[Tommy Williamsen]

It isn't always about statistics. I am a better chipper than putter from outside 20 feet. When I feel I can make a chip I pull the flag. It gives me confidence. I make more when I take it out than leave it in, not because of anything else but that I seem to have more confidence that way.

[A.G._Crockett]

Erik, you verified my memory inside the same post you were challenging me on...maybe I should have used "comments" instead of "research"...




Now, how can you state Tour players are not great putters? I'm reading Broadie's book now and he claims it but it seems an empty claim. Are you relying on him? Or some other resource?

Jim,

Not to speak for Erik, but I'll restate what he said.  Tour pros are "great" putters primarily in that they are great at "three putt avoidance"; they do NOT make lots of long putts.  The idea that Tour pros are routinely making lots of 20' putts compared to amateurs is simply incorrect.  They have great distance control on first putts, and are absolutely rock solid on putts inside 4'.  It states the obvious to say that there are NO bad putters on Tour; the worst guy out there is a very good putter by any measure. 
But they aren't on Tour because of the way they putt.  There are guys at your club who putt as well as an average Tour pro; there probably aren't any guys at you club who hit the ball like a Tour pro.


I'm not sure how you could view Broadie's analysis of Tour putting as an "empty claim"; he doesn't "claim" anything.  He provides a mountain of data about Tour putting stats, the data speaks for itself.  For instance, to get to a distance where Tour pros are making even 50% of their putts, you have to be at 9'; that's three paces, and that's on perfect greens for guys who practice all the time!  That's not a claim; just data, and VERY contrary to the assumptions that most of us used to make about what was happening on Tour before Shotlink.


The corollary to that is that YOU are probably a better putter, at least relative to the average Tour pro, than you are in any other part of your game.  This isn't true for EVERY amateur, of course, but unless you have the yips or consistently three putt multiple times in a round, putting probably even close to the biggest separator between you and better players, even if you think it is.

That's all just macro stats; no claims. 

[JESII]

AG,


I'm not really prepared to debate it yet because I'm only about half way through the book and want to go back to the putting chapters and really get me hands around it...but for now, I'll agree that his stats are comprehensive. His interpretation of them to make his case that putting is the least important part (of four parts; Driving, Approach, Wedge/Chip and Putting) of the game is questionable.


Again, I'll happily discuss but I want to get my ammunition a little more organized first.


FWIW, I just reached the chart that shows the top 40 players from 2004 - 2012 in total strokes gained and I was very impressed to see how many shorter, control type wedge and putt guys there were. Furyk, Zach Johnson, Snedeker etc... I would have expected, based on what little I know about his analysis, it to be dominated by the bomb and gauge guys. Seemed on an eye ball test that 30% - 40% would be in the Wedge/Putter box.




A question; does it seem like a stretch for him to use 90 shooters as his Amateur example against Tour Pro stats? It does to me. 90 shooters want to shoot 80...80 shooters want to shoot 75...75 shooters want to get to scratch and scratch guys want to know how they stack up against the guys on TV.


In my experience, the scratch guy that wants to find 5 or 6 shots to entertain playing for a living will find 90% of that inside 120 yards...

[A.G._Crockett]

AG,


I'm not really prepared to debate it yet because I'm only about half way through the book and want to go back to the putting chapters and really get me hands around it...but for now, I'll agree that his stats are comprehensive. His interpretation of them to make his case that putting is the least important part (of four parts; Driving, Approach, Wedge/Chip and Putting) of the game is questionable.


Again, I'll happily discuss but I want to get my ammunition a little more organized first.


FWIW, I just reached the chart that shows the top 40 players from 2004 - 2012 in total strokes gained and I was very impressed to see how many shorter, control type wedge and putt guys there were. Furyk, Zach Johnson, Snedeker etc... I would have expected, based on what little I know about his analysis, it to be dominated by the bomb and gauge guys. Seemed on an eye ball test that 30% - 40% would be in the Wedge/Putter box.




A question; does it seem like a stretch for him to use 90 shooters as his Amateur example against Tour Pro stats? It does to me. 90 shooters want to shoot 80...80 shooters want to shoot 75...75 shooters want to get to scratch and scratch guys want to know how they stack up against the guys on TV.


In my experience, the scratch guy that wants to find 5 or 6 shots to entertain playing for a living will find 90% of that inside 120 yards...

Jim,

You see Broadie as "interpreting" the data; I just see him explaining it.  The data is what it is.

As to the bogey golfer "against" the Tour pro, I assume you're talking about the chart on page 120 of the hardcover.  I don't think the correct takeaway from that chart is that Broadie is using one "against" the other, and by then he has already pointed out multiple times in the book that the same things are statistically true across ALL levels of golf.  "Bogey golf" is a convenient shorthand for that chart, but if the chart was much bigger and included 5's, 10's, 15's, 20's, and 30's, the tendencies would be the same.

