Do highly contoured greens favor bad putters?

[TEPaul]

Good post A.G., and a good example of how easily some on here try to turn some assumption into a proven conclusion. The vagaries of golf and golfers will probably always resist such things!    

[JakaB]

TP,

Speaking of that..it just hit me this morning that your advocacy of slow greens will force courses into the lengthening mode due to their inability to defend at the greens...thanks guy..

[TEPaul]

John B;

Generally it's gotten fairly pointless to respond to some of the things you've said to me about slow greens but I can pretty much guarantee you that greens running around 11 are definitely not slow in any context for any level of player no matter how much or for whatever reason you may choose to think they are.

[JakaB]

Tom,

I'm just trying to help you prepare if the cocktail hour runs a little long before one of your presentations.....I can't imagine anybody coming up with something stupider than some of my arguments.   Even though they are based in fact....

[TEPaul]

"I can't imagine anybody coming up with something stupider than some of my arguments."

Barney:

Oh, I don't know---I've seen some pretty stupid arguments. While your arguments are pretty stupid you surely should never expect to win the prize.  

[JakaB]

Shivas,

I remember standing next to the first green at Augusta wondering if I could ever be done putting on that hole...I think once I got to a comfortable 11 or 12 over I could putt them pretty well.....so....it is how I get to 11 or 12 over that would determine my total putts......don't tell anybody but I'm a headcase.. to put it lightly...

[TEPaul]

Barney:

One of the stupidest arguments happened with me when I was once presenting the logic of some of our Master Plan to practically the entire membership.

When I got to the 18th hole I proposed that perhaps the 11th and 18th tees should be melded together and played occasionally from the front of either right across the front of the other. Those two holes happen to go exactly opposite directions. As soon as I said that about 25 people all jumped up together and started saying things like--"What? Are you crazy? Members will be killed!"

So I said; "Do we really have members around here who will stand wthin plain view of each other separated by perhaps 50 or 60 yards and fire drives from opposite directions directly at each other?"

There was some general mumbling to the effect of "Oh, yeah, I guess not" and they all sat down.

[TEPaul]

But you can never be too sure what some member might do. I was once playing Seminole with my Dad and a friend of his called Dizzy Benson. Dizzy's name came about apparently for somewhat obvious reasons.

Anyway, we were on the 17th hole and we were waiting on the tee for the group ahead of us to clear the green. The green of Seminole's #17 is in plain view slightly below the tee about 175 yds away.

Dizzy sauntered over and teed up his ball (it wasn't even his honor, I don't think) and we figured he was just getting antsy waiting for the green to clear. No, that wasn't it at all! Dizzy rather quickly hit a great shot right in the middle of the green and right into the middle of all the golfers and caddies on it without even looking!

Dad yelled; "Dizzy what the hell did you do that for?", and Dizzy said; "Oh Jesus, I didn't see anyone on the green!"

So you never know!

[TEPaul]

That may've been the last time it ever happened since it may've taught the membership that failing to stay well ahead of a guy like Dizzy Benson could be positively life threatening!

[TEPaul]

Dave;

I've seen worse than Dizzy, though! One time down the road at Gulf Stream G.C. (which has a lot of the same type of members as does Seminole) I was playing a little Tuesday tournament with my Dad and the old members. There was a thunderstorm delay right around lunch time. About a hundred members were sitting on the covered patio adjacent to the pro shop where an elaborate buffet had been set up.

Along comes this old guy in his cart, right up near the patio, turns his cart around slowly so the rear of it is facing the patio and proceeds to stomp on the accelerator to get his rear tires over a small step on the patio and backs his cart into the patio crashing into chairs and tables with people at them and knocks over the entire buffet!

And just like Dizzy when everyone screamed at him; "What the Hell are you doing?", he said; "Oh Jesus, I didn't see anyone on the patio!"

[A.G._Crockett]

Tom Paul,
Great Florida stories, where the sound of a car horn in a parking lot often means that a aged person who can no longer turn their head is about to back out of a parking place, regardless of what might be behind them!

