Jump to content

Titleist golf ball study; Finally, some facts added to the debate


Roadking2003

Recommended Posts

Ever see this? Surprised many...

 

http://www.espn.com/...erence-bay-hill

 

"Mark Broadie, a professor at Columbia University's business school, is a pioneer of the strokes-gained approach to PGA Tour statistics."

 

 

"Over the years, Broadie has looked very closely at the strokes-gained performance of Tiger Woods. Broadie used PGA Tour ShotLink data from 2003 to 2010 to determine that Tiger gained 3.2 strokes per round over the average tour player. The biggest chunk of those strokes gained during that period came from his long game (2.08), with his short game (0.42) and his putting (0.70) accounting for the rest."

 

Not surprised at all. His iron play was way better than anybody else. I suspect that his long game (2.08) gain was 100% irons. Or maybe over 100% since he was so wild off the tee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 550
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

This topic makes for some great debate. IMO, if they roll the golf ball back for everyone......it will be a dead story within 6-12 months. We will all adjust and it will be no big deal. Now if they choose bifurcation......that's where it gets really interesting for me. Either way I hope the USGA is also taking a serious look at what will make the game easier and faster for the average golfer. That's where the game needs help desperately.

 

 

I agree, we will still need a ball to play with and it will be the same for everyone. Bifurcation could potentially cause more problems than it solves.

 

To be fair they are looking at speeding up the game and as Uhit suggests in an earlier post, if we the players get on with it and play ready golf theatre will help a lot.

 

I truly hate lines on golf balls and people using them as an alignment aid.

Taylormade Sim 2 Max - 10.5 Ventus Blue 6X
Titleist TSR3 - @15.75 Tensei 1K Black 75X
Titleist TSR3 Hybrid - @20 Tensei 1K Black 85X

Titleist 620 CB  - 4 iron - Dynamic Gold Tour Issue X100

Titleist 620 MB - 5-pw - Dynamic Gold Tour Issue X100

Vokey SM9 - 52.08, 56S  & 60M Dynamic Gold Tour Issue S400
Taylormade Spider Tour X - X3
Titleist - Pro V1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's data from 2017. It seems there was interest in learning how Spieth is able to score better than the golfers in his range. I had 2017 data on hand, so I filtered strokes gained data to only include players within 5 yards of Spieth's driving distance (so 290.6 - 300.6).

 

It looks like in 2017, Spieth is doing it with approach shots. Even short game and putting combined don't equal the whopping .779 strokes per round he's gaining on his peers. Altogether, he has a 1.545 stroke advantage on the guys with similar distance.

 

This will be interesting to reproduce with 2015 data, his outlier year.

 

When the data you show are correct, then the SG Tee 0.276 have to stem from his driving accuracy, which has to be better than that of his peers (with comparable driving distance).

Otherwise your data is not correct.

 

In a raw sense, yes, his accuracy would likely be better. This doesn't necessarily mean more FIRs, though I'll take a look at that. It could just mean more open looks to the green, regardless of lie, and/or fewer OB shots.

 

I'll include FIRs when I do 2015.

 

You see, SG is missing something, and is sometimes more obfuscating, than revealing.

 

Maybe Spieth just knows when and where to miss, a tad better, than his peers...

...and this has nothing to do with driving distance, and is not that easy to grab with SG.

 

What if this knowledge also has helped Tiger, Jack etc.?

 

Distance is not the problem, neither is the ball a problem...

...the problem is in between the ears...

...golf is known for that.

 

Well, that's why people prefer SG over traditional stats like FIR - because not all misses are created equal. We know intuitively that a "good" tee shot is some combination of long, accurate and in bounds! But you're right, it's hard sometimes to tease out the nuances.

 

So, here, I present to you 2015 Jordan Spieth. Tell me what you see here. I see a guy who hit more fairways, and was closer to the center of the fairway that his peers. This would tell me by law of averages, fewer big misses, perhaps better misses. To gain .398 strokes off the tee without adding distance is impressive.

 

His advantage over his peers was pretty mixed between long game and short game. He was just flat-out good. So, it's my opinion that we can't just say the difference between him and his peers was purely short game. It was about 50/50 each.

 

This was a fun exercise. Thanks for the good discussion.

 

EDIT: Accuracy is measured in feet to center of fairway.

 

Well, the differences in accuracy are tiny - to say the least...

 

...and distance is playing no role in this case.

 

This shows, that he just made less mistakes than others - during a whole season.

 

That made his success - his strength between the ears.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's data from 2017. It seems there was interest in learning how Spieth is able to score better than the golfers in his range. I had 2017 data on hand, so I filtered strokes gained data to only include players within 5 yards of Spieth's driving distance (so 290.6 - 300.6).

 

It looks like in 2017, Spieth is doing it with approach shots. Even short game and putting combined don't equal the whopping .779 strokes per round he's gaining on his peers. Altogether, he has a 1.545 stroke advantage on the guys with similar distance.

 

This will be interesting to reproduce with 2015 data, his outlier year.

 

Spieth probably had the best iron game on Tour in 2017.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I re-did the Top 30 to show earnings per event. The Top 12 are all above-average in distance. 80% of the top 30 are above-average in distance. This is further highlighted in my scatter plot, where I highlight the Top 30. A lot of guys to the right of the average. If you're earning big money, you're longer than average.

 

I think the discussion should mostly be about the top 30 on tour. When you include all 190 or so you can get really bad numbers for the weaker players.

