News:

Welcome to the Golf Club Atlas Discussion Group!

Each user is approved by the Golf Club Atlas editorial staff. For any new inquiries, please contact us.


JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Strokes Gained Outlier Performances and Architecture
« Reply #25 on: September 08, 2021, 07:32:19 AM »
This has always been the weakness of "Strokes Gained", hasn't it? We don't actually know where the player was aiming so how can we assign a value to their shot? As a result, Bryson's superior ball striking makes his putting look better than it is.


Agree that it's better than what we used before but could use some enhancements.

Erik J. Barzeski

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Strokes Gained Outlier Performances and Architecture
« Reply #26 on: September 08, 2021, 02:54:13 PM »
So Erik, you're basically saying that a player who thinks positioning beyond mere proximity might actually be able to ballstrike his way to a better SG putting number by consistently setting up putts from advantageous positions, even if they're not necessarily short putts. Correct?
I'm saying, over a shorter span of time (one round for sure, one season no), it's possible. SG:P only cares about the distance of the first putt, it doesn't care about the "difficulty" of the putt otherwise.

Again Brandel said that faders left themselves more uphill, right-to-left breaking putts, but the truth is no correlation was found there over the course of a season.

This has always been the weakness of "Strokes Gained", hasn't it? We don't actually know where the player was aiming so how can we assign a value to their shot?

Yes. That said, I don't know if not knowing where they're aiming is a weakness of SG is true, because if they're aiming 50 yards right of the green and pull it to two feet, then he's still going to play the hole in fewer strokes on average, so… it's got to be the actual result, not factoring in "aim" or something like that.

But, yes, SG is really good, but at the finite level, at the shot-by-shot level, still fairly broad: not all 8' putts are equally difficult. Not all 170-yard shots from the right intermediate are equally difficult.
Erik J. Barzeski @iacas
Author, Lowest Score Wins, Instructor/Coach, and Lifetime Student of the Game.

I generally ignore Rob, Tim, Garland, and Chris.

Rob Marshall

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Strokes Gained Outlier Performances and Architecture
« Reply #27 on: September 08, 2021, 03:56:48 PM »
Maybe Brandel should consult with you….
If life gives you limes, make margaritas.” Jimmy Buffett

Ben Hollerbach

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Strokes Gained Outlier Performances and Architecture
« Reply #28 on: September 09, 2021, 08:49:37 AM »
Assume two players both get to 4 SG:P for the day. A does so by holing four 33' putts. B does so by holing 8 8' putts. They're both average on the remaining putts.
  • A has a 0.000625% chance of that happening, since a 33' putt is holed about 5% of the time.
  • B has a 0.390625% chance of that happening, since an 8' putt is holed about 50% of the time.

With the average hole proximity on tour being 37’, and 32’ on shots hit from the fairway, a player on any given day having 4, 33’ putts would seem to be moderate to highly probable. But what would need to happen for the average tour player to have a day in which they have 8, 8’ putts? How frequently does that occur?

A ball resting anywhere on the green most likely arrived there by one of three methods; as the result of an approach shot, as the result of a chip/pitch, or as the result of a putt.

Comparing a ball laying at 8’ and a ball laying at 33’:

A ball at 33’ has a greater than 93% chance to be the result of an approach shot and a near zero chance to be the result of a putt.
A ball at 8’ has a 45% chance to be the result of an approach shot and a small, but recognizable chance to be the result of a putt. Meaning close to 50% of all 8’ putts will be for par or worse.

With their approach performance being considered average on all other holes...

If all 8, 8’ putts were the result of an approach shot, resulting in 44% of that player’s approach shots that day ending up at 8’, that would probably be the greatest SG:App round ever. At the other end of the spectrum, if all 8, 8’ putts were the result of missed greens and recovery shots, the SG:App for that round would probably be very poor.

In actuality, the average player with 8, 8’ putts in a round would most likely have less than 4 of the putts come from approach shots and more than 4 of them come from other shots. As the average tour player hits ~12 greens a round, 2/3rd of those missed greens would result in a recovery shot ending up at 8’ from the hole, which would be a well below average scrambling distance. Suggesting the approach shot was fairly wayward and hurting their SG:App.

It would then seem unlikely for a player that makes 8, 8’ putts over a round to do so with a stellar approach game.

Over the course of the 2020-2021 season there were 10,343 putts struck from 8’ and ~11,554 putts struck from between 30-35’. (33’ stats were not available, but I presume the SG:P variance between 30’ and 35’ is close enough to 33’ for this exercise) If a player had 8, 8’ putts over the course of a round, the probability would say they would also have 9, 33’ putts. But of course neither is true. Odds are a player would have less than 1 of each putt in a round. So to have 8, 8’ putts is twice as unlikely as having 4, 33’ putts.

While it may be feasible to putt at an average rate for 11 holes and make 8 consecutive 8’ putts, the probability of the situation even presenting itself appears to be rather low.





JESII

  • Karma: +0/-0
Re: Strokes Gained Outlier Performances and Architecture
« Reply #29 on: September 09, 2021, 02:47:16 PM »
Ben,


What is the point of that post? To avoid Erik's premise that +4 SG:P for a round is actually not all that unreasonable?

Tags:
Tags:

An Error Has Occurred!

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()
Back