The analogy is actually a good example of our point.
In your Bonds example, there is a lower bound for your hitting - 0. So you can only drop 160.
Putting is the exact opposite. The lower bound is on how low you can go - there is no upper bound. When the average golfer takes a putt with 15 feet of break, there is an excellent chance he will end up no closer to the hole, possibly even further away. This is a type of example of why some people say "Don't get above the hole." What in God's name makes you think he is going to generally 2 putt from a location that is as far or farther away?
The kind of contour that would be required to create 25 foot breaking putts would be rather extreme, no? Yet, I have seem pros and amateurs 2 putt in some crazy instances, like putting 180 degrees from the hole, using the ground to bring it back to the hole. If the average golfer gets this kind of putt, without seeing the pro do it first, he will easily leave his putt as far or farther away.
If you do not see people 4 putting on a regular basis, then you are indeed golfing with better than average golfers, or you are playing courses with "easy" greens - slow and no contour. On the hardest greens in the world - Oakmont, ANGC, #2 during the Open setup, take your pick - the average pro is still going to 2 putt most of the time, and only occasionally 3 putt. On these same greens, the average golfer (which we never really defined - I'll use the USGA stated average index of 18 or whatever) is going to have some greens where he almost can't even finish the hole. 4 putts, 5 putts, 6 putts, these are going to flat out kill his total.
I repeat, if you truly believe that you are only going to 3 putt a bit more often on greens with a lot of contour (relatively speaking, less often than Ben), you are not a bad putter. You may not be great at holing long putts like Fax, and you may not have a dead eye stroke from 6 feet like Tom or Arnold in their prime, but apparently you are a good lag putter.