 

The question in my mind is "what do the top 30 or so players do that keeps them on top"? I suspect they don't have a big weakness in any area of their game.

 

Other questions;

 

Would Spieth have won more events if he drove the ball as far as Rory (+20 yards)? My guess is no.

 

Would Rory have won more events if he hit his irons like Spieth (Spieth had about 1 more GIR per round, or four per event)? My guess is yes. More GIRs means more chances for birdies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's data from 2017. It seems there was interest in learning how Spieth is able to score better than the golfers in his range. I had 2017 data on hand, so I filtered strokes gained data to only include players within 5 yards of Spieth's driving distance (so 290.6 - 300.6).

 

It looks like in 2017, Spieth is doing it with approach shots. Even short game and putting combined don't equal the whopping .779 strokes per round he's gaining on his peers. Altogether, he has a 1.545 stroke advantage on the guys with similar distance.

 

This will be interesting to reproduce with 2015 data, his outlier year.

 

Spieth probably had the best iron game on Tour in 2017.

 

No doubt about that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I re-did the Top 30 to show earnings per event. The Top 12 are all above-average in distance. 80% of the top 30 are above-average in distance. This is further highlighted in my scatter plot, where I highlight the Top 30. A lot of guys to the right of the average. If you're earning big money, you're longer than average.

 

I think the discussion should mostly be about the top 30 on tour. When you include all 190 or so you can get really bad numbers for the weaker players.

 

The question in my mind is "what do the top 30 or so players do that keeps them on top"? I suspect they don't have a big weakness in any area of their game.

 

Other questions;

 

Would Spieth have won more events if he drove the ball as far as Rory (+20 yards)? My guess is no.

 

Would Rory have won more events if he hit his irons like Spieth (Spieth had about 1 more GIR per round, or four per event)? My guess is yes. More GIRs means more chances for birdies.

 

Hey, I've got some range time and then I'm playing some bball tonight... these will have to wait!

 

But I do have some thoughts on how we can get some approximate answers. We'll never know for sure, but it's fun to make assumptions based on the most sound math we can use.

 

It's what I do all day for work... and today was a slow day. Lucky us!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Other questions;

 

Would Spieth have won more events if he drove the ball as far as Rory (+20 yards)? My guess is no.

 

Would Rory have won more events if he hit his irons like Spieth (Spieth had about 1 more GIR per round, or four per event)? My guess is yes. More GIRs means more chances for birdies.

 

...but the accuracy increase by being nearly 2 clubs closer also gives potential for more/better birdie looks. It can't be ignored.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I re-did the Top 30 to show earnings per event. The Top 12 are all above-average in distance. 80% of the top 30 are above-average in distance. This is further highlighted in my scatter plot, where I highlight the Top 30. A lot of guys to the right of the average. If you're earning big money, you're longer than average.

 

I think the discussion should mostly be about the top 30 on tour. When you include all 190 or so you can get really bad numbers for the weaker players.

 

The question in my mind is "what do the top 30 or so players do that keeps them on top"? I suspect they don't have a big weakness in any area of their game.

 

Other questions;

 

Would Spieth have won more events if he drove the ball as far as Rory (+20 yards)? My guess is no.

 

Would Rory have won more events if he hit his irons like Spieth (Spieth had about 1 more GIR per round, or four per event)? My guess is yes. More GIRs means more chances for birdies.

 

 

dont know about that one..plus 20 yards probably puts 5 more wedges in JS hands a round.... has to equal at least 1 stroke a round.. likely 2... thats HUGE!

Callaway epic max LS 9* GD-M9003 7x 

TM Sim2 max tour  16* GD  ADHD 8x 

srixon zx 19* elements 9F5T 

Cobra king SZ 25.5* KBS TD cat 5 70 

TM p7mc 5-pw Mmt125tx 

Mizuno T22 raw 52-56-60 s400

LAB Mezz Max armlock 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic makes for some great debate. IMO, if they roll the golf ball back for everyone......it will be a dead story within 6-12 months. We will all adjust and it will be no big deal. Now if they choose bifurcation......that's where it gets really interesting for me. Either way I hope the USGA is also taking a serious look at what will make the game easier and faster for the average golfer. That's where the game needs help desperately.

 

A ball rollback for everyone creates problems for everyone, pro's, amateurs, golf courses and golf equipment manufacturers. You can't cut 10% from all of our iron and wood shots and not have it impact our index. Our indexes will need to be adjusted or all courses will have to be re-evaluated.

 

Many courses will not play as they were designed for the majority of golfers unless new tee boxes are created.

 

Manufacturers will have to formulate a new conforming ball that lacks the performance of previous versions and have to get them certified by the USGA. The manufacturers and golf stores will take a huge loss from having an inventory of non-conforming balls The pre-owned / refurbished ball market will likely be wiped out until enough of the new conforming balls are lost.

 

Tournament directors at club, amateur, college and pro levels will have to ensure non-conforming balls are not used intentionally or accidentally.

 

Older players, new golfers and some ladies will become more frustrated playing the game given a 10% loss in distance.

 

The rollback introduces a host of new problems to the entire sport and industry in hopes of ensuring pro's don't figure out a way to hit the new conforming ball too far that would result in more whining from Jack and others.