[ForkaB]

AG

I personally believe that the frequency of hurricanes in Florida this year is a direct result of the swinging chads from the 2000 election.  It is only the "butterfly effect" from chaos theory which caused it to be delayed by nearly 4 years.  It is fallacious to think that "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" is a fallacy.

As to my golf game, my opponent was not only a friend but also a GCA, which means that he putts like god but often strikes the ball like dog.  As he is a 10 and I am a 6 he is an inferior golfer to me, ipso facto. Sorry, but that's the way it is.....

You should also know that my "smileys" have been disabled by Ran ever since drove his brother off this site by refusing to agree with him that the view from the 13th hole at Lundin Links was "one of the Top Ten views in Scottish golf."

So, some of my posts are serious and some are less so.  Take them all cum grana salis.

Semper ubi, sub ubi

Rich

[A.G._Crockett]

AG

I personally believe that the frequency of hurricanes in Florida this year is a direct result of the swinging chads from the 2000 election.  It is only the "butterfly effect" from chaos theory which caused it to be delayed by nearly 4 years.  It is fallacious to think that "post hoc, ergo propter hoc" is a fallacy.

As to my golf game, my opponent was not only a friend but also a GCA, which means that he putts like god but often strikes the ball like dog.  As he is a 10 and I am a 6 he is an inferior golfer to me, ipso facto. Sorry, but that's the way it is.....

You should also know that my "smileys" have been disabled by Ran ever since drove his brother off this site by refusing to agree with him that the view from the 13th hole at Lundin Links was "one of the Top Ten views in Scottish golf."

So, some of my posts are serious and some are less so.  Take them all cum grana salis.

Semper ubi, sub ubi

Rich

Rich,
I'll respond to this as soon as my daughter (who takes 2nd year Latin) gets home from school and can tell me what the hell it says! (Insert disabled smiley here...)

[Dan Kelly]

If someone had time to go back through Tom I's 14,262 (and counting) posts and pull out all of the "Goofballs (and Other Rich People) I've Known" stories, I think we'd be looking at a best-seller.

[ForkaB]

Dan

I consider it one of the most sacred roles of my life to occasionally stimulate Tom Paul's brain into revealing more of his goofball life stories.  I am on record on this forum in believing that any compilation of such stories would outsell all the works on GCA ever written or ever contemplated to be written.

[A.G._Crockett]

In this morning's paper, I read this stat:  Brad Faxon has not 3-putted in his last 324 holes!  That is 18 rounds, or 4 1/2 tournaments.

As best I can tell, his last 5 events, along with courses and GCA's are:

WGC-AmEx at Mt. Juliet Estate (Nicklaus)
84 Lumber at Nemacolin Woodlands (Dye)
Deutsche Bank at TPC of Boston (Palmer)
Buick Championship at TPC of River Highlands (Robert Ross, Dye and Weed)
WGC-NEC at Firestone (RTJ)

I haven't played any of these, so I'm not sure of the contour of these particular greens, but they must be damn flat greens for a guy like Faxon to be able to so consistently 2 putt (or better!).  I'd like to get his scrawny butt on some contoured greens; I'd wear him out!

Does this make any of the hypothetical "scorecards" from earlier in the thread a bit suspect?  I grant that Faxon is the best out there, and that he is obviously rolling it well, but can anyone seriously look at these stats off these five courses and contend that a bad putter could do BETTER relative to Faxon on these greens compared to flat greens at Goat Hills?
Come on!  Check into drug rehab and rejoin civilization!

[TEPaul]

"If someone had time to go back through Tom I's 14,262 (and counting) posts and pull out all of the "Goofballs (and Other Rich People) I've Known" stories, I think we'd be looking at a best-seller."

I sure hope noone has that kind of time on their hands. If they did, I, for one, sure would feel extremely sorry for them, and, in a burst of compassion, I might suggest they take my little diarrheic dog and go out and spend a few months strolling and smelling some of the world's best golf architecture.  

