How good is Jordan Spieth's Distance Control?

Read my article in this month's Masters issue of Golf Digest

How difficult were the poa greens at Riviera

I recently did a detailed Putting - Distance Control study comparing Jordan Spieth's 2015 year to the most recent five, year-end, Strokes Gained leaders and the 2015 Tour average (please look for my article in the next issue of Golf Digest).  Something jumped out in that there were 88 4-Putts and five 5-Putts on Tour in 2015.  We obviously don't see these on TV.  I typically have one 4-Putt every season so like to get it out of the way early in the year.  Have never recorded 5 putts yet - WHEW!  In 27 years of Shot By Shot data, we see very few 4-Putts.  Why?  The vast majority of our rounds are match play format and players tend to very appropriately pick up that 3rd putt.

Not only did the fairly large number of 4+ putts stand out but two courses owned more of them than any of the others:

• CC of Jackson had the most with EIGHT 4-Putts in 2015.  
• Riviera was 2nd with SEVEN 4-Putts and, even more surprising, was that FIVE of the seven fell on the 1st hole - a very reachable Par 5.  

There was quite a bit of discussion during the Norther Trust telecast about the difficulty of the poa greens so I decided to see HOW difficult and WHY; as well as, see if the 4-Putts were repeated. 

The greater difficulty is not a surprise and was specifically pointed out by Nick Faldo - specifically the ability, or lack thereof, to make the 4-5 ft. putts.  Good get Sir Nick!  To support your point, the biggest difference between the 2015 Tour average and Riviera performance was the 4-5 ft. range (see graphic above).  This key distance led to the highest rate of 3-Putts that I have seen in a PGA Tour event.  Riviera = .72/round vs. 2015 Tour avg. = .51/round. 

Was it the Lag difficulty?

No!  The average start distances and leaves/results were close enough to be a wash but the average leave distances for 3-Putts was telling.  In 2015 the Tour's average leave  on 3+ Putts was 6.1 ft. (the distance for their 2nd putt).  At Riviera the average 3+ Putt leave distance was 5.7 ft.  In short, the Riviera field 3-Putted with far greater frequency by missing shorter 2nd putts - on average 5 inches closer to the hole. 

What about the 4-Putts? 

There were TEN in 2016 - up from the SEVEN in 2015.  They were obviously caused by unusually difficult pin placements:

• Round 1, THREE 4-Putts, on three different holes.
• Round 2, FOUR 4-Putts, 9th hole.
• Round 4, THREE 4-Putts, 6th hole.

I wonder if the Tour officials review their numbers to identify, and avoid, these overly difficult placements? 

Strokes Gained Putting - Why is Jordan Spieth NOT #1?

How many times have we heard the TV announcer proclaim that Jordan is the best putter in the game?  Jordan is a GREAT putter, ranked #8 for the year in Strokes Gained and is clearly a PHENOMENAL clutch putter.  For the record, I believe Jordan is the best putter in the game and that he would be appropriately ranked #1 if the Majors were included in the ShotLink stats.  

[It is often overlooked that ShotLink stats are not captured for non-PGA Tour events, notably the Masters, US Open and British Open.  If Jordan's putting performance in these Majors were included, it would add 12 rounds (18%) of superior putting to the his 67 ShotLink rounds for 2015.  In case anyone forgot, Jordan's finishes in the three missing majors were:  Masters - #1, US Open - #1, British Open - #2.]

All that said, using the stats at my disposal:  Why is he not #1?  The simple answer turns out to be consistency.  When compared to the #1's that I have studied over the last four years, Jordan's WORST putting events (those with negative Strokes Gained totals) are slightly more frequent than these other players' (@ 5 of 20 (25%), but more importantly, his are more negative.  Jordan's five negative Strokes Gained events averaged -.99/round while the four most recent Strokes Gained #1's averaged only -.44/round on their negative Strokes Gained events.

The follow-up question is:  What changes about Jordan's putting to produce these negative SG events?   To answer this, I ran my BEST vs. WORST analysis on Jordan's 2015 ShotLink rounds.  [The BEST being the 15 events where Jordan recorded positive SG totals, and the WORST - the five events with negative SG totals.] 

The answer?  It is NOT an uncharacteristic flood of 3-Putts.  In fact, Jordan's 3-Putt numbers are good across the board and slightly better in his WORST putting events.  Jordan ranked 37th in 3-Putt Avoidance - only 3-Putting 2.4% of holes played.  The Tour average is 3.15%, and Aaron Baddeley (#1 Strokes Gained 2015) ranked 22nd @ 2.25.  Further, one of Jordan's strengths is his impressive distance control - but that is a topic for another day.    

The major difference was logically a drop off in 1-Putts almost across the board but specifically in the always critical 6 - 10 foot range.  As you can see from the chart above, this important range involves more 1st Putt opportunities than any other range - just under one in every four.  In his WORST putting events, Jordan fell significantly below his BEST performance AND the PGA Tour average in this range.  Not just coincidently, Jordan missed only four cuts this year.  Three of the four were also included in the WORST putting events.