Driver - Callaway Paradym
Woods - Callaway Paradym 3W
Hybrids - XXIO 10 3H, 4H, 5H
Irons - Callaway Paradym 6-52*
Wedge - PXG Forged 56** 
Putter - Ping TYNE C
Ball - Titleist AVX

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic makes for some great debate. IMO, if they roll the golf ball back for everyone......it will be a dead story within 6-12 months. We will all adjust and it will be no big deal. Now if they choose bifurcation......that's where it gets really interesting for me. Either way I hope the USGA is also taking a serious look at what will make the game easier and faster for the average golfer. That's where the game needs help desperately.

 

A ball rollback for everyone creates problems for everyone, pro's, amateurs, golf courses and golf equipment manufacturers. You can't cut 10% from all of our iron and wood shots and not have it impact our index. Our indexes will need to be adjusted or all courses will have to be re-evaluated.

 

Many courses will not play as they were designed for the majority of golfers unless new tee boxes are created.

 

Manufacturers will have to formulate a new conforming ball that lacks the performance of previous versions and have to get them certified by the USGA. The manufacturers and golf stores will take a huge loss from having an inventory of non-conforming balls The pre-owned / refurbished ball market will likely be wiped out until enough of the new conforming balls are lost.

 

Tournament directors at club, amateur, college and pro levels will have to ensure non-conforming balls are not used intentionally or accidentally.

 

Older players, new golfers and some ladies will become more frustrated playing the game given a 10% loss in distance.

 

The rollback introduces a host of new problems to the entire sport and industry in hopes of ensuring pro's don't figure out a way to hit the new conforming ball too far that would result in more whining from Jack and others.

 

 

Bifurcation answers 99% of that... and the handicap issues wipe themselves out after 20 rounds....

Callaway epic max LS 9* GD-M9003 7x 

TM Sim2 max tour  16* GD  ADHD 8x 

srixon zx 19* elements 9F5T 

Cobra king SZ 25.5* KBS TD cat 5 70 

TM p7mc 5-pw Mmt125tx 

Mizuno T22 raw 52-56-60 s400

LAB Mezz Max armlock 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are NO numbers or statistics you can point out that will change the attitude behind this "idea". They want Dustin Johnson to hit the same club into #13 at Augusta, from the same spot in the fairway as Jack did in 1975. Or Tiger in 1998. Or Bobby Jones in 1935. Or something.

 

Correct. I love you guys on the stats train doing solid work. But this isn't about stats. This is the anchored putter thing all over again - nobody can conclusively demonstrate that it's more effective, but the old men in blue jackets are offended by how it "looks".

 

I understand what you're saying, but I think it's clearly been demonstrated that hitting the balls further is a more effective way to play golf. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your point.

 

Agree there was no demonstrated advantage to anchored putters. At the top level of sport, games evolve. People figure them out. Strategies change. Don't panic.

 

It's always been the case that long hitters are at an advantage - nobody is bothered by that truism.

 

They don't like the optics of guys hitting nine irons from the same spot where Ben Hogan hit a legendary one iron.

 

I seriously do not understand how anyone can be okay with the optics of guys hitting nine iron from the same spot Ben Hogan hit one iron. Five iron or maybe even six iron, yes. But definitely not nine iron. That's an indication that the ball goes too far if there ever was one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are NO numbers or statistics you can point out that will change the attitude behind this "idea". They want Dustin Johnson to hit the same club into #13 at Augusta, from the same spot in the fairway as Jack did in 1975. Or Tiger in 1998. Or Bobby Jones in 1935. Or something.

 

Correct. I love you guys on the stats train doing solid work. But this isn't about stats. This is the anchored putter thing all over again - nobody can conclusively demonstrate that it's more effective, but the old men in blue jackets are offended by how it "looks".

 

I understand what you're saying, but I think it's clearly been demonstrated that hitting the balls further is a more effective way to play golf. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your point.

 

Agree there was no demonstrated advantage to anchored putters. At the top level of sport, games evolve. People figure them out. Strategies change. Don't panic.

 

It's always been the case that long hitters are at an advantage - nobody is bothered by that truism.

 

They don't like the optics of guys hitting nine irons from the same spot where Ben Hogan hit a legendary one iron.

 

I seriously do not understand how anyone can be okay with the optics of guys hitting nine iron from the same spot Ben Hogan hit one iron. Five iron or maybe even six iron, yes. But definitely not nine iron. That's an indication that the ball goes too far if there ever was one.

 

I'm sure when Byron Nelson was winning everything in sight there were people who couldn't understand why anyone can be okay with the optics of that upright, quick swing with steel shafts when everyone knew golf was supposed to be played with a long, patient swing waiting for hickory shafts to whip around and catch up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic makes for some great debate. IMO, if they roll the golf ball back for everyone......it will be a dead story within 6-12 months. We will all adjust and it will be no big deal. Now if they choose bifurcation......that's where it gets really interesting for me. Either way I hope the USGA is also taking a serious look at what will make the game easier and faster for the average golfer. That's where the game needs help desperately.

 

A ball rollback for everyone creates problems for everyone, pro's, amateurs, golf courses and golf equipment manufacturers. You can't cut 10% from all of our iron and wood shots and not have it impact our index. Our indexes will need to be adjusted or all courses will have to be re-evaluated.

 

Many courses will not play as they were designed for the majority of golfers unless new tee boxes are created.

 

Manufacturers will have to formulate a new conforming ball that lacks the performance of previous versions and have to get them certified by the USGA. The manufacturers and golf stores will take a huge loss from having an inventory of non-conforming balls The pre-owned / refurbished ball market will likely be wiped out until enough of the new conforming balls are lost.

