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

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

What makes a great putter?

Brandt Snedeker ranked #1 in Strokes Gained Putting for the 2012 PGA Tour year.  Quite an accomplishment to be considered the best of the best.  I decided to see if I could find the key to his putting prowess - was there something that clearly separated Brandt from the rest?  My conclusion:  Two things stand out.
     1.  Consistency
     2.  Distance control

Consistency
In 18 events covered by ShotLink, Brandt recorded a negative Strokes Gained total in only five (28%).  While negative, these five poor putting events were not horrible.  The average of the five was only -.325 (only giving up .325 shots per round to the field) and his worst was only -.64.  

Brandt's other 13 events were positive SG numbers and for the year Brandt averaged .860 strokes gained on the field.  This profile is the picture of putting consistency.

But what exactly does he do to achieve this high level of consistent performance?  The answer does not exactly leap out of the Tour stats.  Speaking of the ..., there are NINE putting stat categories and 110 individual putting stats.  Each is expressed in a number or percentage with a ranking for perspective.  Further, there is a high degree of compaction which causes the rankings to sometimes be misleading.  That said, rankings in the TOP-20 on Tour are good in ANY stat.  The Tour average tends to be around 75.

Brandt's ranking for the year in a few stats stood out and lead me to my conclusion:

• 1 Putts 10-15 feet - rank 4 (this range consistently shows up in the Winners on Tour)
• 1-Putts > 25 feet - rank 8
• Putts made over 10 feet - rank 3
• Putts made over 20 feet - rank 4  

I believe that Brandt's high level of success in the four stats mentioned above comes from a great confidence in his distance control and the relative absence of fear about the length of the next putt.

Distance control
In 2000 and 2001, when Tiger was the dominant player on tour, I did a study of his distance control as it related to the other top players at the time.  I found that they all tended to average 7% of their start distance (40 foot start ==> inside 3 feet = 7%).  I also found that Tiger set himself apart by getting a higher percentage of his long distance lag putts to or past the hole.

ShotLink makes this exercise quite a bit easier and precise.  A study of Brand Snedeker's 2012 putts of 25 feet and greater revealed a similar result:

• His overall average lag distance - 6.5%
• 2-Putts - 5.8%
• 3-Putts - 14.2%

In both instances above (2 and 3 Putts), Brandt got 63% of these long putts to or past the hole.  I can't help but think of the annoying refrain:  Never up, never in!  Obviously, Brandt has taken it to heart.

Finally, we amateurs should take heed and work on distance control.  I like to focus on 10% of the start distance as my goal and highly recommend it.  First, we don't do this for a living and second, the math is much easier.

iPhone App Now Available!

Finally, the App was approved by Apple yesterday morning 5/3/13 and is available as a FREE download from the App Store.  Follow this link:  Download App

Some of the features that I believe make it appealing:

• Large buttons and numeric keypad makes data entry easy, especially while walking.  I am able to use it on the course WITHOUT my reading glasses.
• No data connection is required while entering data - works perfectly in "offline" mode.
• We added Front nine and Back nine review screens to help ensure data accuracy.
• Missing data is highlighted, with easy navigation to fix them.
• "Jump to Hole" feature makes navigation simple.
• Bonus stat summary, such as Driving - Fairways and Errors as well as Short game Saves vs. Errors.  Instant feedback on your round.
• Courses - Choose from your entire course list, or add a new course on the fly.

It has been a long time coming but I am excited to finally have a product of which I am very proud.  I used it every round during my recent 6-round trip (Field tests).  It was quick and easy - not at all a distraction.  Best of all, when I finished my round I had checked and entered it by the time I had changed my shoes.

I will be very interest in your feedback. 

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?     

What effect did the wind have on the 30 champions in Kapalua?

The Plantation course at Kapalua is a bomber's paradise with ample targets and large greens.  The four par 5's as well as three of the par 4's are reachable.  It is no surprise that a player like Dustin Johnson, if on his game, would win.  I found the most interesting aspect of this event to be the severe winds and their impact on performance.

The greatest impact was on putting!

Kapalua's greens are always near the top by my measure of difficulty, but were even more so this week due to extreme winds.  [For more on my measure of relative green difficulty, see my last entry:  Were the Barclays Greens Unfair?]  I look at two stats as a measure of putting difficulty:

1.  3-Putt Avoidance - the higher the number or frequency of 3-Putts, the more difficult the greens;

2.  # of Players in the field with ZERO 3-Putts - the lower the number, the more difficult...