Congratulations on a spectacular year, Jordan!  Tighten up that 6 - 10 foot range a bit and I look forward to studying you as the #1 ranked putter next year.     

Best vs. Worst Analysis on ShotByShot.com

Some of our ShotByShot.com users have had a difficult time finding our Filtering Options located below the Pick Specific Rounds screen on our Analyze tab.  Sorry, we are correcting this.  The Filtering features are robust, and can be used together to produce interesting analysis.  I promised one of our new Group Leader instructors that I would share exactly how I run a BEST vs. WORST analysis. I thought that this was something that everyone should see.  I have been doing these studies for years for the Tour players with whom I work, but every player can  benefit from seeing exactly what changes the most from when they are at their best, playing to their handicap level, versus the OTHER rounds.

 

Use the Filter Rounds:

1.  Run an analysis on the Most Recent 20 rounds.  It can be more or less rounds and can also be further filtered by type and format (e.g., Tournament, Stroke play... and even by Course).

 

2.  From the Rounds/Scoring page of the analysis, record:  Average Score and Date of the oldest round analyzed (this  will be the anchor for the BEST and WORST analysis).

 

3.  BEST - Select:  Score Less then or Equal to:  The average score.  Also, anchor the analysis on the Start Date of the oldest round recorded in #2 above.  This will produce the BEST analysis.  If it is not exactly 10 or half, you may have to adjust the Score selected up or down by 1.

 

4.  Review the BEST analysis and record the numbers listed in the example above.

 

5.  WORST - select:  Score Greater than or Equal to:  One stroke above the score used in the BEST analysis above and anchor the start date of the analysis.  Record the appropriate numbers listed in the example above and compute the differences.

 

The greatest negative difference will be the part of the game that changes the most and is costing the player the most strokes on average when NOT at their BEST.  The case above is an actual study that I did for a mini Tour player.  It was somewhat of a surprise that Putting was the main culprit as it has long been one of his strengths.  When we looked deeper, it was clear as to why.  First, his % 1-Putts in the always critical range of 6-10 ft. dropped from 56% (50% is the PGA Tour Avg.) down to 37%.  This is a significant drop off.  Second, his 3-Putts jumped from a tidy 2% (PGA Tour Avg. is 3%) to 5%.  Clearly, good to know!     

Short Game: When is a missed green NOT an ERROR?

Shot By Shot was the first statistical program to recognize the importance of errors in the short game and enable our users to record them 25 years ago.  When we launched a simplified, web version of the program in 2005, we had users record when their short game shots were successful (hit the green) or missed the green (errors).  The subsequent putting distance recorded revealed the exact level of success but we did not know the exact extent of the mistake.    The percentage of misses (or errors) has been a valuable component in our short game handicap determinations - a proprietary balance of three factors:

1. Average putting distance when the green was hit;
2. % of attempts hit close (to within 5 feet for Chip/Pitch, 8 feet for Sand);
3. % Errors (shots that missed the green).  

The PGA Tour data does not include errors or missed greens in the 409+ ShotLink stats.  I had my my programmer extract these important pieces of data from ShotLink for use in my work with Tour players.  As one can see above, in 2014 the PGA Tour player on average MISSED greens with 7% of their Chip/Pitch shots (within 50 yards of the hole) and 11% for Sand shots from within the same range.  If you think these numbers, when viewed as errors, seem high - I agree. 

A post-round discussion with my genius programmer led us to the solution of this dilemma.  Why not see what percentage of the missed greens actually took the players more than 3 strokes to hole out?  Three strokes from a short game situation is not a SAVE, but it is certainly not a stroke lost. The save %'s are:  Chip/Pitch - 65% and Sand - 50%.  But four or more strokes to hole out is definitely an ERROR.

Once the programming was done, the answer confirmed that "These guys really are good!"  In 75% of their missed greens with Chip/Pitch attempts, and 73% of missed Sand shots, the Tour holes out in 3 strokes or less.

How does your game compare?  Just stay tuned.  Now that we have been collecting score by hole since last October, we will be able to exactly match our new Tour calculations.  I plan to wait until we have a full year of new data but am very anxious to see the results.

  

Kuchar's improbable finish at Harbour Town

A good friend texted me after Matt Kuchar's improbable closing holes to ask:  "Which is more likely, a 3-Putt from 4 ft. or to hole out from a greenside bunker?"  I do not have this stuff on the top of my head but was intrigued, so looked into ShotLink.

The greenside bunker shot holed is not that uncommon on Tour.  In 2013, there were 252 instances in 20,741 attempts or one in every 82 attempts. 

Since 2003, there have been 499 3-Putts from 4 ft. in 143,788 attempts or one in every 288 attempts. 

If my math is correct, the bunker holed is 3.5 times more likely.  I was not able to calculate the odds that one player would do both on consecutive holes.

Nice to see Kuchar close this one out.

It is interesting to note how the tables turn on these two outcomes as we move into the amateur ranks.  Let's take the average 10 handicap - The 3-Putt from 4 ft. becomes 2.4 times more likely than the hole out from the greenside sand.

