I think using stats to try and prove a point may work for players who pretty much know where their ball is going all the time.
Again, the stats are pretty consistent up to 20 handicappers. And even PGA Tour players have a dispersion pattern that's wider than many seem to think.
But saying angles don't matter isn't really applicable to those of us who play differently and aren't trying to post a number.
That's why I said this:
Except when the ball is rolling. Or if you're just looking at what makes golf interesting to you. It's important to understand that this is generalized data and the data speaks to scoring, not engagement, or fun, or interest, etc.
It's my opinion that angles do matter to some players, to others they don't. Even if only they add interest to the round. I don't think there is any reason to be shitty about it in the way you respond to people who may have a different POV.
Wow, okay there man. Hypotheticals are pointless IMO. You can make up whatever you want to support whatever position you want.
My biggest take away in how this discussion applies to architecture: as these sorts of analytics become more mainstream knowledge, architects are going to have to get more creative in how they create temptation and poor choices from golfers.
Yes, this. They're going to have to, like TD did, create things where what appears to be the optimal target may not be. They'll have it easiest working around the paint-by-numbers approach (DECADE), less so when players take more factors into consideration.
A client of mine, very much into numbers as a finance guy, told me the tour stats show PGA players make 8 footers for par more often than 8 footers for birdie. Why? He said the same reason human investors ride their losers and sell their winners. Why? Because they are human.
This has also been shown to be misleading. When you adjust for first-putt or second-putt differences, the gap narrows substantially.
Why do average players score worse from the good angle vs the bad?
Because they take on more when they feel they have a good angle. And when they have a bad one, they play more conservatively, which is probably how they should play regardless of their angle.
If I play a difficult par 4 with an otherwise flat fairway, but well guarded green. The correct side of the fairway could vary significantly from day if the pin is tucked on the far left one day, and the far right the next.
Lou has explained it, as have the others who have done this. The "good angle" is generally the left side of the fairway to a hole location on the right or vice versa.
Are the data collectors for "average joes" following behind every round and taking note of things like this?
Unnecessary. Arccos knows where their shots are hit from. They know where the boundaries of the fairway are, and where the holes are cut. So, effectively, yes they have data collectors noting the specifics of every shot.