What up with Jordan?

[playa]

> @Shilgy said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > Only if that new coach slapped him in the face and said “ you’re Jordan bleepin spieth. Wake the F UP MAn and hit the ball “.

> >

> > It’s absolutely ludicrous for anyone to think that he’s magically unable to hit the ball. As if he can’t reset to the old swing . When you engrain hours upon thousands of hours doing something. You don’t just forget.

> >

> > He’s just pushing on With what he’s trying now. And that seems to be dead wrong. I watched all his swing s at Augusta and every now and again he’s revert back to an upright address and hit a good iron or wedge. Once he got into a little groove that’s where he went back to on feel. That’s all he needs to do. Let the new idea die and reset.

>

> Clearly you didn't pay attention during Tigers struggles. You cannot just "go back to the old swing". It sounds simple but it's gone. Body is different for one thing. He would basically have to learn that old seeing all over again.

 

Agree. Try asking Baker Finch, Duval, Harrington etc how easy it is to go back to your old swing.

 

Brad Hughes has a good YouTube vid about how a swing coach wrecked his game and why it is physically difficult to go back.

 

Maybe with Spieth it's not so bad cause it's recent, but not easy.

[Titleist_PT23]

> @tiderider said:

> he's -7 with 2 doubles ... made a double from the fairway today on 18 ... it's a pretty bad slump by any standards, but he's making lots of birdies each round, so it's 3 or swings ... and he just got married ... he's adjusting ... jordan will be back, in spades ...

Maybe. People have been saying this for the entire year and so far the slide has just continued. It was "Just wait for Augusta."

 

I tend to believe that he's a bit closer given the birdies and few bad holes he's putting up. But I thought this a couple months ago too.

 

I guess he's in a good spot to post a decent result this week, if he can avoid imploding on the weekend. I guess anything is a positive for him at this point, but this week isn't exactly the greatest field.

 

It would be amazing if he can somehow find it for 4 days next week at Bethpage. Doesn't seem likely (state of game and course setup on paper), but it would shut a lot of people up, and his place in history would be cemented.

[Shilgy]

> @agolf1 said:

> > @tiderider said:

> > he's -7 with 2 doubles ... made a double from the fairway today on 18 ... it's a pretty bad slump by any standards, but he's making lots of birdies each round, so it's 3 or swings ... and he just got married ... he's adjusting ... jordan will be back, in spades ...

> Maybe. People have been saying this for the entire year and so far the slide has just continued. It was "Just wait for Augusta."

>

> I tend to believe that he's a bit closer given the birdies and few bad holes he's putting up. But I thought this a couple months ago too.

>

> I guess he's in a good spot to post a decent result this week, if he can avoid imploding on the weekend. I guess anything is a positive for him at this point, **but this week isn't exactly the greatest field.**

>

> It would be amazing if he can somehow find it for 4 days next week at Bethpage. Doesn't seem likely (state of game and course setup on paper), but it would shut a lot of people up, and his place in history would be cemented.

 

Not to pick on this past but I have read similar so many times. Exactly hope much more difficult would this event be with more top players? The leader is 16 under for two rounds. Spieth is t9 and 9 strokes back.

I am a firm believer, certainly could be wrong, that the winning scores rarely are lower with the top players active in an event. They are top players usually because they are more consistent week to week. For one event Amy of these guys can compete with the best.

[lowheel]

> @Pent08 said:

> Looks like the putter cooperated today.

 

yup but still 2 doubles in 2 days... those are killing him

[JAMH03]

> @playa said:

> > @Shilgy said:

> > > @bladehunter said:

> > > Only if that new coach slapped him in the face and said “ you’re Jordan bleepin spieth. Wake the F UP MAn and hit the ball “.

> > >

> > > It’s absolutely ludicrous for anyone to think that he’s magically unable to hit the ball. As if he can’t reset to the old swing . When you engrain hours upon thousands of hours doing something. You don’t just forget.

> > >

> > > He’s just pushing on With what he’s trying now. And that seems to be dead wrong. I watched all his swing s at Augusta and every now and again he’s revert back to an upright address and hit a good iron or wedge. Once he got into a little groove that’s where he went back to on feel. That’s all he needs to do. Let the new idea die and reset.

> >

> > Clearly you didn't pay attention during Tigers struggles. You cannot just "go back to the old swing". It sounds simple but it's gone. Body is different for one thing. He would basically have to learn that old seeing all over again.