3-Putt from 4 ft.:  1 in every 170 attempts

Hole out from greenside sand:  1 in every 408 attempts

Shot of the Year?

Rory's 5-wood to last weekend's final hole of regulation from 245 yards in the fairway was remarkable for many reasons.  Had he made the putt and won the Honda Classic, that approach shot would be in the conversation for best all-time clutch shots.

The announcers did give the shot appropriate praise, but after Rory missed the 11-foot putt and didn't win, it was virtually forgotten.  Tiger used to WOW us with just that kind of pressure shot, but more often than not finished it by making the putt.

By ShotLink standards Rory's shot was great because of its relative proximity to the hole.  The ShotLink average proximity from 225-250 in the fairway is 53 feet.  OK, 11 feet is worlds closer, but it is actually much more than that.  The problem with the "Proximity" stat is that it includes all shots - whether they successfully hit the green or not.  A ball can be 15 feet short and in the water, or 10 feet away and buried under the lip of a bunker - and still be included in the average proximity.

ShotLink also reveals that tour players will hit the green-in-regulation from 200+ yards in 43% of their tries.  This is nice but it mixes all conditions (fairway, rough, bunkers, etc.).  Further, there is a large distance span of attempts greater than 200 yards.   Players are attempting to hit greens from 260+ these days.

I believe the best way to judge Rory's accomplishment is by comparing apples to apples.  Accordingly, I have looked a bit deeper.  The 2013 tour average for greens hit from 225 - 250 yards in the fairway was 36% (just over 1 of every 3).  When successful, the average putting distance from this range was 33 feet.

So Rory's success in hitting the green was impressive, but 11'4" from the pin was over the top, especially under the circumstances, and the looming downside of water short, right and long.  Missed putt notwithstanding, I think it qualifies for Shot of the Year so far.

Publicity for ShotByShot.com and me!

About a month ago, I received a phone call from Josh Sens, a writer for GOLF Magazine.   Josh was researching an article on the relatively new trend of PGA Tour players adding stat experts to their support teams.  

Josh had done his homework.  He had spoken to Zach Johnson and gotten my name and number from Dr. Morris Pickens (Zach's Sports Psychologist) - Thanks Mo!  Our discussion was a lively one that lasted approximately an hour with a few follow up calls and questions about points that I had raised.

Josh's article was published on GOLF.com on Monday, July 8.  I think he did a great job and included quite a few of my quotes and was kind enough to plug my website.  By far my favorite quote is from Zach, talking about my work:  "He's able to find holes in the stats and magnify other stats by clearing out the junk,"  Johnson says.  "He chews on it, digests it and then spits out something a lot more practical than 'You've got to hit more fairways.'"

Way to go Zach!  Very high praise and I could not have said it better myself.

I hope you enjoy the article:  GOLF.com - It All Adds Up

Muirfield brings out the worst in most - not Matt Kuchar

I have said for years that the frequency and severity of our mistakes in golf have a far greater influence on our score and handicap level than do our good shots.  Jack's event this weekend proved to be a great example of my point.  The table below displays the errors (mistakes) made by Matt Kuchar in his four rounds on Muirfield Village as compared to the average of the field.  For perspective, I added the average number of errors made by the PGA Tour in 2012 for an equivalent four rounds.

Muirfield Village is, without question, one of the most difficult courses visited by the Tour.  It is ranked the 3rd most difficult this year, based upon score over par, just behind PGA National - Champion (#2) and Augusta National (#1).  While I have yet to be invited to play Muirfield, I did walk (actually run) the course some years ago to record Shot By Shot data for Jack and his three pro am partners.  Not quite as much fun as playing but I did not lose a single ball.  

What did I learn?

• Playing is more difficult than walking.  The three amateurs, not bad golfers, picked up almost as often as they finished holes.
• Muirfield has lots of water that comes into play around the greens.  (Note the approach shot penalties are more than 2x the 2012 Tour average.)
• The greens and green complexes are very severe and present difficult short game shots. 

 In my study of the event this week, I was surprised to see that aside from the difficulty of the approach shots to the greens, it was the greens and their surroundings, especially the bunkers, that presented the greatest relative difficulty.  (Note the average number of short game errors were more than 50% higher than the 2012 Tour averages.) The Muirfield field made an error from the greenside sand 19.5% of the time - one in every five attempts.  This compares to 12%, or one in every nine attempts in all of 2012.

Matt Kuchar obviously had his sand game ready for Muirfield's test.  In seven attempts, his average putting distance was 6.7 feet (1.3 ft. closer than the field).  And he saved all seven (100% vs. 49% for the field), obviously with ZERO errors.  Well done, Matt!

How do your errors match up?  

How Important are Fairways?

One of my college coaches asked my help to provide some perspective for his players - I love when my clients do that - it's a compliment!