3-Putt Avoidance

Last year the field at Kapalua was 5.04% - the highest of all the courses that I checked in my 2012 study.  5.04% means that the entire field (only 30 player/champions) averaged 3.6 3-Putts in 72 holes.  For perspective, in a typical tournament, an average field would 3-Putt twice in 72 holes.  This year the average for the Hyundai field at Kapalua was 7.47%.  The 30 champions averaged FOUR 3-Putts in just 54 holes.  Further, Dustin Johnson (the winner) had three 3-Putts.  Most PGA Tour winners have NONE, but some sneak by with only one putting blemish.

Players with zero 3-Putts

The average for the 25 courses in my 2012 study was 12 players.  In the 2012 Hyundai, only ONE player in the field escaped without a 3-Jack.  (Guess who?*)  This year's field not only had NO such lucky players, the best were seven players that had only two 3-Putts.  None of the events in last year's study had NO players in this category.

The long game was the least affected

Greens-hit in-regulation achieved by the field were almost identical from 2012 to 2013:  14.6 vs. 14.5.  Even these numbers are high as the Tour average in 2012 was 11.3 GIR's.

Finally, I thought that approach shot accuracy would certainly be affected by the high winds - I know mine is.  Not so much!  Proximity to the hole following approach shots was also very close from 2012 to 2013:  40' 7" vs. 41' 1".  Literally only six inches or less than 1% difference in accuracy in 30 to 40 MPH gusting winds.  THESE GUYS REALLY ARE GOOD!

*Bubba Watson!

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. 

No Wonder Luke Donald is #1 in the World!

 

Last week I mentioned one of my general rules for winning on the PGA Tour:  Stack-18.  I emphasize GENERAL because as with most RULES it does not always hold true.  Such was the case with Justin Rose last week at the WGC event.  I pointed this out because Justin was the lowest "Stack" Winner that I have seen at 16.6.  By contrast, Luke Donald built the highest Stack at 20.9 when he recently won the Transitions Championship.  

What is Stack-18?

In my ongoing study of the Winners on Tour, I have observed that they consistently stack up a total of  the following three key stats for a grand total of 18:

1.  GIR's

2.  Successful Scrambles - The number of par saves when the GIR is missed.

3.  Strokes Gained - Putting

I take each of these stats (per round averages for the event) and add them together.  As you can see from the chart above, the average total for the winners of the first nine tournaments of 2012 is 18.1 (this excludes Luke Donald).  With the exception of Luke and the aforementioned Justin Rose, there is an eerie consistency among the rest as they are tightly clustered around the magic #18.  

The reason Luke Donald's stack is so high is that he actually doubles up on two pieces of the stack.  His successful scrambles (79%) are high because of his short game prowess AND his exceptional putting.  Luke's short game is strong but his putting is the best on Tour.  He was #1 in Strokes Gained Putting in 2011 and #1 in the Transitions tournament at 2.59.  This number tells us that based upon the distance of each putting opportunity, and the number of putts needed to hole out, Luke beat the average putting performance of the Transitions' field by an average of 2.59 shots per round - or over 10 strokes in total for the tournament.

Despite a lone 3-putt (50 ft.), Luke Donald 1-putted 34 of 70 holes (that's 49%!!) and OH, he holed out from "off-shore" on the other two holes.  In addition to his 17, par saving, 1-putts to achieve a 79% Scrambling stat (the Tour avg. is 58%), Luke had 17 additional 1-putt greens.   I hope my fellow Master's pool participants aren't reading this ... little chance,  only a couple of them can read.

Muirfield's Front 9 Must be EASY?

In four rounds, Steve Stricker was 24 strokes lower on the front 9 than he was on the back!  If the opening track is not much easier, perhaps he needs an energy bar or a beer at the turn?

A brief story about my tour around Muirfield Village

Actually, the 9's are not anywhere near that different.  I have walked, no ran them.  Years ago, I was asked to provide our unique ShotByShot.com analysis for the marquee group in the Wednesday, Pro Am prior to the Memorial.  The Group: Jack, the CEO of the named sponsor, and two prominent clients.  Realizing that it would be inappropriate to expect this group to learn our system and record data during what could be the most pressure-packed round of three of their golfing lives, I agreed to walk with the group and record the data myself.  What could be more fun -  walk 18 holes with Jack Nicklaus???  NOT EXACTLY, as the gods or the PGA Tour was not on my side - they would not allow me inside the ropes.  Believing that a commitment is a commitment, I agreed to accomplish my task from the OUTSIDE looking in.  It proved to be one of the most difficult feats I have ever undertaken.