>

> Agree. Try asking Baker Finch, Duval, Harrington etc how easy it is to go back to your old swing.

>

> Brad Hughes has a good YouTube vid about how a swing coach wrecked his game and why it is physically difficult to go back.

>

> Maybe with Spieth it's not so bad cause it's recent, but not easy.

 

@bladehunter see this would be a good place for the kinds of #'s I was asking for on that post yesterday because if we had them, for example scoring average, greens whatever we thought was important then we could make better guesstimates about how far away he is or is not and which direction he maybe headed.

 

The % of $$$ won suggested he is fine but possibly trending down. More data would help

 

[Titleist_PT23]

> @Shilgy said:

> > @agolf1 said:

> > > @tiderider said:

> > > he's -7 with 2 doubles ... made a double from the fairway today on 18 ... it's a pretty bad slump by any standards, but he's making lots of birdies each round, so it's 3 or swings ... and he just got married ... he's adjusting ... jordan will be back, in spades ...

> > Maybe. People have been saying this for the entire year and so far the slide has just continued. It was "Just wait for Augusta."

> >

> > I tend to believe that he's a bit closer given the birdies and few bad holes he's putting up. But I thought this a couple months ago too.

> >

> > I guess he's in a good spot to post a decent result this week, if he can avoid imploding on the weekend. I guess anything is a positive for him at this point, **but this week isn't exactly the greatest field.**

> >

> > It would be amazing if he can somehow find it for 4 days next week at Bethpage. Doesn't seem likely (state of game and course setup on paper), but it would shut a lot of people up, and his place in history would be cemented.

>

> Not to pick on this past but I have read similar so many times. Exactly hope much more difficult would this event be with more top players? The leader is 16 under for two rounds. Spieth is t9 and 9 strokes back.

> I am a firm believer, certainly could be wrong, that the winning scores rarely are lower with the top players active in an event. They are top players usually because they are more consistent week to week. For one event Amy of these guys can compete with the best.

 

Maybe the lead wouldn't be any higher. I believe there's a better chance more people would be somewhere between -12 (T2) and -8 (9th) ahead of Spieth if the field was stronger. Regardless, does a Top 10 at a Major, the Players, or WGC sound like a better showing than a Top 10 at this tournament?

[gvogel]

I think that Jordan is having a good week because Trinity Forest is not intimidating off the tee. I hope that Jordan does well this weekend, but good results may not travel to Bethpage Black because of the difficulty of that golf course.

[bladehunter]

> @JAMH03 said:

> > @playa said:

> > > @Shilgy said:

> > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > Only if that new coach slapped him in the face and said “ you’re Jordan bleepin spieth. Wake the F UP MAn and hit the ball “.

> > > >

> > > > It’s absolutely ludicrous for anyone to think that he’s magically unable to hit the ball. As if he can’t reset to the old swing . When you engrain hours upon thousands of hours doing something. You don’t just forget.

> > > >

> > > > He’s just pushing on With what he’s trying now. And that seems to be dead wrong. I watched all his swing s at Augusta and every now and again he’s revert back to an upright address and hit a good iron or wedge. Once he got into a little groove that’s where he went back to on feel. That’s all he needs to do. Let the new idea die and reset.

> > >

> > > Clearly you didn't pay attention during Tigers struggles. You cannot just "go back to the old swing". It sounds simple but it's gone. Body is different for one thing. He would basically have to learn that old seeing all over again.

> >

> > Agree. Try asking Baker Finch, Duval, Harrington etc how easy it is to go back to your old swing.

> >

> > Brad Hughes has a good YouTube vid about how a swing coach wrecked his game and why it is physically difficult to go back.

> >

> > Maybe with Spieth it's not so bad cause it's recent, but not easy.

>

> @bladehunter see this would be a good place for the kinds of #'s I was asking for on that post yesterday because if we had them, for example scoring average, greens whatever we thought was important then we could make better guesstimates about how far away he is or is not and which direction he maybe headed.

>

> The % of $$$ won suggested he is fine but possibly trending down. More data would help

>

 

#Ihatestats

 

lol. I’m no statistics analyst. I prefer the “ hit ball. Put ball into hole “ method.

[JAMH03]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @JAMH03 said:

> > > @playa said:

> > > > @Shilgy said:

> > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > Only if that new coach slapped him in the face and said “ you’re Jordan bleepin spieth. Wake the F UP MAn and hit the ball “.