Thanks to my genius programmer, I was able to run a query on the last two years of PGA Tour ShotLink data - 28,272 rounds to be exact - a pretty solid sample.  I looked to see how players score from the fairway vs. rough as well as their relative accuracy from various distances from each.  To be clear, the "rough" locations that I reviewed did not include the intermediate rough, fairway bunkers or any of the many "Other" results.

Score

The cost or scoring difference between hitting the fairway vs. rough is:  .315 strokes

• Results from the fairway = -.156 (under par)
• Results from the rough = +.159 (over par)

This means that a golfer who misses half the fairways (7) in a given round loses over 2 shots to par - not counting any Penalty or No shot results driving results that we consider to be errors.

Accuracy

The affect on accuracy is even more dramatic than that on score.  Bottom line, in order to achieve the same accuracy from the rough as the tour enjoys from the fairway at 151 to 175 yards, the players must move as much as 75 yards closer to the target.    

Accuracy from 151 to 175 yards:  

• Hit Green from Fairway: 71%; Hit Green from Rough: 49%
• Average Proximity to Hole from Fairway: 28 feet; from Rough: 45 feet

To attain the same the fairway accuracy cited above from the rough, we need to get to the 76 to 100 yard range:

• Hit Green from Rough: 71%
• Average Proximity to Hole: 27 feet

Mid point to mid point of these ranges is 75 yards.

One might ask, how does this relate to amateur golfers.  I do not have that data, but my slightly educated guess is NOT SO MUCH.  Why?  Because amateurs do not have anywhere near the accuracy from any position and certainly not from the greater distances.  Thus, it can only fall off so much when faced with shots from the rough.

What's so hard about Harbour Town?

I spent much of this weekend camped out in front of my TV multi-tasking - watching the golf (RBC Heritage Classic), while happily collecting data on my players.  It is a special event because it is a special course.  Short by today's standards at 7,101 yards (Par 71), and tight by any standards.  The greens are the smallest on tour and well protected by the thin fairways, towering pine trees, water and SAND.

Accordingly, it plays like a mini-major and tends to bring the very best players to the top.  Tom Watson and Hale Irwin are multiple winners and Davis Love, III has won FIVE times.  The King won the first in 1969 taking home $20,000.  I found it interesting that only 44 years later Graeme McDowell multiplied Arnie's cash by just over 50 times to earn $1,044,000.  My Dad said I should focus on golf NOT football - what did he know?

While the telecast was focused on the leaders, I noticed some uncharacteristic short game errors by some players not quite on camera.  When the event was over, I looked closer and noticed that the frequency of errors from the sand at Harbour Town was unusually high.  I compared the  Tour average YTD, just prior to Harbour Town, to the  average for the field in this event.  The errors from the sand were UP by 55%!  The chart above displays the percentage of Sand shots hit to within 8 feet (a good shot by ShotByShot.com standards) as well as the % Errors (shots that miss the green).  Note, the Harbour Town field would no doubt be proud to fall in the 6 to 9 handicap group based upon the frequency of their faux pas in the sand.   

Why so many mistakes?  My somewhat educated guess is that it was due to the small greens and the severe, collection areas adjacent to most of the greens.  First, given the small greens, the normal miss in the sand tends to be further into the sand - leaving more sand to cover and less green.  Second, the poor (or safe) sand shot that would come to rest on a larger green tends to run off into the collection areas. 

One might say:  "It was the wind on Sunday!"  My thought exactly, so I compared the first 3 rounds to the wind-blown 4th - NOT so.  In fact, the sand errors in the 4th round dropped slightly to only 15% (3 to 5 Handicap).

So, whatever your handicap, when you plan to tee it up at Harbour Town, bring your A sand game.    

Is Tiger Back? His Putting certainly is!

As an admitted statistical stalker of Tiger, I have good perspective on the parts of his game that separate him from the rest and punctuate his wins.  Until his two most recent wins, the dominant facet of his game has not been his putting.  An outrageous statement?  Let me explain:

It has been his Long Game Efficiency!  Tiger consistently hit more greens in regulation in fewer long game strokes than anyone in golf.  When I discovered this 2000 and 2001, I created my patented Long Game Efficiency Index to quantify his prowess.  The index also works well for amateurs, and is the foundation of the Long Game analysis contained in ShotByShot.com and fully explained in: A Better Way to Track Long Game Improvement.

This is not to in any way diminish Tiger's putting.  His has been consistently ranked near the top since Strokes Gained Putting has been used to analyze putting by the PGA Tour.  Further, we have all witnessed over and over that Tiger is one of the best clutch putters of all time.  So what is my point?

In my analysis of the Winners on the PGA Tour, putting is more often than not the difference maker and the Winners often record 'Strokes Gained' totals above 2.00 and even 3.00 (meaning that they have "gained" 2+ or 3+ strokes on the field PER ROUND.  Not so with Tiger.