During Saturday's telecast Ian Baker-Finch mentioned that the course featured water hazards on 13 holes.  I can confirm this because I jumped over or trudged through all 13.  Further, most meander along the entire hole, crossing the fairway multiple times.  A good friend, and member of Muirfield Village, refers to it affectionately as a 6 to 10 ball round for the average 15 handicap golfer.  I looked it up and the USGA's "Bogey rating" is 105.3.  That says that the average 18 handicap golfer is expected to shoot 33 strokes over par here.  Incidentally, the Course ratings for the front and back 9's are less than one stroke different:  Front 38.1 vs. Back 38.8. 

  

What else was remarkable?

Just before the Masters, I listed a few things that I have noticed that the Winners of PGA Tour events have in common.  One is Off Shore Holeouts - or that most winners will hole out from off the green once in their four rounds.  But Stricker's FOUR holeouts is outrageous!  OK, two were short game opportunities - not that uncommon.  The other two were special:  

• 2nd Round, Par 3, 8th hole:  Ace from 185 yards.
• 3rd Round, Par 4, 2nd hole:  116 yard approach shot - holed - Eagle.

I can't explain it but, like the two above, most of Steve's fireworks happened on the front 9 and, given these thunderbolts, NO WONDER HE WON!  

So Much for Hitting Fairways!

I enjoyed watching Anthony Kim win in a playoff this weekend at the Shell Houston Open. Ironically, he won the playoff hole by hitting both the fairway and the green in regulation and a 2-putt par. The irony being the "fairway" because AK hit fewer fairways, by far, than I have seen from other winners on the PGA Tour - only 41% - or just over 5 of 14 fairways each round. What makes this stat even more remarkable is that Anthony started the event by hitting his first 7 fairways. After that, no so much!

AK's win dramatizes the uselessness of this ancient stat - and when will Johnny Miller get with the program because he continues to refer to it along with the other outdated measures of performance. That said, Johnny has become a fan of the Tour's newish Total Feet of Putts Made stat. While this stat is way better than the hated (mostly by me) Putts/GIR stat, Total Feet still lacks the important perspective of starting distances. It also does not account for 3-putts, or worse. I can't wait for the Tour to implement the "new" MIT approach (go to "Just a Minute MIT..." for an explanation) to see if/how the announcers explain it.

But back to Anthony Kim. Despite his apparent lack of driving accuracy, he still managed to hit over 12 Greens-in-regulation each round. So while he missed fairways, he did not miss so badly that he could not recover. In fact, he made only four Errors off the tee - two Penalties and two "No Shot" situations. (No Shot = a ball driven into a position from which one cannot proceed normally toward their next goal, requiring some sort of advancement shot to put the ball back in play.) This is still uncharacteristic as our PGA Tour Winner's Profile only records a mistake off the tee once in every two rounds, with the vast majority being the No Shot type. A Penalty off the tee creeps into our Winner's game only once every 14 rounds. For perspective, the average 10 handicap golfer drives the ball into trouble more than three times EACH round: No Shot = 2.8 per round; Penalty = .5 per round.

I submit that AK was able to survive these Errors because EVERYONE was making them. The Redstone, Tournament course has more water than my basement (Northeast joke). Taylor Vaughn tied for the lead with an identical number of tee shot errors (2 Penalties, 2 No Shots) and Phil Mickelson made light of the number of tee shots he dunked. I would like to see the averages for the field but the Tour has no such stat - yet.

On the other hand, it must be noted that the rough was cut unusually low, in part to emulate the playing conditions of next week's Masters. This helps account for how AK could hit so many greens from the rough.

Speaking of the Masters, Phil Mickelson is my pick to win. Not a great stretch as he has proved he can do it more than once. Why this year? I was very impressed with his attitude and sense of humor in his post event interview. He seems more relaxed and comfortable than I have seen in the past.

How Refreshing - A Real Par 5!

The AT & T Pebble Beach Pro-Am is played on three different courses and ShotLink is only set up on one - Pebble Beach. As a result, Shot By Shot's analysis can only be done on two of the four rounds of this tournament, which makes an in-depth analysis of what won and what didn't impossible. Nevertheless, it was still a very entertaining event on a magnificent golf course.

It was nice to see an exciting finish and I was stunned by the car wrecks on the par-5, 14th hole, especially by the two final groups. First, a quadruple bogey (+4) is somewhat rare on the PGA Tour and generally follows a major mistake off the tee requiring a re-tee. In this case we saw two contenders for the lead play hockey around the 14th green for back-to-back 9's. Bryce Molder and then Paul Goydos did their best impressions of choppers. It was both hard to watch and interesting to see how well they handled their demise.