[THuckaby2]

I grant that Faxon is the best out there, and that he is obviously rolling it well, but can anyone seriously look at these stats off these five courses and contend that a bad putter could do BETTER relative to Faxon on these greens compared to flat greens at Goat Hills?
Come on!  Check into drug rehab and rejoin civilization!

AGC:  I can look at those stats and maintain my contentions, absolutely.  Do you REALLY want me to go into the why part of it again?  

Just do remember ONCE AGAIN that the issue isn't that the bad putter is ever going to do BETTER than Faxon - he's not, no matter where.  The contention is that he's going to come closer to him on contoured greens than on flat.  And he is, for the reasons I have tried to explain umpteen ways to you all who are so afflicted with not seeing beyond the obvious.  End of story, no drug rehab necessary.  Well, not for this anyway.

Lovingly,


TH

[Brent Hutto]

As a statistician, I have a strong affection for made-up data as it always works out better than the messy stuff that is actually gathered in the real world. However, in the current discussion I don't think making up how many putts you think Brad Faxon and Joe Hacker will take at ANGC is of much more than entertainment value. So here's my modest suggestion...

Grant me the assumption that at least some portion of the factors separating Brad Faxon's putting from mine also exist (albeit to a much, much smaller extent) when you compare Faxon to a PGA Tour player who isn't a good putter by Tour standards. Under that assumption, we could compare a player near the top of the Tour putting ranking to one near the bottom and see how they fare on flat versus contoured greens.

So how about we find the two lowest-ranked (in putts per GIR) players in the 2004 PGA Tour stats who played at Augusta this year along with the two highest-ranked players in those same rankings who played at Augusta this year. Then we identify a couple of Tour events with flattish greens and see how our two better putters fared on the flat-green tournaments versus our two worse putters. Would that shed any light on this debate?

[THuckaby2]

Brent:

As a statistician, you make far too much sense.

 

Of course that would shed light on this debate, but expecting it to SETTLE it is like expecting Republicans to admit George Bush got his ass kicked in the three debates, or Democrats to admit the same re Kerry.  Not gonna happen.

In all seriousness though, that would be interesting, but the worst pro is still a very good putter, and thus the difference from worst to best isn't enough to really solve this.  Unfortunately what we do need is Joe Hack v. Brad Faxon, and if you can find data on that, then you are even more of THE MAN than I already think you are.

 

[A.G._Crockett]

I grant that Faxon is the best out there, and that he is obviously rolling it well, but can anyone seriously look at these stats off these five courses and contend that a bad putter could do BETTER relative to Faxon on these greens compared to flat greens at Goat Hills?
Come on!  Check into drug rehab and rejoin civilization!

AGC:  I can look at those stats and maintain my contentions, absolutely.  Do you REALLY want me to go into the why part of it again?  

Just do remember ONCE AGAIN that the issue isn't that the bad putter is ever going to do BETTER than Faxon - he's not, no matter where.  The contention is that he's going to come closer to him on contoured greens than on flat.  And he is, for the reasons I have tried to explain umpteen ways to you all who are so afflicted with not seeing beyond the obvious.  End of story, no drug rehab necessary.  Well, not for this anyway.

Lovingly,


TH

Tom,
I didn't mean that Joe Hack would do better than Faxon, anywhere, anytime, any way.  What I meant by "relative to Faxon" was the degree of change between the two as they move from flat to contoured greens.

I'm going to give up now because I just cannot comprehend that we are still arguing a point that is so simple.  Contour is more difficult that flat for ANY golfer, and so would over time (not on an isolated lucky putt) ALWAYS tend to accentuate the skill of a better putter.  It cannot be otherwise under the laws of the universe as I understand them. End of story.

[THuckaby2]

Aw come on AGC, are you REALLY gonna give up?  

It's funny - I see this as simple as you do and am as baffled as you are, coming from the other direction.  No kidding - I really do think it is fundamental and obvious that a missed putt is a missed putt, and Faxon is gonna have way more on contoured greens, enough to make the lesser putter come closer to him.  I really do believe this.