> > > > >

> > > > > It’s absolutely ludicrous for anyone to think that he’s magically unable to hit the ball. As if he can’t reset to the old swing . When you engrain hours upon thousands of hours doing something. You don’t just forget.

> > > > >

> > > > > He’s just pushing on With what he’s trying now. And that seems to be dead wrong. I watched all his swing s at Augusta and every now and again he’s revert back to an upright address and hit a good iron or wedge. Once he got into a little groove that’s where he went back to on feel. That’s all he needs to do. Let the new idea die and reset.

> > > >

> > > > Clearly you didn't pay attention during Tigers struggles. You cannot just "go back to the old swing". It sounds simple but it's gone. Body is different for one thing. He would basically have to learn that old seeing all over again.

> > >

> > > Agree. Try asking Baker Finch, Duval, Harrington etc how easy it is to go back to your old swing.

> > >

> > > Brad Hughes has a good YouTube vid about how a swing coach wrecked his game and why it is physically difficult to go back.

> > >

> > > Maybe with Spieth it's not so bad cause it's recent, but not easy.

> >

> > @bladehunter see this would be a good place for the kinds of #'s I was asking for on that post yesterday because if we had them, for example scoring average, greens whatever we thought was important then we could make better guesstimates about how far away he is or is not and which direction he maybe headed.

> >

> > The % of $$$ won suggested he is fine but possibly trending down. More data would help

> >

>

> #Ihatestats

>

> lol. I’m no statistics analyst. I prefer the “ hit ball. Put ball into hole “ method.

 

By that standard JS has already won so no worries.

[bladehunter]

> @JAMH03 said:

> > @bladehunter said:

> > > @JAMH03 said:

> > > > @playa said:

> > > > > @Shilgy said:

> > > > > > @bladehunter said:

> > > > > > Only if that new coach slapped him in the face and said “ you’re Jordan bleepin spieth. Wake the F UP MAn and hit the ball “.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > It’s absolutely ludicrous for anyone to think that he’s magically unable to hit the ball. As if he can’t reset to the old swing . When you engrain hours upon thousands of hours doing something. You don’t just forget.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > He’s just pushing on With what he’s trying now. And that seems to be dead wrong. I watched all his swing s at Augusta and every now and again he’s revert back to an upright address and hit a good iron or wedge. Once he got into a little groove that’s where he went back to on feel. That’s all he needs to do. Let the new idea die and reset.

> > > > >

> > > > > Clearly you didn't pay attention during Tigers struggles. You cannot just "go back to the old swing". It sounds simple but it's gone. Body is different for one thing. He would basically have to learn that old seeing all over again.

> > > >

> > > > Agree. Try asking Baker Finch, Duval, Harrington etc how easy it is to go back to your old swing.

> > > >

> > > > Brad Hughes has a good YouTube vid about how a swing coach wrecked his game and why it is physically difficult to go back.

> > > >

> > > > Maybe with Spieth it's not so bad cause it's recent, but not easy.

> > >

> > > @bladehunter see this would be a good place for the kinds of #'s I was asking for on that post yesterday because if we had them, for example scoring average, greens whatever we thought was important then we could make better guesstimates about how far away he is or is not and which direction he maybe headed.

> > >

> > > The % of $$$ won suggested he is fine but possibly trending down. More data would help

> > >

> >

> > #Ihatestats

> >

> > lol. I’m no statistics analyst. I prefer the “ hit ball. Put ball into hole “ method.

>

> By that standard JS has already won so no worries.

 

Lol. I guess touché. But you know I mean ball in the hole , in least tries. That’s a stat technically. But it’s a stat that directly correlates to score. These “ if you’re 109 out in the first cut and not too close to a fire ant mound , you should gain .035% strokes on the field “ stats are the issue in my mind. It’s useless conjecture at best.

[Pent08]

> @lowheel said:

> > @Pent08 said:

> > Looks like the putter cooperated today.

>

> yup but still 2 doubles in 2 days... those are killing him

 

Yep, people forget that he's still the same birdie machine from his, dare I say, prime years. He now has the Rickie Fowler volatility.

[bladehunter]

> @Pent08 said:

> > @lowheel said:

> > > @Pent08 said:

> > > Looks like the putter cooperated today.

> >

> > yup but still 2 doubles in 2 days... those are killing him

>

> Yep, people forget that he's still the same birdie machine from his, dare I say, prime years. He now has the Rickie Fowler volatility.

 

Agree. But. It’s much easier to clean up play vs trying to figure out how to make more birdies. He’s making a ton of birdies. The doubles won’t last forever.