They were not alone as the hole ranked the 5th most difficult of the 54 holes played with an average score of 5.187. Not that anyone really cares about the hole rankings or how they are ranked, but I believe this hole was clearly the most difficult and should have been ranked #1. Instead of ranking based upon the greatest margin over par, the holes should be ranked based upon the greatest margin from the Tour's average scoring on holes of like par. Below are the scoring averages for the entire 2009 PGA Tour season:
Par 3's = 3.08
Par 4's = 4.06
Par 5's = 4.68

The event score for the 14th hole was a full half stroke higher than the 2009 Tour scoring average on par 5's. According to this week's ranking, the most difficult hole at Pebble was the par 4, 9th with a scoring average of 4.253. OK, it was .25 strokes over par and that is difficult but it was only .19 strokes over the average scores that can be expected on par 4 holes at this level. See my point?

It is obvious that with today's length, the par 5 holes represent the real scoring opportunities on the PGA Tour. If players can't hit the greens in two, and most can, they can lay up to their favorite wedge distance and attack the flags.

What then was so hard about the 14th at Pebble? It was not the tee shot - 65% of the players hit the fairway (YTD Tour Avg. for Fairways Hit is only 62%). It was the green which presents a very small and unforgiving target. Only 53% of the field hit it in regulation. This compares to the Tour average of 84% for GIR's from 125 yards or less. The approach and short game shots to the small, firm plateau proved unusually difficult. It really did look like hockey as the balls slid past the hole, picking up speed as they ran over the other sides of the green.

Bottom line, #14 played a meaningful role in determining the winner. In addition to culling the list of hopefuls (Molder & Goydos), the 14th green extracted a critical bogey from David Duval (runner-up by 1). Finally, Dustin Johnson could credit his 1-stroke win to the very intelligent par that he recorded on this hole.

It will be very interesting to see how the USGA sets up #14, and how the players handle it, in the US Open later this year.

Fairways Hit? Fuhgeddaboudit!

Ability to hit fairways has long been the traditional measure of golf driving accuracy. It is, after all, our goal when we stand on the tee of a par 4 or par 5 hole. But, like most traditional golf statistics, it is one-dimensional. That’s because it asks for a simple Yes/No answer to a question that forces us to focus mainly on the Yes. Why? Because conventional wisdom has us believing that ‘Yes’ is the most positive outcome. But think about it – is that really the case?

Over the past 18 years we have analyzed golf performance at every level – including PGA Tour players – and have concluded that hitting or missing fairways is a statistic of limited relevance. Of far greater importance is the character and severity of the miss. Did the ball land just in the light rough, in a bunker, behind a tree (with or without a shot?), disappear in a pond, or worst of all – go lost or OB?

The higher the level of the player’s golf game, the less relevant is the number of fairways hit to improvement or performance. A recent study of performance on the PGA Tour conducted by two professors at Northeastern University in Boston cited the declining importance of driving accuracy due primarily to increasing driving distances. To support this, during his 2007 seven-event winning streak, Tiger Woods hit only 61% of the fairways. In the final event of that streak at Torrey Pines, Tiger hit only 46% of the fairways en route to victory. Of far greater importance was the fact that Tiger’s tee shots resulted in an ERROR in only 2% of his total attempts. (ERROR = a result that was a penalty, or in a position from which he did not have a normal advancement opportunity for his next shot.)

At the amateur level, the frequency and severity of errors tends to be directly correlated to the handicap. In a study of single-digit handicap golfers that I conducted several years ago, I determined that over 80% of double bogeys began with an error from the tee. A double bogey is the dreaded, scoring anathema for this low handicap group. I have found that these errors have much more to do with long game effectiveness. And developing a strategy to avoid errors is much more important to the improvement process than focusing on the number of fairways hit.

Test your game:
•Step #1: Play your normal game and track your tee shot errors (Remember, ERROR = a penalty, or in a position from which there is not a normal advancement opportunity for your next shot) in your next few rounds to see where you stack up on the chart below. In a typical round, you will have 14 driving opportunities. One error would be 7% (1/14).

PGA Tour 5% errors
0-5 hcp 10%
6-10 hcp 19%
11-15 hcp 30%
16-25 hcp 42%
26-35 hcp 57%

Step #2: Next, play a few rounds where you make conscious choices to avoid these errors and see what effect it has on your score. This means selecting both the club and target that provides the greatest guarantee of success. It might mean using 3-wood or even 5-iron off the tee and playing away from potential trouble. It will take discipline. But if mistakes off the tee are a problem, you will be surprised at the improvements you will see.

(For more detailed information on your own personal Driving Performance, check out the game analysis options available at http://www.shotbyshot.com/.)