Since 2004, Tiger has recorded 29 wins in which Shotlink captured his putting and Strokes Gained numbers were published.  Here are the Strokes Gained putting highlights of his prior 28 Wins:

• 2013 Bay Hill was the first event with a SG total above 2.00 (an impressive 2.798)
• Tiger's prior high was 1.981 @ 2013 Honda - just 2 weeks ago.
• The average of his 28 prior wins was 1.087 vs. 1.398 and 1.360 for 2012 and 2011 winners respectively.
• Tiger posted a win at the 07 WGC Cadillac Champ. with a -.793 SG Total.  This means that he won despite giving back over 3 strokes to the field in four rounds.  I have seen this once before BUT in a much reduced field.  It was Rory McIlroy's -.21 in the BMW Championship semi-finals of the FEDEX Cup.  

Perhaps Tiger simply putts as well as needed when he feels a win coming.  He needed to putt well this week because he made FIVE driving errors (1-Penalty, 4-No Shots) and only hit 11.5 GIR's.  Not his, or ANYONE's typical winning numbers.

 

Finally, it should be noted that two of his best statistical putting performances EVER came in very close succession in his most recent two wins.  If Tiger has found something and can hold onto it for a couple of weeks, I make him a clear favorite at the Masters.  Ignore this if you are part of my Master's Weekend Pool!      

153rd Event a Charm for Kevin Streelman

It is a very nice story to see Kevin Streelman win after six years and 152 prior tries.  Further, he did not back into it but instead finished the event in grand style, all the while knowing exactly what he needed to do to beat the score posted before he even teed off.  

As I like to do, I collected and analyzed his Shot By Shot data and was slightly taken back by the fact that he failed to reach either of my Winner's benchmarks.  Something I said or wrote, Kevin?  Why would you go out of your way to make me look bad?  Perhaps he has not read my blog and was simply unaware of what it takes to win on the PGA Tour?  If so, no wonder it took him six years.....

Could there be another reason why my work did not measure up this week?  What if the course were just that much more difficult, thus pulling the "bars" down?  This could be, and having played the course, I can attest to the tight, tree-lined fairways, ample water hazards and severe greens.  But how to quantify the difficulty relative to the other nine courses played on Tour this year?  Let me count the ways:

1.  USGA Course Rating:  [Forget Slope rating as it is geared to the bogey golfer.]  The Copperhead's back tees rank 2nd most difficult @ 76.8 behind Torrey Pines @ 78.2.  The average of all ten courses hosting events this season is 75.7  The easiest: PGA West @ 74 - no wonder Brian Gay won at -25.  OK, I accept this as a fairly good measure.  However, having served on a local golf course rating committee, in order to completely understand the rating process, I learned that there can be regional discrepancies in outcome.

2.  Average Score for the Field:  This number reflects the course's inherent difficulty as well as the playing conditions during the week of the tournament.  Bingo!  The Copperhead field recorded the highest average score @ 72.2.  Further, the weather conditions were not bad.  The Plantation course at Kapalua was 2nd @ 72.1 (High winds caused the 1st round to be cancelled and dramatically influenced play throughout.)   The average for all ten courses was 70.8 and the easiest, again, PGA West @ 68.8.

OK, let's agree that the Copperhead course is and was playing hard enough to lower the proven statistical benchmarks for PGA Tour Winners - WHEW!

Oh, one more thing that Kevin Streelman did to insure his victory - not a single Driving ERROR on a course where these errors were very easy to come by.  No wonder Jim Furyk calls Copperhead "...his favorite course in the Florida swing."  It's driving difficulty not only levels the playing field, it tilts it in his favor.

How Good Was Tiger's Putting at Trump Doral?

The announcers and analysts raved about Tiger's putting this week, and rightly so.  Over the last few years I have noticed that the winners on the PGA Tour tend to separate themselves in the ranges between 10 and 20 feet.  Certainly 4 - 10 foot putts are important but all the contenders putt well inside 10 feet or they would not be there.  It is consistently making the longer 1-putts that earmarks the winners.

Tiger exemplified this trend in his win at Trump Doral this week.  The graph above displays Tiger this week, my 2012 Winner's profile and a large sample of Tiger's rounds - mostly wins - that I have collected over the past several years (Tiger Past).

I find three things of particular note about Tiger's putting:
1.  Tiger made 6 of 11 putts, or 55%, in the 16 - 20 foot range this week.  Try this at home!  Here are some comparative number for perspective on just how good this was:

• 2012 Winners:  made 23% (or less than 3 of 11);
• PGA Tour Average for 2013:  made 17% (or less than 2 of 11); 
• 15-19 Handicap:  makes 6% (or less than 1 of 11).  This group will actually 3-Putt from this range almost TWICE as often as 1-Putt.

2.  What is going on in the 11 - 15 foot range, Tiger?  At just 3 of 13 (23%), Tiger is quite a bit below the 2012 Winners, and it seems to be a pattern.  More comparative data:

• PGA Tour Average for 2013:  30%
• Event average:  31%
• 15-19 Handicap:  11%
• @ 23% Tiger is about a 0 handicap.

