's, so for us normal folk we can assume the probabilities are lower.

percentage of putts holed from 25 foot is 5%, and from 20 foot around 8%.  There is no mention of how these odds are improved if you see the line beforehand.  If seeing the putt was the equivalent to moving 5 feet closer, so player B now faces a 15 foot putt (or at least equivalent) the chances of holing it are 15%.

And in your scenario you are currently 1 up on 18, and playing partner has guaranteed a par. With no mention of player two's partner, I assume they are out of the hole.


So the scenario that looses you the match is player B holing and you missing, where picking up is the same as missing.

If you pick up the chances of loosing the hole are 0.08, his probability of holing an unassisted 20 footer.

The other scenario is you taking the putt but missing (0.95), and player B holing an assisted putt from 20 foot (0.15).  The probability of this happening is 0.1425. (0.95x0.15)

This of course depends on what the actually probability is for holing an assisted putt from 20 foot. If it is as much as the number quoted above (0.15) then you should pick up as 0.08<0.1425. (you want to minimise chance of loss)

But in general you should only pick up if the probability of holing the assisted putt is deemed to be greater than 0.08421 (for these distances).  


Now try working that out standing on 18th while one up.

Regardless of the statistical data I can`t fathom picking up a putt that gives me a chance to win outright.

Very true, not sure how much fun we would have if things like holing a winning putt were reduced to hard facts.  What next architecture by statistics?

[Mark Pearce]

If you pick up and he holes it, you're going to spend a long time wondering what if.....

[Tim Martin]

If you pick up and he holes it, you're going to spend a long time wondering what if.....

Thanks Mark. Who is out there on 16 green running the percentages the way they are being discussed in this thread? Take a crack at closing the door right then and there. We are talking about a 20 footer.

[JLahrman]

Thanks Mark. Who is out there on 16 green running the percentages the way they are being discussed in this thread? Take a crack at closing the door right then and there. We are talking about a 20 footer.

Hobody would run the percentages, but it's still a fun exercise.  It all would depend upon being able to accurately set the percentages - which can vary wildly by skill level of the player, length of putt, and the difficulty of the putt.  It would be worthless to do this in the real world.

Not to mention, you're probably not changing the percentages that much by letting the other guy see the line.  So it's a lot of analysis for naught.

[Carl Nichols]

This is not unlike the decision of whether to give one opponent's longer putt for par if it's on the same line as his partner's shorter putt for birdie -- you have to weigh whether you'd rather give him a free run at the birdie putt (because his partner has been given the par) or let him see the line.  Ultimately so much depends on the situation -- who's the better putter, how hard the putts are, where the match stands, etc. -- that sometimes you do it and sometimes you don't.

[Ronald Montesano]

A) Agree with Sean and Jud and disagree with Mark and Greg...you're in it to win it, and whatever within the rules allows you to do that, you do it. How is this different from a guy shooting a free throw, down by two, so he bricks it to give his mates a shot at the rebound and the tie?

B) The math of this is totally irrelevant. If you are a great putter and feel you can close the suckers out, make the putt! The fact that you had any doubt shows that you shouldn't have putted it.

C)  The math of this is totally irrelevant, parte dos...you are going to improve opponent's chances of making by showing him the line.

D)  The "douche" comment didn't phase me, as I might have made it during my younger years (e.g., two weeks ago.)

E)  To ramble, you are competing. Competition is not about "good form" and "proper chap" b.s. How does it differ from a guy who gives three-feet putts all day long, then asks the guy to make one or two, late in the round?

[Greg Chambers]

A) Agree with Sean and Jud and disagree with Mark and Greg...you're in it to win it, and whatever within the rules allows you to do that, you do it. How is this different from a guy shooting a free throw, down by two, so he bricks it to give his mates a shot at the rebound and the tie?

You're in it to win it, so you try to make the putt to close out the match.  You don't pick your ball up and hope the other guy misses.  If you pick up, and he makes anyway, now he has the momentum and the mental edge and he's going to beat you.  If you miss and he makes, at least you tried to win the match, and you still have the mental fortitude to try to close him out on one of the last two holes.

[Ronald Montesano]

Two points of view that are equally viable.

[Ken Moum]

Sadly, the rules no longer allow me to lay him a stymie....

If it were me, I'd probably try to make the putt by running it into the hole with some pace, adding confusion to my opponent's read on his attempt.

K

[Jim_Coleman]

    To all you "douche" and "coward" callers, would you feel the same if player A picked up his 50 ft. putt to keep player B from seeing the line on his 15 footer.  Seems like a good (or least defensible) tactic to me.  And haven't all of you given player B's partner his 25 ft. par putt so as not to show player B the line on his 15 ft. birdie putt?  This is a standard better ball tactic.  These decisions are all based on quick, rough assessments of the perceived odds.  It's all part of better ball tactics - not a test of one's manhood.