 

Tournament directors at club, amateur, college and pro levels will have to ensure non-conforming balls are not used intentionally or accidentally.

 

Older players, new golfers and some ladies will become more frustrated playing the game given a 10% loss in distance.

 

The rollback introduces a host of new problems to the entire sport and industry in hopes of ensuring pro's don't figure out a way to hit the new conforming ball too far that would result in more whining from Jack and others.

 

They could experiment with a local rule, that allows distance restricted (Range-) balls for certain tournaments - and avoid the risk to screw up the golfing community and the golfing industry.

 

However, the data show, that we have since about 15 years stability - which shows, that the ball is neither the problem, nor the solution to a made up problem (if there is a problem at all).

 

Btw. how many golfer started playing golf after 2002?

 

It would be a dumb decision, to skew the stability, perceived by the generation of golfers, who has to carry the game into the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ever see this? Surprised many...

 

http://www.espn.com/...erence-bay-hill

 

"Mark Broadie, a professor at Columbia University's business school, is a pioneer of the strokes-gained approach to PGA Tour statistics."

 

 

"Over the years, Broadie has looked very closely at the strokes-gained performance of Tiger Woods. Broadie used PGA Tour ShotLink data from 2003 to 2010 to determine that Tiger gained 3.2 strokes per round over the average tour player. The biggest chunk of those strokes gained during that period came from his long game (2.08), with his short game (0.42) and his putting (0.70) accounting for the rest."

 

Not surprised at all. His iron play was way better than anybody else. I suspect that his long game (2.08) gain was 100% irons. Or maybe over 100% since he was so wild off the tee.

 

Youd be surprised at how highly ranked TW was in sg driving in his prime. Often in the top 10.

 

Myth: TW was a terrible driver.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ever see this? Surprised many...

 

http://www.espn.com/...erence-bay-hill

 

"Mark Broadie, a professor at Columbia University's business school, is a pioneer of the strokes-gained approach to PGA Tour statistics."

 

 

"Over the years, Broadie has looked very closely at the strokes-gained performance of Tiger Woods. Broadie used PGA Tour ShotLink data from 2003 to 2010 to determine that Tiger gained 3.2 strokes per round over the average tour player. The biggest chunk of those strokes gained during that period came from his long game (2.08), with his short game (0.42) and his putting (0.70) accounting for the rest."

 

Not surprised at all. His iron play was way better than anybody else. I suspect that his long game (2.08) gain was 100% irons. Or maybe over 100% since he was so wild off the tee.

 

Youd be surprised at how highly ranked TW was in sg driving in his prime. Often in the top 10.

 

Myth: TW was a terrible driver.

And it was not just superior length.

Titleist TSR4 9° Tensei AV White 65

Titleist TSi3 strong 3w 13.5° Tensei AV White 70

Titleist TS3 19°  hybrid Tensei Blue/Titleist TSR3 24° Diamana Ahina

Titleist T150 5-pw Nippon Pro Modus 125

Vokey SM8 50° F & 56° M SM9 60°M

Cameron Newport w/ flow neck by Lamont/ Cameron Del Mar

 



 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ever see this? Surprised many...

 

http://www.espn.com/...erence-bay-hill

 

"Mark Broadie, a professor at Columbia University's business school, is a pioneer of the strokes-gained approach to PGA Tour statistics."

 

 

"Over the years, Broadie has looked very closely at the strokes-gained performance of Tiger Woods. Broadie used PGA Tour ShotLink data from 2003 to 2010 to determine that Tiger gained 3.2 strokes per round over the average tour player. The biggest chunk of those strokes gained during that period came from his long game (2.08), with his short game (0.42) and his putting (0.70) accounting for the rest."

 

Not surprised at all. His iron play was way better than anybody else. I suspect that his long game (2.08) gain was 100% irons. Or maybe over 100% since he was so wild off the tee.

 

Youd be surprised at how highly ranked TW was in sg driving in his prime. Often in the top 10.

 

Myth: TW was a terrible driver.

 

I don't know, he had the single vehicle accident not too long ago. ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ever see this? Surprised many...

 

http://www.espn.com/...erence-bay-hill

 

"Mark Broadie, a professor at Columbia University's business school, is a pioneer of the strokes-gained approach to PGA Tour statistics."

 

 

"Over the years, Broadie has looked very closely at the strokes-gained performance of Tiger Woods. Broadie used PGA Tour ShotLink data from 2003 to 2010 to determine that Tiger gained 3.2 strokes per round over the average tour player. The biggest chunk of those strokes gained during that period came from his long game (2.08), with his short game (0.42) and his putting (0.70) accounting for the rest."

 

Not surprised at all. His iron play was way better than anybody else. I suspect that his long game (2.08) gain was 100% irons. Or maybe over 100% since he was so wild off the tee.

 

Youd be surprised at how highly ranked TW was in sg driving in his prime. Often in the top 10.

 

Myth: TW was a terrible driver.

 

I don't know, he had the single vehicle accident not too long ago. ;-)

 

Sean! Rofl.

 

You made my evening ; )

 

Hope your holidays are shaping up beautifully.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fitness levels.

Fitting processes.

Shaft technology.

Club head technology.

Course maintenance improvements.

Coaching technological advances.

Course knowledge available.

The use of high speed video for training.

And, of course, the ball.

 

If anyone can think of anything I left off of the list as far as "things that really have led to more distance" please feel free to add them. My question is, "If you assert that the ball must be changed are you not taking the position that all of the other factors that had led to more distance are not all that profound?"