See, over time contour DOES accentuate the skill of the better putter - agreed.  But to me that just means he's gonna get putts CLOSER over time.  He's still going to leave putts that he can miss, though - which he just plain won't on flat greens.  A perfect example of this was one I just rudely inserted into Ed's thread about Greywall, changing the subject to Meadow Club.  The third green there has many putts that BOTH Faxon and Joe Hack are going to three putt, and they're not so severe that JH is going to four putt.  To me, this is pretty common in a highly-contoured green.  Put them back on a flat green, and Joe Hack still 3jacks from time to time, where Brad never does.  So where does Joe Hack come closer to Brad?  If you can't see that it's on the 3rd green at Meadow Club, then perhaps you should really give up.  

Now of course you can argue that #3 Meadow Club is an atypical green, and I'd agree with that.  But it is the kind of "highly contoured green" I thought this whole thing was based on.

In any case perhaps that is one of our disconnects.  I'm thinking of pretty severe greens, where Brad will indeed three putt, versus flat greens where he never will.  Maybe such scenarios don't exist and Brad never three putts anywhere.  But I gotta tell ya, I'd bet good money he 3putts at least 50% of the time from the putt I had on #3 Meadow Club, because there is just no way under the laws of physics that one gets that inside of 10 feet, without holing it (which is also bloody unlikely).  So IF Brad hits a great putt, he's left with another twisting 10 footer - not too much break, but enough so that I'm betting he only makes half.  Meanwhile Joe Hack gets it to 20 feet and two putts from there, damn near all the time.  Three putts = three putts.

That seems to be our fundamental disconnect.  If we base this on who gets it closer to the hole, I agree with you whole-heartedly.  But I believe we are basing this on putts holed, and for that reason I contend what I do.

TH

[A.G._Crockett]

Okay, okay, I don't give up!

I guess you might be right here that there are some greens so bizarrely contoured that it is just luck for anybody, but I don't think there are many, and I doubt they last long before they are blown up and replaced.  The thread title is "highly contoured", which is a relative term, of course.

     BUT...

Look, Tom, Faxon hasn't three-putted in 324 straight holes!  On tour!  For money!  On courses that include work by Dye, Nicklaus, RTJ, et. al.!  Holy cow!  Those have GOT to be tougher greens based on contour than most, and you can't seriously mean that the differential between me and him wouldn't be greater on those five courses than on flat greens!  Please tell me that you don't mean that...

Now granted, a great part of the trick to this is that Faxon doesn't hit the ball to the same stupid places on greens that I do, and the more severe the green, the more careful he is about where he misses.  

That said, and given that I don't know about the Meadow Club green, my real life experience has been that if a great putter three putts because of a really, really tough green (instead of just a random poor stroke), then I am in deep, deep do-do, and a four putt is entirely possible, if not likely.

It is a LAW of sports that more difficult conditions bring the cream to the top.  Why should tough putts be different than everything else in the known universe?

[THuckaby2]

Fair enough.  I believe we have come to a conclusion.

Because.....

a) I don't put too much stock into those stats about Faxon on tour.  Outside of majors those guys don't tend to play the "highly contoured greens" I am talking about which make my contention correct.  Again, perhaps this is our fundamental disconnect.  I'm not talking greens with a little break, I'm talking monsters like #3 at Meadow Club.  Oh yes, just make this SOME BREAK and it won't be enough to get Brad to 3jack - as you show - and thus my contentions fail.  But that is not what I meant in my contentions.

and...

b) I really do think that Joe Hack is not going to 4putt enough to make such relevant, and that as per my example, the normal occurrence is going to be that they each just 3putt in different ways.  I could be wrong here.  But I just witnessed four players of wildly different abilities all three putt #3 Meadow, all just like this, so I feel pretty strong that I'm right.  Oh I know, I shouldn't go from a specific to the general.  But this did have a powerful affect on my contentions here.

and...

c) Hell yes golf is different than anything else in the universe.  If you don't believe and accept that, then I guess there truly is no hope.  

So we shall agree to disagree, no?  Or perhaps we agree more than you think?

TH

[A.G._Crockett]

Hmmm, you might be on to something...