[jeffwarne]

    To all you "douche" and "coward" callers, would you feel the same if player A picked up his 50 ft. putt to keep player B from seeing the line on his 15 footer.  Seems like a good (or least defensible) tactic to me.  And haven't all of you given player B's partner his 25 ft. par putt so as not to show player B the line on his 15 ft. birdie putt?  This is a standard better ball tactic.  These decisions are all based on quick, rough assessments of the perceived odds.  It's all part of better ball tactics - not a test of one's manhood.

Definitely not a test of manhood-my daughter would've putted it
I personally would never pick up a putt that would give me a win if I made it.
I'm not sure I buy the odds thing either.
If you pick up, you've eliminated your chance (one in whatever)certainly that's at least equal to what you gain by not giving him the line.
yes his odds go down, but yours are eliminated.
The only equivalent i can see is punting on 3rd and one in your opponent's territory.
To each his own

[Jim_Coleman]

   It's not a question of "buying the odds thing."  Odds are math; they are objective.  In blackjack, you don't hit 17 when the dealer is showing an ace.  It's objectively a bad decision.

[JLahrman]

The only angle that would really make picking up worth considering is if you think you are really changing your opponent's odds of making the putt.  If you've got a 1 in 25 chance, but if he sees the line you think his chances go from 1 in 20 to 1 in 5, then picking up could be worth it.

But I just don't think you're improving your opponent's odds by that much.

[jeffwarne]

  It's not a question of "buying the odds thing."  Odds are math; they are objective.  In blackjack, you don't hit 17 when the dealer is showing an ace.  It's objectively a bad decision.

In blackjack, you have no control over what card you, or your opponents are dealt, you only have odds.
In golf you have to believe your skill will allow you to rise above the "odds" and perform/succeed on a given putt.
I couldn't fathom not putting and giving an opponent a free shot at beating me-in fact I'm assuming he's going to have to make it to tie me.

[JESII]

I never make a putt when I just saw the line from another putt so that should answer my view on this...you gotta putt it.

By the way, ever hear of a Dudas?

Roll your 25 footer about 4 or 5 feet by so he relaxes a little thinking you might miss then you make yours...

[Jim_Coleman]

   If you really believe that seeing the line is of no (or little) help, then of course you should putt.  I think you're kidding yourself.  Apparently, so does Nick Faldo and pretty much every analyst.  I suspect a telecast doesn't go by when the line, "he got a good read of that putt" isn't uttered.

[Jud_T]

  It's not a question of "buying the odds thing."  Odds are math; they are objective.  In blackjack, you don't hit 17 when the dealer is showing an ace.  It's objectively a bad decision.

In blackjack, you have no control over what card you, or your opponents are dealt, you only have odds.
In golf you have to believe your skill will allow you to rise above the "odds" and perform/succeed on a given putt.

Jeff,

I'll gladly give you 30 different 25 footers at $100 each and wager that you won't "rise above the odds"... That's why they're called odds dude, it's probability 101.  I suppose you believe in batting slumps, betting on underdogs and the tooth fairy as well...

[jeffwarne]

  It's not a question of "buying the odds thing."  Odds are math; they are objective.  In blackjack, you don't hit 17 when the dealer is showing an ace.  It's objectively a bad decision.

In blackjack, you have no control over what card you, or your opponents are dealt, you only have odds.
In golf you have to believe your skill will allow you to rise above the "odds" and perform/succeed on a given putt.

Jeff,

I'll gladly give you 30 different 25 footers at $100 each and wager that you won't "rise above the odds"... That's why they're called odds dude, it's probability 101.  I suppose you believe in batting slumps, betting on underdogs and the tooth fairy as well...

Jud,
You're only giving me 50-50 odds on each putt.
That's completely different.
Give me the putt at 25:1(the odds that were estimated) and you're on.
or give me 25 putts to make it once (from 25 different angles or on different greens)and you're giving me the same odds.

Some people want the ball at the end of the game -others don't.
I'm OK with that.
Giving up one's own chance to win (or tie) seems ridiculous to me, and certainly needs to be calculated into the odds (even if it decreases your opponents chances of making)
His opponent's odds were estimated at 15:1 and he made his so didn't he "defy" the odds

You don't think Tiger defied the odds for 12 years?
Aren't there certain partners you want in money games because they're always there at the end?(i.e have historically defied the odds on the last hole on a given putt)
and certain partners you don't want.....(I'm talking about a money game where #18 with 7 presses is way more importantthan say 15 or 16)

What are the correct "odds" to actually take a putt at winning a "Club Championship" match.
It's a game-it's not like he was risking his family or house.
I do understand he was simply choosing the strategy he thought best to win(or not lose),but once the thought entered his mind......