In other words, if you change the ball but you don't change the other things on the list, will the elite players still find a way to make up for the distances lost and still tear courses apart? Can not help but wonder given the grooves rule of 2010 and how it really didn't cause that much of an uproar at the highest levels of play.

Callaway Epic with Fujikura 62s in 45.25 set at 12.5*
Taylormade Rbz FW (17*)
Callaway X-Hot Pro 20* Hybrid
Callaway Steelhead 4-PW w/KBS 90s
Titleist Vokey 50*
Titleist Vokey SM-6 56*
Titleist Vokey SM-6 60-08 M
Tad Moore TM-1 35"
Callaway Chrome Soft

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fitness levels.

Fitting processes.

Shaft technology.

Club head technology.

Course maintenance improvements.

Coaching technological advances.

Course knowledge available.

The use of high speed video for training.

And, of course, the ball.

 

If anyone can think of anything I left off of the list as far as "things that really have led to more distance" please feel free to add them. My question is, "If you assert that the ball must be changed are you not taking the position that all of the other factors that had led to more distance are not all that profound?"

In other words, if you change the ball but you don't change the other things on the list, will the elite players still find a way to make up for the distances lost and still tear courses apart? Can not help but wonder given the grooves rule of 2010 and how it really didn't cause that much of an uproar at the highest levels of play.

 

No the ball is the only thing on the list they think they can change. If they roll back the ball, they want it to be enough to undo the “ProV1 effect” plus some extra to undo all those other factors. And if players pick back up the lost 25-30 a few years hence, what the heck just roll back the ball again no worries!

 

It’s all about “optics” and Nicklaus and Hogan and mom and apple pie, the ball is just the easy fall guy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fitness levels.

Fitting processes.

Shaft technology.

Club head technology.

Course maintenance improvements.

Coaching technological advances.

Course knowledge available.

The use of high speed video for training.

And, of course, the ball.

 

If anyone can think of anything I left off of the list as far as "things that really have led to more distance" please feel free to add them. My question is, "If you assert that the ball must be changed are you not taking the position that all of the other factors that had led to more distance are not all that profound?"

In other words, if you change the ball but you don't change the other things on the list, will the elite players still find a way to make up for the distances lost and still tear courses apart? Can not help but wonder given the grooves rule of 2010 and how it really didn't cause that much of an uproar at the highest levels of play.

 

Take the ball out of the equation and you would see still a gradual increase over the years in driving distance due to all the other factors you listed. Totally expected and normal. Started in the 80's and is even going on now despite claims that distance has leveled off which is simply not true. For proof of that just take a look at median driving distance through the years. Or take a look every 5 years of how many players average 300+, how many 290+, and how many 280+ and so on.

 

However look at what happened in the period around 2000 and the years just before and after and you will see an abnormal increase due to primarily the ball and the size of the driver clubhead. Quite simply the ruling bodies fell asleep at the wheel.

 

Again, driving distance will naturally progress over the years due to the factors that Medic listed above. Nothing wrong with that. But the evidence is there that there was an abnormal increase that was due to the ball and the driver size and you are in denial if you don't see that.

 

And, good lord, can we quit with the ridiculous notion that older players like Nicklaus are simply wanting to protect their legacy. That is beyond stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are NO numbers or statistics you can point out that will change the attitude behind this "idea". They want Dustin Johnson to hit the same club into #13 at Augusta, from the same spot in the fairway as Jack did in 1975. Or Tiger in 1998. Or Bobby Jones in 1935. Or something.

 

Correct. I love you guys on the stats train doing solid work. But this isn't about stats. This is the anchored putter thing all over again - nobody can conclusively demonstrate that it's more effective, but the old men in blue jackets are offended by how it "looks".

 

I understand what you're saying, but I think it's clearly been demonstrated that hitting the balls further is a more effective way to play golf. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your point.

 

Agree there was no demonstrated advantage to anchored putters. At the top level of sport, games evolve. People figure them out. Strategies change. Don't panic.

 

It's always been the case that long hitters are at an advantage - nobody is bothered by that truism.

 

They don't like the optics of guys hitting nine irons from the same spot where Ben Hogan hit a legendary one iron.

 

I seriously do not understand how anyone can be okay with the optics of guys hitting nine iron from the same spot Ben Hogan hit one iron. Five iron or maybe even six iron, yes. But definitely not nine iron. That's an indication that the ball goes too far if there ever was one.

 

And some will say Hogan should have been using a gutta percha golf ball. How can anybody be OK with Hogan hitting a one iron where Old Tom Morris used to hit a three wood?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ever see this? Surprised many...

 

http://www.espn.com/...erence-bay-hill

 

"Mark Broadie, a professor at Columbia University's business school, is a pioneer of the strokes-gained approach to PGA Tour statistics."

 

 

"Over the years, Broadie has looked very closely at the strokes-gained performance of Tiger Woods. Broadie used PGA Tour ShotLink data from 2003 to 2010 to determine that Tiger gained 3.2 strokes per round over the average tour player. The biggest chunk of those strokes gained during that period came from his long game (2.08), with his short game (0.42) and his putting (0.70) accounting for the rest."

 

Not surprised at all. His iron play was way better than anybody else. I suspect that his long game (2.08) gain was 100% irons. Or maybe over 100% since he was so wild off the tee

 

Youd be surprised at how highly ranked TW was in sg driving in his prime. Often in the top 10.

 

Myth: TW was a terrible driver.