And if you go over two pages, you find the MACRO answer to your scratch golfer who wants to "find 5 or 6 shots".  ON AVERAGE, a scratch golfer, to gain 5 shots, would have to find 1.4 shots from driving, 1.95 shots from approach shots, .95 shots from short game shots, and .65 shots from putting.  The message here is that a scratch golfer has to make incremental improvements throughout their game, but the two biggest separators between the "average" scratch golfer and an "average" Tour pro are approach shots and tee shots, in that order; hit it farther and hit it closer.  And those happen to be the biggest separators between the scratch and the 5, the 5 and the 10, and so on.


The scratch golfers that you've played with may be different than the ones I've seen; I feel fortunate in having gotten to play golf with some really good players over the years.  The scratch golfers that I've seen are already really good close to the green; they manage their misses, they get up and down, and they do NOT three putt.  I have yet to see a true scratch golfer who could realistically expect to pick up 5 or 6 shots a round from their short game.

We're now VERY far afield from the question of leaving the stick in when putting, and my affinity for Broadie's work (and Erik's book, and The Practice Manual, for that matter) are well known here, so I won't threadjack any further. 

[Erik J. Barzeski]

What would happen to golf course architecture if the best players in the world learned to putt?

You're asking the wrong question. Putting is a pretty easy skill, relatively speaking. Hogan said it was like a different game entirely. There's not much separation between PGA Tour players and other golfers.

Now, how can you state Tour players are not great putters? I'm reading Broadie's book now and he claims it but it seems an empty claim. Are you relying on him? Or some other resource?

Any comments I've made about them being great putters is relative to other golfers of other skill levels; they're not as great as a lot of people think relative to those other golfers. They aren't. And my opinion comes from knowing the stats, and pre-dates Mark Broadie's book, but his book backed up what I'd felt. Look, they make 50% or so from 8'.

Putting is very random. The combination of speed and line to a hole that's still pretty darn small is pretty small. Amateurs are better putters than a lot of people think, and Tour pros are not anywhere near as far ahead on average as most people think. I can roll balls from a Perfect Putter on a 20-foot puttt and make less than 30-40% of them just because of the little bumps on the green being hit ever so slightly differently roll to roll. And that's with a near-perfect line and near-perfect speed.

BTW...I'm still trying to get my hands around "Bullets don't bend"...but I laugh each time I try...

Watch "Wanted" with Angelina Jolie.

It isn't always about statistics. I am a better chipper than putter from outside 20 feet. When I feel I can make a chip I pull the flag. It gives me confidence. I make more when I take it out than leave it in, not because of anything else but that I seem to have more confidence that way.

Develop confidence in knowing that the flagstick gives you a better chance.

AG, yeah, your post sums it up pretty well.

His interpretation of them to make his case that putting is the least important part (of four parts; Driving, Approach, Wedge/Chip and Putting) of the game is questionable.

To use a term we own, putting has the lowest "Separation Value" of the other skills.

https://thesandtrap.com/blogs/entry/257-switcheroo/

Imagine a game in which you pair two average PGA Tour players with two average 80s golfers.

- Team A: the pro hits every shot that requires a Full Swing Motion (roughly every shot from 65+ yards), and the 80s golfer will play every short game shot and hit every putt.
- Team B: the 80s golfer hits every Full Swing Motion shot, and the pro plays every short game shot and hits every putt.

On a typical 7000-yard golf course, what might you expect these teams to score? Which team would win?

In my experience, the scratch guy that wants to find 5 or 6 shots to entertain playing for a living will find 90% of that inside 120 yards...

That's where you're most wrong.

He's already almost as good as a Tour player on the putting green, he's not too shabby around the greens, and PGA Tour players aren't stuffing every wedge from 60 or 90 yards to six feet. They average 2.75 strokes from 80 yards in the fairway. Not much less than a scratch golfer.

[John Kavanaugh]

Erik,


It seems to me that you are trying to put a premium on the value of your ability to teach golfers how to hit the ball. Have you had any success in teaching a golfer how to be a tour player? Where is the leap between a great athletic swing and a tour swing if everyone already can putt?

[Kalen Braley]

I would submit that just like the worlds longest drivers can eviscerate most guys on Tour....if they had an equivalent contest for putting it would be a similar result.


Specialists are almost always going to be much better than all-around generalists who do everything well.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

It seems to me that you are trying to put a premium on the value of your ability to teach golfers how to hit the ball. Have you had any success in teaching a golfer how to be a tour player? Where is the leap between a great athletic swing and a tour swing if everyone already can putt?

As AG said we're getting pretty far away from the topic (leaving the flagstick in), so I'm getting off this train. I wrote a book, as did Mark Broadie. You're welcome to buy either or both.

[John Kavanaugh]

Yea but it's my contention that your agenda pushing that tour players are no better putters than us is bad for architecture. It would lead one to believe that the only way to defend par is to make courses longer and longer. We are just getting to a point where interest is focused at the green. I don't think that fits your agenda.