[Brent Hutto]

I think Jeff and others have narrowed in on the crux of the issue. It's a "strategy" that is passive/defensive to be charitable (and it's chickenshit to be blunt). When I first read the original question I thought the longer putt was meaningless, for double-bogey or some such. In that case it's clearly good tactics not to go ahead and roll it along the opponents line. But giving up a 25-foot chance to seal the win in the hope that your opponent misses a shorter putt to hand it to you through the back door betrays a very fearful approach to competition and to putting.

[Jud_T]

jeff,

I'll give you slightly worse than your true odds.  Tiger didn't defy the odds, he simply had better odds than others.  One doesn't "defy" odds over the long run.  One expects to make the occasional 50 foot putt and miss the occasional 2-footer.  And who knows what the true odds are for each player in this situation without sufficient data.  But I'd rather be smart and stare at the trophy on my mantle than be considered a real gamer who was robbed in the club championship.  

[Jim_Coleman]

   I find the manhood challengers quite odd.  If you accept the premise the the odds of winning are improved by picking the ball up (an objective fact), then they are saying they would rather man-up the win.  And please don't say that you don't accept the premise.  That's the whole point of the discussion.

[Ulrich Mayring]

You should never pick up, if you want to maximise your chances of winning the match. You should putt it a couple of feet inside your opponent's ball and then pick up. Due to your putt slowing down, it will take a lot of break in the area, where your opponent's putt will start. At worst there is no effect, but at best your opponent will see that break and factor too much into his own line. He also may be annoyed mentally by your gamesmanship tactics. You may have to drink your beer alone, but mathematically I believe this is the way to go if you're dormie. Try to deceive him.

Ulrich

[jeffwarne]

  I find the manhood challengers quite odd.  If you accept the premise the the odds of winning are improved by picking the ball up (an objective fact), then they are saying they would rather man-up the win.  And please don't say that you don't accept the premise.  That's the whole point of the discussion.

Respectfully,
I don't accept the premise.
You're calculating his odds as increasing if you putt and miss and show him the line(I'll buy that)
I'm calculating your odds decrease by not putting (from one in 20 to none in twenty).
What you're not calculating is what happens if you putt and make?
You're conceding that you'll not make it (certainly at least mentally)
You're also assuming the math says you won't make.


On an unrelated/related note, I often offer good/good when I'm 8 feet(on a putt I feel good about) and my opponent is 4 feet.
They look at me and say no way.
The psycological effects are devastating when I make and they then have to make(or worse yet miss).
The rest of the day I get a lot of good/good offers.

[Bill_McBride]

You should never pick up, if you want to maximise your chances of winning the match. You should putt it a couple of feet inside your opponent's ball and then pick up. Due to your putt slowing down, it will take a lot of break in the area, where your opponent's putt will start. At worst there is no effect, but at best your opponent will see that break and factor too much into his own line. He also may be annoyed mentally by your gamesmanship tactics. You may have to drink your beer alone, but mathematically I believe this is the way to go if you're dormie. Try to deceive him.

Ulrich

You could also jingle a lot of coins and try to stand in his line while he's putting!

[Brent Hutto]

It's not about manhood, it's about confidence in your own game. I've met real manly men who could kick my ass in a fair fight but who still look around hopefully for someone to concede their 3-1/2 foot comebackers for par.

I also do not accept the ever-evolving "premise". What is in play here is not some Dave Pelz version of the Platonic ideal of probability. That junk may be true enough as a statement about large groups of elite golfers but has nothing to do with you deciding whether to putt or concede or whatever...

What does matter is your idea of how likely you are to make your putt and your idea of how likely the opponent is to miss. Nothing to do with Dave Pelz's reality. And in that situation anyone who picks up is either:

a) rating their own putting ability very low
b) rating their opponent's ability to putt with knowledge of the line very high
c) scared spitless over three-putting
d) truly so in over their head with that opponent that they would never be 1-up to start with

If I see someone pick up in that situation, my interpretation is that they are looking for any excuse not to have their own putting affect the outcome. And I'm certainly not going to endorse the idea that they are some sort of frickin' strategic genius who is just smarter than the rest of us. I know chickenshit when I see it.

P.S. That last bit in italics is my best attempt at a Dave Schmidt imitation. How'd I do, Shiv?