 

Not a myth at all. Read Hank Haney's book. He said his driving accuracy was so bad that he encouraged Tiger to hit a three wood off the tee.. Tiger's driving accuracy was one of the worst ever on the PGA Tour.

 

Here are some examples of his pitiful driving accuracy;

 

 

2001: 145th

2002: 107th

2003; 142nd

2004: 182nd

2005: 191st

2006: 139th

2007: 152nd

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take the ball out of the equation and you would see still a gradual increase over the years in driving distance due to all the other factors you listed. Totally expected and normal. Started in the 80's

 

Actually, it started over 100 years ago.

 

 

and is even going on now despite claims that distance has leveled off which is simply not true.

 

Obviously, you are not looking at the stats. Look at the last ten years. There has been no increase in distance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ever see this? Surprised many...

 

http://www.espn.com/...erence-bay-hill

 

"Mark Broadie, a professor at Columbia University's business school, is a pioneer of the strokes-gained approach to PGA Tour statistics."

 

 

"Over the years, Broadie has looked very closely at the strokes-gained performance of Tiger Woods. Broadie used PGA Tour ShotLink data from 2003 to 2010 to determine that Tiger gained 3.2 strokes per round over the average tour player. The biggest chunk of those strokes gained during that period came from his long game (2.08), with his short game (0.42) and his putting (0.70) accounting for the rest."

 

Not surprised at all. His iron play was way better than anybody else. I suspect that his long game (2.08) gain was 100% irons. Or maybe over 100% since he was so wild off the tee

 

Youd be surprised at how highly ranked TW was in sg driving in his prime. Often in the top 10.

 

Myth: TW was a terrible driver.

 

Not a myth at all. Read Hank Haney's book. He said his driving accuracy was so bad that he encouraged Tiger to hit a three wood off the tee.. Tiger's driving accuracy was one of the worst ever on the PGA Tour.

 

Here are some examples of his pitiful driving accuracy;

 

 

2001: 145th

2002: 107th

2003; 142nd

2004: 182nd

2005: 191st

2006: 139th

2007: 152nd

 

Here are his sg off the tee.

 

Keeping in mind that 2004 was the 1st year the stat was recorded and prior was possibly even stronger.

 

2004 31st (distance, 9th)

2005 4rth (distance, 2nd)

2006 3rd. (Distance, 12th)

2007 8th. (Distance, 12th)

 

Can only imagine his sg off the tee in 2000-2003.

 

Guys would kill for this "pitiful" driving.

 

Myth busted.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fitness levels.

Fitting processes.

Shaft technology.

Club head technology.

Course maintenance improvements.

Coaching technological advances.

Course knowledge available.

The use of high speed video for training.

And, of course, the ball.

 

If anyone can think of anything I left off of the list as far as "things that really have led to more distance" please feel free to add them. My question is, "If you assert that the ball must be changed are you not taking the position that all of the other factors that had led to more distance are not all that profound?"

In other words, if you change the ball but you don't change the other things on the list, will the elite players still find a way to make up for the distances lost and still tear courses apart? Can not help but wonder given the grooves rule of 2010 and how it really didn't cause that much of an uproar at the highest levels of play.

 

Take the ball out of the equation and you would see still a gradual increase over the years in driving distance due to all the other factors you listed. Totally expected and normal. Started in the 80's and is even going on now despite claims that distance has leveled off which is simply not true. For proof of that just take a look at median driving distance through the years. Or take a look every 5 years of how many players average 300+, how many 290+, and how many 280+ and so on.

 

However look at what happened in the period around 2000 and the years just before and after and you will see an abnormal increase due to primarily the ball and the size of the driver clubhead. Quite simply the ruling bodies fell asleep at the wheel.

 

Again, driving distance will naturally progress over the years due to the factors that Medic listed above. Nothing wrong with that. But the evidence is there that there was an abnormal increase that was due to the ball and the driver size and you are in denial if you don't see that.

 

And, good lord, can we quit with the ridiculous notion that older players like Nicklaus are simply wanting to protect their legacy. That is beyond stupid.

 

I think you have in a miraculous way missed that one:

 

 

 

...published by the USGA:

 

http://www.golfwrx.c...ns-on-pga-tour/

 

Btw

 

You will find, that the size of the driver was not as important for the increase in distance, than that they are made out of titanium.

 

The funny thing is, that this chart still doesn´t take into account, what the courses with enhanced fairways contributed to that increase! :read:

 

And last, but not least, you see, that driving distance kept about the same since more than a decade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ever see this? Surprised many...

 

http://www.espn.com/...erence-bay-hill

 

"Mark Broadie, a professor at Columbia University's business school, is a pioneer of the strokes-gained approach to PGA Tour statistics."

 

 

"Over the years, Broadie has looked very closely at the strokes-gained performance of Tiger Woods. Broadie used PGA Tour ShotLink data from 2003 to 2010 to determine that Tiger gained 3.2 strokes per round over the average tour player. The biggest chunk of those strokes gained during that period came from his long game (2.08), with his short game (0.42) and his putting (0.70) accounting for the rest."

 

Not surprised at all. His iron play was way better than anybody else. I suspect that his long game (2.08) gain was 100% irons. Or maybe over 100% since he was so wild off the tee

 

Youd be surprised at how highly ranked TW was in sg driving in his prime. Often in the top 10.

 

Myth: TW was a terrible driver.

