At last, Putting analysis we can trust from the PGA Tour!

When I analyzed Lucas Glover's rounds from last weekend's Wells Fargo Championship, his putting clearly stood out as the difference maker.  More importantly, for the first time EVER the PGA Tour stats and ShotByShot.com agree.  Why?  The Tour debuted its new putting statistic this week: "Strokes Gained - Putting" and has posted several articles explaining it on their website @ PGATour.com/Putting.  I wrote about this last year when it was first discussed in an article in the Wall Street Journal.  To see what I said then see then:   "Just a minute MIT..." 

What is Strokes Gained?

In brief, the Tour has used the distance-specific, putting data collected by ShotLink over the last several years to create a computer model of what I call "down-in strokes" or the average strokes needed to hole out from every distance from 1 to 100 feet.   Each player's putting opportunity, and the number of putts needed, is then compared to the "down-in" value of that distance (the model) and strokes gained or lost are calculated.  The example cited:  "...the average number of putts used to hole out from 7 feet, 10 inches is 1.5.  If a player one-putts from this distance, he gains .5 strokes.  If he two-putts, he loses .5 strokes.  If he 3-putts, he loses 1.5 strokes."  The total strokes gained or lost for a given round, event or period of time can then be compared to that of the field to determine the best putter.  BRAVO!  I COULD NOT HAVE DONE IT BETTER MYSELF!  But wait - I did, and 20 years ago.

I have been killing the Tour for their myopic, misleading stats,  especially putting, for 20+ years.  To my delight, in their new material they point out the precise flaws in their old putting stats - all they had to do is search my blog - but I guess even they figured it out. 

My creative story?

Shortly after I launched Shot By Shot in 1989 (a paper and US mail-based, analysis program),  I realized that the old "#-of-putts" paradigm was dramatically flawed and that I needed to create something better.  I decided to allow my subscribers to record the distance of their 1st putt on each green in order to create a putting model.   Remember, computer modeling was a big part of my business background and why I established ShotByShot to begin with.  By the time I had collected 4,000 rounds, I was able to create an effective model of what putting looked like, from every distance, for the 0-handicap golfer - I called it "Mr. Scratch."  At  7,000 rounds, I not only had a Mr. Scratch model for putting but for the rest of the game as well and it became the foundation of my entire analysis program.  While my model has been refined and updated over the years, the method that I created in 1990 has not changed and is exactly what the PGA Tour just released. 

In 2004 I invested in a web-based delivery system for my analysis program, and launched ShotByShot.com - initially only the Putting Analysis, but the Complete Game followed in 2006.  The difference between what I have done and what the PGA Tour just released is minor and strictly has to do with the data that we each collect and our clientele. The Tour's data is limited to their players and those events covered by ShotLink.  I have Tour data but more importantly amateur data on men and women at every level of the game (now 27,000+ rounds and growing at 1,000/month). The Tour model is based upon the average of their performance while I was able to create my "Scratch" model by segregating out only the appropriate rounds.  Further, while the Tour analysis only compares their members, I must analyze players at all skill levels playing all over the world.  To do this, I used our database to determine the average Putting "Strokes Lost or Saved" at each handicap level for comparison.  This enables ShotByShot.com to accurately assign a Putting Handicap for rounds analyzed. 

Bottom line, I am delighted to see the Tour admit the flaws in their prior analysis and adopt something smart - no - BRILLIANT, if I do say so myself (right Trill?).  I intend to speak with my friends at the Tour about possible collaboration as well as find ways to promote the fact that non-PGA Tour players all over the world can enjoy the same brilliant putting analysis at ShotByShot.com and NOWHERE ELSE! 

Nice Short Game Bubba - NOT!

To say that Bubba's strength is his long game is a gross understatement.  While a bit sloppy on Sunday, Bubba overpowered the 7,341 yard  TPC Louisana (par 72).  He led the field in the all-important GIR stat - even with one minor driving error and an approach shot penalty that resulted in a double-bogey.  Good thing for him because as good as his long game was, his short game was about the level of your average club, 10 handicap. 

THE GOOD NEWS

Driving Distance

While leading the field in Driving Distance (331 yds.), Bubba averaged 10 of 14 fairways.  This accuracy tied for 13th and exceeds our Winner's Profile by just under one fairway per round (9.3).  Bear in mind that the prodigious 331 only represents two drives per round.  However, thanks to ShotLink,  I was able to determine that Bubba averaged 311 on all of his "measured drives."  This  includes holes where he hit irons and compares to 278 for the field and 279 for the Tour average to date.  Hugely long and accurate - I'm impressed! 

Short Game,  SCORING Opportunites
His combination of length and accuracy generated an unusual number of short approach shots for GIR's - 16 in four rounds.  To be clear, these are opportunities to hit the Green in Regulation on Par 4 and 5 holes, from 50 yards to the hole and closer.  These opportunities are generally associated with reachable par 5 holes and the occasional short par 4.  For perspective, I looked at the last seven Winners for which I have captured and analyzed their ShotByShot.com data.  This illustrious group averaged six (1.5 per round) with a high of 10 (Mickelson, on the 7,422 (72) Redstone GC) and a low of only ONE (Rory Sabbatini, PGA National 7,158 (70).   So, what did Bubba do with this plethora of scoring opportunities?  See THE BAD NEWS below.

THE BAD NEWS 

The 16 short game opportunities were comprised of 15 Chip/Pitch and 1 Sand.  As my readers know, I evaluate the short game based upon a proprietary balance of three important RESULTS:

1.  Putting Distance - How close on average to the hole.

2.  % Hit Close - % to 5 ft. Chip/Pitch and % to 8 ft. Sand

3.  % Errors - Shots that miss the green.

Based upon ShotByShot.com's analysis (graphic above), Bubba's Chip/Pitch game was that of an 8 handicap and a 15 handicap from the Sand.  I will give him a break from the sand as he only had two opportunities:  one hit to 4 ft. - very good.  The other missed the green - No so...

Below, I will offer three perspectives on Bubba's prowess in those 15 opportunities when his great drives were rewarded with chipping or pitching opportunities for EAGLE:

Category:                  Watson   Tour Winnners  10 - 14 Handicap

Avg. Putt Distance:     13 ft.            4.6 ft.                13 ft.

% to 5 feet:                3 (20%)        (57%)               (22%)

% Errors:                   4 (27%)         ( 4%)               (13%)

% Saved:                   5 (33%)        (72%)               (30%)

On a final note, it was refreshing to see the camraderie and friendship between Bubba and Webb Simpson throughout their final round.  That is a great example of how we should all compete, at every level.  Bubba seemed to be genuinely upset for Webb during the critical penalty situation - a very difficult one but perfectly handled by Webb.  More than anyone, Peter Kostis must really be enjoying the upbeat and positive post-round interviews where he need not wear a flack jacket and helmet.  More good role models - very nice to see.