3.  Tiger 1-Putted 61% of the 71 holes where he had a putting opportunity (One "off shore" chip in).  This is exceptional:

• 2012 Winners:  46%
• PGA Tour Average for 2013:   39%
• Event average:  44% (remember, a reduced field of Top players)
• 15-19 Handicap:  21%  

Congratulations Tiger!  Nice to see you smile - it's good for the game.

Putting IS for Dough!

The Snedeker - Hahn final round pairing at Pebble was refreshing as Jim Nantz remarked: "...they smiled their entire way around the course."  One can only hope that their example sets a new trend on Tour.  As likeable as Brandt Snedeker is, James Hahn gives him an honest run...  His now famous dance on the 16th green at Scottsdale was not only artfully done but seemed genuinely spontaneous and joyous.  I actually watched his post, 3rd round interview online this week - I never do that.  Again, he is refreshingly happy to be there.  I learned that his nick name is "The Asian Brad Pitt."  Good to know!  James, you just may be my new favorite player on Tour.

Given that it was your first final-round share of the lead James, you made a very good showing.  Too bad you ran into a putting buzz saw.  The relatively small, Pebble greens were designed to be one of the defenses of this relatively short course.  That is short by today's standards @ 6,900+, par 72.  The greens were firm and fast and statistically difficult for all but Brandt, who blew the field away with 3.185 Strokes Gained on the greens in his final round.  Brandt did this with a 3-Putt from only 22 feet on the 9th hole.  That green alone set him back just over a full stroke.  Were it not for this blemish, Mr. Snedeker would have been in the rare air of 4+ Strokes Gained on the field.  Phil Mickelson did this to Tiger last year posting 4.78 Strokes Gained in his final-round to Tiger's -5.288 (Strokes Lost).  For more on this and an explanation of Strokes Gained Putting see:  (How-good-is-strokes-gained-putting?)

Let's put these Strokes Gained numbers into perspective:

1.  Brandt Snedeker was the #1 putter on Tour in 2012.  He averaged .86 Strokes Gained on the field over the entire year - IMPRESSIVE!  No wonder he won the FedX Cup!

2.  The 25 Winners that I studied in 2012 averaged 1.40 Strokes Gained per round.  Typically, three of their four rounds were gaining 1 to 3 strokes on the field and most winners survived a clunker - a slightly negative putting round.
   
The best 4-round total was 3.001.  Keegan Bradley @ Firestone.  All 4 rounds were plus numbers highlighted by 5.537 final round - the best total and the best single round I have seen.

The worst 4-round total:  -.21  Rory McIlroy @ Crooked Stick.  Incredibly, Rory lost strokes to the field in 3 of his 4 rounds.  It was; however, a much reduced field - the semi-finals of the FedX Cup.

The worst single round that I saw among the winners was Tiger who survived a 3rd round -2.649 on his way to victory at Muirfield.  Not to jump on Tiger, but his aforementioned -5.288 (against Phil at Pebble last year) is the worst single round I have seen.  Bear in mind, I usually only study the winners and players with whom I am working.

So, James Hahn's -.566 Strokes Gained final round does not seem all that bad.  However, when Stacked up against Brandt's positive 3.185, simple math reveals 3.75 of the five stroke difference in their scores.  They both hit 14 Greens and each made a single bogey.  The difference, Brandt rolled in EIGHT birdies while James made only THREE. 

Are "These Guys" getting better or just smarter?

I just noticed an interesting trend among the Tour Winners that I have been analyzing this year.  With one exception (Tiger @ Torrey Pines) they are hitting more Greens-in-Regulation than the winners from the same events last year.  Of all the old school stats, I have always held this one in high regard.  It represents two positives:  First, the long game has been good enough to get there; and second, it is a birdie opportunity.  I estimate that, on average, each missed GIR on Tour carries a cost of .75 strokes (-30% birdie chance + 44% bogey chance = 74% rounded to 75%). 

I decided to compare the entire field in each of the first five events (graph above) and sure enough EVERYONE is hitting more greens.  But why?

Driving the ball better?  I don't think so.  

   Accuracy is about the same:  56.2% vs. 56.6% for 2012 vs. 2013 respectively. 

   Distance is actually down a bit this year:  289 vs 292 at this point in 2012.

Proximity to Hole is better:   The Tour average YTD is almost two feet closer:  35' 5 vs. 37' 3' (2012).  Remember, even shots missing the green are included in this number so it is not pure putting distance.

Could the answer be improved equipment - the combination of slightly improved irons and balls?  I apologize that I do not have the answer but I will keep watching to see if the trend continues.

One last point of interest.  The scoring is also lower for the field this year vs. last year at the same point:  69.8 vs. 70.5 = .7 strokes lower.  My .75 average cost of a missed GIR comes very close to that number.  Difference in GIR's:  13.3 - 12.5 = .8 x .75 = .6   Close enough!  

Perhaps it is as simple as a growing awareness of the value of the GIR?   SMARTER!

Why didn't Josh Teater WIN at Torrey Pines?

First - More Blog Posts?