 

Not a myth at all. Read Hank Haney's book. He said his driving accuracy was so bad that he encouraged Tiger to hit a three wood off the tee.. Tiger's driving accuracy was one of the worst ever on the PGA Tour.

 

Here are some examples of his pitiful driving accuracy;

 

 

2001: 145th

2002: 107th

2003; 142nd

2004: 182nd

2005: 191st

2006: 139th

2007: 152nd

 

Here are his sg off the tee.

 

Keeping in mind that 2004 was the 1st year the stat was recorded and prior was possibly even stronger.

 

2004 31st (distance, 9th)

2005 4rth (distance, 2nd)

2006 3rd. (Distance, 12th)

2007 8th. (Distance, 12th)

 

Can only imagine his sg off the tee in 2000-2003.

 

Guys would kill for this "pitiful" driving.

 

Myth busted.

 

Nobody would kill for being 191st in driving accuracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take the ball out of the equation and you would see still a gradual increase over the years in driving distance due to all the other factors you listed. Totally expected and normal. Started in the 80's

 

Actually, it started over 100 years ago.

 

 

and is even going on now despite claims that distance has leveled off which is simply not true.

 

Obviously, you are not looking at the stats. Look at the last ten years. There has been no increase in distance.

 

You have to dig deeper into the stats to get what I'm saying.

 

And I just used the 80's because the PGA Tour website starts at 1980 for the driving distance stats. But yes, it has been going on for 100 years or so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fitness levels.

Fitting processes.

Shaft technology.

Club head technology.

Course maintenance improvements.

Coaching technological advances.

Course knowledge available.

The use of high speed video for training.

And, of course, the ball.

 

If anyone can think of anything I left off of the list as far as "things that really have led to more distance" please feel free to add them. My question is, "If you assert that the ball must be changed are you not taking the position that all of the other factors that had led to more distance are not all that profound?"

In other words, if you change the ball but you don't change the other things on the list, will the elite players still find a way to make up for the distances lost and still tear courses apart? Can not help but wonder given the grooves rule of 2010 and how it really didn't cause that much of an uproar at the highest levels of play.

 

Take the ball out of the equation and you would see still a gradual increase over the years in driving distance due to all the other factors you listed. Totally expected and normal. Started in the 80's and is even going on now despite claims that distance has leveled off which is simply not true. For proof of that just take a look at median driving distance through the years. Or take a look every 5 years of how many players average 300+, how many 290+, and how many 280+ and so on.

 

However look at what happened in the period around 2000 and the years just before and after and you will see an abnormal increase due to primarily the ball and the size of the driver clubhead. Quite simply the ruling bodies fell asleep at the wheel.

 

Again, driving distance will naturally progress over the years due to the factors that Medic listed above. Nothing wrong with that. But the evidence is there that there was an abnormal increase that was due to the ball and the driver size and you are in denial if you don't see that.

 

And, good lord, can we quit with the ridiculous notion that older players like Nicklaus are simply wanting to protect their legacy. That is beyond stupid.

 

I think you have in a miraculous way missed that one:

 

 

 

...published by the USGA:

 

http://www.golfwrx.c...ns-on-pga-tour/

 

Btw

 

You will find, that the size of the driver was not as important for the increase in distance, than that they are made out of titanium.

 

The funny thing is, that this chart still doesn´t take into account, what the courses with enhanced fairways contributed to that increase! :read:

 

And last, but not least, you see, that driving distance kept about the same since more than a decade.

 

Okay, we're looking at a chart provided by the USGA who want to justify their position. Think about it.

 

Dig deeper in the stats to see what I'm am talking about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate the nice tone. I enjoy talking about this stuff! You and I agree on #2. I think the game is just evolving, and I enjoy the fact that I am using the same equipment as the pros. I know I stink compared to them. Me playing a "normal" ball and them playing a rolled back ball would take the fun out of it. Like I needed "help." I do, but I enjoy the delusion a bit :)

 

My only critiques of your work is that I'd look at Earnings Per Event rather than just earnings. I'd also look at the reasons why scoring is flat on the PGA tour. Longer courses.

 

Why use earnings per event? That number can be skewed since event payouts vary tremendously. Scoring average might be a better measure. Agree scoring is a better measure. But you guys were referencing money lists earlier, so I used money. I didn't think a guy who played 15 events and a guy who played 20 events could be fairly compared without controlling for how many events they played.

 

Another good analysis is to graph scoring vs all of the the "strokes gained" stats to see which one correlates best. Ask and you shall receive. More commentary below.

 

 

I re-did the Top 30 to show earnings per event. The Top 12 are all above-average in distance. 80% of the top 30 are above-average in distance. This is further highlighted in my scatter plot, where I highlight the Top 30. A lot of guys to the right of the average. If you're earning big money, you're longer than average.

 

I agree with your numbers, but being above average isn't a very high bar. Spieth is above average and everybody calls him a short hitter (on this board) and even talk about how he must increase his distance to remain competitive.

 

I'm on this board and I don't think he needs to do anything differently off the tee. He already has an advantage off the tee with his distance and accuracy.

 

 

Then I would take another look at the Titleist charts. How they can say courses haven't changed length over the years or major-winning scores haven't gone down is beyond me. There are clear (likely statistically-significant) trends there. Scores trend down, lengths trend up.

 

But scores have been flat for a decade. Not at the majors, which is what Titleist used in their report. I even posted their exact slides. Agree PGA scores have been flat, but that's because they play longer courses. I also posted this data.