[A.G._Crockett]

Yea but it's my contention that your agenda pushing that tour players are no better putters than us is bad for architecture. It would lead one to believe that the only way to defend par is to make courses longer and longer. We are just getting to a point where interest is focused at the green. I don't think that fits your agenda.

John, I agree with this post 100%, except for the following:

1. That anybody, ever, has said that a tour player is "no better" as a putter than you are.
2. That statistics about anything constitute an "agenda".
3. That how well anybody at any level of does or does not putt has anything to do with GCA.
4. That ANY of this has anything to do with whether or not to leave the stick in when putting.

But other than that, you're spot on here.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

John, I agree with this post 100%, except for the following:

1. That anybody, ever, has said that a tour player is "no better" as a putter than you are.
2. That statistics about anything constitute an "agenda".
3. That how well anybody at any level of does or does not putt has anything to do with GCA.
4. That ANY of this has anything to do with whether or not to leave the stick in when putting.

But other than that, you're spot on here.

Thank you.

Happy to talk about this in an off topic thread or something, if those are allowed, but it's VERY off topic regarding putting with the flagstick in.

[JESII]

Tour pros aren't awesome putters, John. They're just not.

Erik, this from you, earlier today.


Any interest in clarifying?

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Any interest in clarifying?

I clarified when I said this:

Any comments I've made about them being great putters is relative to other golfers of other skill levels; they're not as great as a lot of people think relative to those other golfers.

[JESII]

Ok...and what do you base that statement on? Broadie’s stats?

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Ok...and what do you base that statement on? Broadie’s stats?

Asked and answered, and still off topic.

[JESII]

Topics evolve

[A.G._Crockett]

Tour pros aren't awesome putters, John. They're just not.

Erik, this from you, earlier today.


Any interest in clarifying?

Jim,


There are guys at every club in America that putt as well as average Tour pros, or within a very small margin.


There are NOT guys at every club in America that hit the ball like an average Tour pro.  Not as long, not as straight, not as consistently.


The difference between the best guys at your club and an average Tour pro is highly unlikely to be putting.  It is almost certain to be ball striking, especially proximity of approach.


I know that isn't satisfying to you because you won't leave it alone, but it's reality.

But I digress; are you going to leave the flag in or not?  If not, why not?   

[JESII]

AG - I understand that these stats are gospel to you, and Erik...and I may come to buy his interpretation of them...but you do t have to continue quoting them.


For example, my experience is the opposite of yours with respect to the best club players strengths and differences versus the Tour guys.


Therefore weeding through the book to see what makes sense, and discussing it with you is helpful.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

For example, my experience is the opposite of yours with respect to the best club players strengths and differences versus the Tour guys.

Statements like that don't make any sense. Certainly not in the face of thousands of rounds of data that says otherwise.

I too digress and will re-ask the question; are you going to leave the flag in or not? From what distances, in general, does your answer change? Why or why not?

[JESII]

I play about half my golf in gangsomes with ready golf so if I’m putting first it can stay in if nobody is near it.


Otherwise, and in tournaments, out if I’m thinking about making it.


If I have a putt that absolutely cannot stop near the hole, such as off a steep top tier, I’d leave it in.


The visual of a good putt nicking the pin and staying out is devastating...and would take years to balance out.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

The visual of a good putt nicking the pin and staying out is devastating...and would take years to balance out.

Maybe mentally, but it would not take years to balance out mathematically against a bad putt that goes in or stays much closer than it would have.

[JESII]

Yes it would because I only fly it over the center of the hole 0.25 times per year...if the pin were in I would save a shot once every four years.

[Erik J. Barzeski]

Yes it would because I only fly it over the center of the hole 0.25 times per year...if the pin were in I would save a shot once every four years.

Uh huh.

[JESII]

How often do you?

[Erik J. Barzeski]

How often do you?

My point is that leaving the flagstick in doesn't help only those putts that hit the dead center of the hole.

Me? I'll be following my advice from the LSW site, and I know that putts outside of eight feet are hit to about 8% of the distance - a 40-footer leaves, on average, a 3.2-foot putt for "good" putters - with a standard distribution both short, long, left, and right accounting for putts finishing both short of 3.2 feet by the hole as well as long, too.

I'm not over-reacting here - people aren't gonna be saving two shots a round or something (unless they're really aggressive from short range, and even then… that's a stretch) - I simply understand how leaving the flagstick in is overall a net benefit. If I gave you 10:1 odds on a game where I asked you to predict the roll of a single die, and you win or lose based on whether you guessed correctly, you'd play that game as long as I let you even if you lost the first 20 rolls because eventually you'd end up winning quite big, given that the odds against you are only 1:6 (or 1:5; I've seen them written as both "one in six" and "one positive versus five negative outcomes").

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()