Just returned from the PGA Show in Orlando.  I had the pleasure of connecting with quite a few of my instructor/clients.  I am most gratified that they all: a) read this blog avidly; and b) expressed an interest in more posts.  I discussed this with my great friend, Henry Brunton, (now a bona fide instructor/coach Rock Star) as he echoed this sentiment.  Understanding the work that goes into each blog post, Henry suggested posting weekly, but making three of every four much shorter.  As I do with all of Henry's wise advice, I will take it.  Further, if YOU have a statistical topic that you would like me to explore, please let me know!

What about Josh Teater?  

Tied for 2nd, Josh finished six shots behind Tiger.  Just try to find those six shots in the stats...

Using some of my favorite statistical barometers [Stack-18 (explained) and the 70% Rule (70% Rule explained)], Josh's performance was clearly better than Tiger's.

I can only conclude that Josh sprinkled more than a few of those pesky ERRORS into his game - the ones that cost strokes but disappear in the Tour stats.  As the Tour's Shot Tracker data also disappears from its website at some point each Tuesday night, I cannot answer my own question.  But true to my word, it certainly makes for a much shorter blog....

I really did look for clues:

1.  Missed Fairway Percent - Other:  (The % of missed fairways that result in a location other than the fairway or rough.)

Josh had one of these "Others."  If it were an OB/Lost, it would account for at least 2 of the 6 lost shots but we'll never know.  BTW, this could also have been a par 4 drive that reached the putting surface.
According to the stats, Tiger had NONE of these Others but I don't trust this stat because on the 15th hole in the 4th round, Tiger drove into an "Unknown" location and incurred a penalty (drop).  If that's not an Other, what is?

2.  Proximity ARG - (How close to the hole on average for all shots starting within 30 yards of the edge of the green.)
I generally like this stat as it tends to correlate fairly closely to ShotByShot.com's short game proximity.  Josh ranked 53rd at 8' 2" average proximity.  This compares to Tiger's 7' 1" and the field's 7' 11".  My guess: Josh made some errors in this part of his game - but again, the proof is lost in the Tour stats.

Finally, if I were Josh Teater's coach, and spent the time to go through this exercise, I would be extremely frustrated with not being able to answer the important question:  Why didn't Josh Teater WIN at Torrey Pines?     

Were the Barclays greens unfair?

First, the Barclays felt a lot like a Major.  I give credit to Bethpage Black - with an assist from the FedEx Cup - for helping to insure that the top players remain engaged as the season winds down.  This course is hard.  With the rough long and thick and the greens fast and severe, it is every bit of its 78.1 course rating, and more.  My "A" group had the thrill of playing there just before it was closed down for the first Open.  We found it almost too hard to enjoy.

There was some whining about the greens being unfair this time, so I decided to dig into this a bit.  First, I have never seen a winner on the PGA Tour 3-putt SIX times as Nick Watney did.  Typically, a winner will have zero or one 3-putts.  Ricky Fowler survived FOUR 3-putts to win in a play-off at Quail Hollow - extremely unusual.  

I thought, "If the winner had six 3-putts, how did the rest of the field fare?  Were the greens unfair?"  For the answer, I re-read my recent blog, written after the 2012 Memorial, in which I discussed a reasonable measure of green difficulty - the age-old Tour stat:  3-Putt Avoidance:  The % of time 3 or more putts were taken for a hole (total 3 and 4-putts divided by the total holes played.)  To read this blog, click here.

According to my 3-Putt Avoidance barometer, Bethpage Black ranks right up there @ 3.51.  This says that the field averaged just over 2.5 3-Putts in 72 holes.  For perspective, the four Majors in 2012 averaged 3.91, with the Masters the most difficult @ 4.88; the British Open the most benign @ 2.53. 

Not quite satisfied, I dug deeper.  What about the number of players in any event that had ZERO 3-putts?  Surely this might provide a strong indicator as to the difficulty of the greens.  I looked at this stat for the 35 events in the books YTD:

# Players with ZERO 3-Putts by event

Fewest (Most Difficult Greens)

• 3 players (Augusta, TPC Sawgrass, Bay Hill)
• 5 players (Riviera, Quail Hollow)
• 6 players (Torry Pines, TPC San Antonio)
• 9 players (TPC Four Seasons, Colonial, Olympic, Congressional, Bethpage Black)

Average for all 35 events - 13 players had zero 3-putts

Most (Easiest Greens)

• 79 players (Trump Puerto Rico)
• 27 players (TPC Louisiana)
• 21 players (Waialea, Copperhead)

Two Points:

1.   Bethpage clearly did not stand out as unfair but stood up nicely with other Major venues as challanging.

2.  Wouldn't The Donald be horrified by this analysis.  To twist the blade, the field at the Trump Puerto Rico event was smaller than the average tour field at only 132 players.  So 60% of the field did not have a 3-Putt!  And dare I say that it was not the strongest field? 

  

Where has Ted Potter, Jr. been?

It was fun to see some new faces/personalities in the hunt at the Greenbriar Classic.  I recorded and analyzed Ted Potter, Jr.'s rounds and was impressed with how clean they were.  There were a couple of minor short game misses and only ONE, minor, driving error - a No-Shot result that required an advancement to return to play.  This made me wonder:  What exactly has Ted done in prior events and what suddenly changed?