 

Then let's look at courses on the PGA Tour. They've gotten longer over the years, no doubt. The last chart shows average course grows roughly proportionate to tee shot distance.

 

Again, I don't want to roll back the ball. I like the natural evolution of the game, and I think this issue is being blown out of proportion. I just don't like the way Titleist has presented it.

 

I trust you'll look at this with an open mind. Thanks for the good discussion.

 

I appreciate your graphs. This thread discussion has wandered all over the place to the point where I'm not sure what the core debate is.

 

My position on the ball roll back issue is that it's not needed because distance and scoring has stabilized over the past ten years.

 

Below are plots showing how each area of the game relates to scoring. Read it as you move from left to right, you move from being worse than the field to better than the field at that skill. Vertical axis is total strokes gained, a comparable measure to scoring average.

 

All skills have positive correlations. Obviously, the better you are at a specific skill, the better you are overall. What I see is that short game and putting are more tightly grouped than approach shots or tee shots. Meaning, not many have really separated themselves from the pack. Whereas, with tee shots and approaches, you start to see more variation in the values.

 

It's tough to draw conclusions from this data. But if you look at the standard deviation of each category, you'll find:

 

STD Dev Tee= .415

STD Dev Approach = .367

STD Dev Short = .211

STD Dev Putting = .312

 

There's almost double the variation of skill off the tee versus on the putting green. I'd be interested in hearing thoughts on why this might be.

What I see is that short game and putting are more tightly grouped than approach shots or tee shots. Meaning, it's not too easy to sep

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Our picks

    • 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Discussion and links to Photos
      Please put any questions or Comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Monday #1
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Monday #2
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Tuesday #1
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Tuesday #2
      2024 Texas Children's Houston Open - Tuesday #3
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Thorbjorn Olesen - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Ben Silverman - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Jesse Droemer - SoTX PGA Section POY - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      David Lipsky - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Martin Trainer - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Zac Blair - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Jacob Bridgeman - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Trace Crowe - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Jimmy Walker - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Daniel Berger - WITB(very mini) - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Chesson Hadley - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Callum McNeill - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Rhein Gibson - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Patrick Fishburn - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Peter Malnati - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Raul Pereda - WITB - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Gary Woodland WITB (New driver, iron shafts) – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Padraig Harrington WITB – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      Tom Hoge's custom Cameron - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Cameron putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Piretti putters - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Ping putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Kevin Dougherty's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Bettinardi putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Cameron putter - 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Erik Barnes testing an all-black Axis1 putter – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
      Tony Finau's new driver shaft – 2024 Texas Children's Houston Open
       
       
       
       
       
      • 7 replies
    • 2024 Valspar Championship WITB Photos (Thanks to bvmagic)- Discussion & Links to Photos
      This weeks WITB Pics are from member bvmagic (Brian). Brian's first event for WRX was in 2008 at Bayhill while in college. Thanks so much bv.
       
      Please put your comments or question on this thread. Links to all the threads are below...
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 31 replies
    • 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #1
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #2
      2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational - Monday #3
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Matt (LFG) Every - WITB - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Sahith Theegala - WITB - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Cameron putters (and new "LD" grip) - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      New Bettinardi MB & CB irons - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Custom Bettinardi API putter cover - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      Custom Swag API covers - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
      New Golf Pride Reverse Taper grips - 2024 Arnold Palmer Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 15 replies
    • 2024 Cognizant Classic - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #1
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #2
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #3
      2024 Cognizant Classic - Monday #4
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Brandt Snedeker - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Max Greyserman - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Eric Cole - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Carl Yuan - WITb - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Russell Henley - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Justin Sun - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Alex Noren - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Shane Lowry - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Taylor Montgomery - WITB - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Jake Knapp (KnappTime_ltd) - WITB - - 2024 Cognizant Classic
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Super Stoke Pistol Lock 1.0 & 2.0 grips - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      LA Golf new insert putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      New Garsen Quad Tour 15 grip - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      New Swag covers - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Jacob Bridgeman's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Bud Cauley's custom Cameron putters - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Ryo Hisatsune's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Chris Kirk - new black Callaway Apex CB irons and a few Odyssey putters - 2024 Cognizant Classic
      Alejandro Tosti's custom Cameron putter - 2024 Cognizant Classic
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
       
        • Like
      • 2 replies
    • 2024 Genesis Invitational - Discussion and Links to Photos
      Please put any questions or comments here
       
       
       
      General Albums
       
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Monday #1
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Monday #2
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #1
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #2
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #3
      2024 Genesis Invitational - Tuesday #4
       
       
       
       
      WITB Albums
       
      Rory McIlroy - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Sepp Straka - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Patrick Rodgers - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Brendon Todd - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Denny McCarthy - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Corey Conners - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Chase Johnson - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tommy Fleetwood - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Matt Fitzpatrick - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Si Woo Kim - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Viktor Hovland - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Wyndham Clark - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Cam Davis - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Nick Taylor - WITB - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Ben Baller WITB update (New putter, driver, hybrid and shafts) – 2024 Genesis Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      Pullout Albums
       
      New Vortex Golf rangefinder - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      New Fujikura Ventus shaft - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods & TaylorMade "Sun Day Red" apparel launch event, product photos – 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods Sun Day Red golf shoes - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Aretera shafts - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      New Toulon putters - 2024 Genesis Invitational
      Tiger Woods' new white "Sun Day Red" golf shoe prototypes – 2024 Genesis Invitational
       
       
       
       
       
      • 22 replies

×
×
  • Create New...