Ted turned pro in 2002 and thru 2011 played in 74 events on the Web.com tour (formerly Nationwide Tour) but only made 19 cuts.  Ted's two wins in 2011 earned $439,000 and more importantly graduation to the PGA Tour.  Prior to his recent win, Ted played in 15 PGA Tour events but with little success:  9 missed cuts and T13 best finish.  What changed in Ted's game to suddenly produce a win?

Bottom line, lightning struck - he put it all together, and kept it together, for all four rounds. As you can see from the chart above, Ted's Stack-18 elements were slightly better than our 2012 Winner's profile.  For an explanation follow this link to an earlier blog:  Stack-18 Explained

As I looked at each of these key elements in Ted's 15 prior events, they were consistently below his Greenbriar performance:

Putting:   Ted's overall average is at least positive, but just (.18).  There has been a pattern of poor putting holding him back in that 7 of his 9 missed cuts featured negative Strokes Gained putting numbers (worse than the average of the entire field).  Ted had one very positive putting number (3.3) at Pebble Beach, but with only two rounds (MC).

GIR's:  Prior to this week, Ted was right at the Tour average for GIR's (62.8% = 11.3).  In his best finish (T13), Ted hit 71%.  He equaled his 72% at Greenbriar just once at the Wells Fargo, but again for only two rounds (MC).

Scrambling:  Ted's 80% this week was clearly a key factor in his success.  Saving par on 4 of the 5 missed GIR's each round is very good, even when compared to our Winner's profile.  His prior performance @54% is below the Tour avg. (56%) and in his 9 missed cuts Ted's average dropped to 48%.

If I were working with Ted and had collected and analyzed all of his 2012 rounds, I could provide clear indications of what really contributed to his lack of success before this week.  Certainly, putting is important and Strokes Gained nails that piece for us.  However, the 1.83 strokes difference amounts to only 30% of the 6.2 difference in Ted's scoring average.

What is the answer?  I have stated many times that my biggest issue with the Tour's robust "stats" is that they do not include ERRORS.  I have worked hard to find clues that allow me to infer the existence of these mistakes and have deduced that Ted's Driving and Long games have included 2 to 3 errors per round amounting to 60% of his scoring difference. 

No wonder Rickie Fowler hasn't WON before!

I have never paid much attention to Rickie Fowler - although he is hard to miss when he shows up dressed like a giant creamsicle.  But then, if I were paid what I can only guess he is paid, I would probably...  In what little I have seen of Rickie on TV, I have concluded that he is a poor putter.  He just seems to miss too many key putts when in the spotlight.  So when I saw him sneaking up the leaderboard on Sunday at Quail Hollow I assumed that he would fall short, again.  The fact that he hung on to win surprised me and made me question my belief that Rickie's weakness is his putting.  As I try to study the winner of every event, I looked forward to taking a close look at Rickie and what he did to get his first win.

First, my impressions were correct - Rickie is a POOR putter - by PGA Tour standards.  In this event he simply putted well enough to squeak by.  The Strokes Gained Putting stats - by far the Tour's BEST stat -  support my point (for an explanation of this stat, see: At-last-putting-analysis-we-can-trust):

• Fowler's Strokes Gained total of .672 at Quail Hollow was the second worst of the 13 Winners that I have studied this season.  Only Justin Rose putted worse in his win at Doral (.114).  
• The 2012 Winners have averaged 1.549.  This means they have gained 1.5+ strokes on the field per round, or just over six strokes per 4-round event. 
• Rickie has recorded NEGATIVE Strokes Gained putting totals in SIX of the TEN "measured" events this season.   (Measured means tour ShotLink data is collected.)
• His average for these six events is -1.345 vs. only .695 for the three positive Strokes Gained totals.
• For the season to date, Rickie is ranked 140 in this important stat.  His overall average per round is -.235.
• This is clearly why Rickie has had trouble getting a win on Tour.  Just like the old adage that "99% of putts that don't reach the hole, don't go in" - I can add that 99% of players that give back strokes to the field on the greens, DON'T WIN!  

So how did Rickie win at Quail Hollow?
Very simply, his long game carried him to victory.  It was sharp and efficient and featured zero serious errors.  His short game complemented his long game in that it was solid and also produced no errors.  Rickie's putting - just good enough.

Driving - 2nd in accuracy, but more importantly, no penalty strokes on a very difficult driving golf course with many well-placed hazards.

GIR's - Ranked 5th with 14.25.  This is very good -  the 2012 Winners average just under 13 GIR's.

Proximity ARG - Ranked 8th @ 5' 10."  This is the stat that measures the putting distance after every shot that starts within 30 yards of the edge of the green.  The field avg. was 7' 3."

Hopefully Rickie's coach has recognized and is addressing the glaring weakness in Rickie's game.  Clearly, if he expects to contend with top tier players on the PGA Tour, he needs dramatic improvement in his putting.