[disco111]

Just watching the rain delay and they were showing a replay of the 2016 tournament. Showed JS and Brooks K off the tee with driver and even back then, JS was all over the place with the driver. Just an opinion, but if he wants to get back to the winners circle, the driver looks to be the main stumbling block. Whatever he's trying to do with his swing, it's clearly not working.

[JAMH03]

 

 

@bladehunter

@JAMH03 said:

 

» show previous quotes

By that standard JS has already won so no worries.

 

Lol. I guess touché. But you know I mean ball in the hole , in least tries. That’s a stat technically. But it’s a stat that directly correlates to score. These “ if you’re 109 out in the first cut and not too close to a fire ant mound , you should gain .035% strokes on the field “ stats are the issue in my mind. It’s useless conjecture at best.

 

I don't enjoy specious #'s just for #'s sake by any means. But I'd like you to understand exactly what I was asking for and then showed you.

 

Percentage of available money won rankings 100% correlates with the ball in the hole, "clutchness", "golfing your ball" our useless eye test observations and beyond that they are predictive. Even if you want to only go on what's happened its actually a better and less biased method of comparing relative PGA pros performances over the duration of a season than most any. If you want to substitute scoring average or net scoring average that would be fine. But this stat is about as useful as any.

 

So I requested the stat, looked it up showed you and explained to you why. Given that you can maybe imagine I don't appreciate your

 

"I don't like stats because I like to "keep" it real type minimization of a standard that fulfills your stated preferences. I fully admit that maybe I've missed the point though if you want to explain to me how does JS's % of money won not indicate his level of performance vs his peers on the PGA tour?

 

> @JAMH03 said:

> @bladehunter

> I was hoping that someone might have useful #'s available to help me put JS's performances in perspective.

>

> Percentage of total money won when I followed the tour more this was one of my favorite stats because I felt like it was reflective of the golfer who played the best when it meant the most. JS's finishing #'s by year and so far in 2019.

>

> * 2019 #211

> * 2018 #37

> * 2017 #2

> * 2016 #6

> * 2015 #1

> * 2014 #16

> * 2013 #9

>

>

>

>

>

>

 

Beyond that... the other stats that I requested would've been helpful in understanding where JS is at now and if he is improving, falling back or maintaining compared to his performances previously and lately.

 

 

[bladehunter]

> @JAMH03 said:

>

>

> @bladehunter

> @JAMH03 said:

>

> » show previous quotes

> By that standard JS has already won so no worries.

>

> Lol. I guess touché. But you know I mean ball in the hole , in least tries. That’s a stat technically. But it’s a stat that directly correlates to score. These “ if you’re 109 out in the first cut and not too close to a fire ant mound , you should gain .035% strokes on the field “ stats are the issue in my mind. It’s useless conjecture at best.

>

> I don't enjoy specious #'s just for #'s sake by any means. But I'd like you to understand exactly what I was asking for and then showed you.

>

> Percentage of available money won rankings 100% correlates with the ball in the hole, "clutchness", "golfing your ball" our useless eye test observations and beyond that they are predictive. Even if you want to only go on what's happened its actually a better and less biased method of comparing relative PGA pros performances over the duration of a season than most any. If you want to substitute scoring average or net scoring average that would be fine. But this stat is about as useful as any.

>

> So I requested the stat, looked it up showed you and explained to you why. Given that you can maybe imagine I don't appreciate your

>

> "I don't like stats because I like to "keep" it real type minimization of a standard that fulfills your stated preferences. I fully admit that maybe I've missed the point though if you want to explain to me how does JS's % of money won not indicate his level of performance vs his peers on the PGA tour?

>

> > @JAMH03 said:

> > @bladehunter

> > I was hoping that someone might have useful #'s available to help me put JS's performances in perspective.

> >

> > Percentage of total money won when I followed the tour more this was one of my favorite stats because I felt like it was reflective of the golfer who played the best when it meant the most. JS's finishing #'s by year and so far in 2019.

> >

> > * 2019 #211

> > * 2018 #37

> > * 2017 #2

> > * 2016 #6

> > * 2015 #1

> > * 2014 #16

> > * 2013 #9

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

> Beyond that... the other stats that I requested would've been helpful in understanding where JS is at now and if he is improving, falling back or maintaining compared to his performances previously and lately.

>

>

 

There are just sooooo many variables in any grouping of stats. I don’t trust them as a predictor of anything. Ever. And we don’t need them as a barometer for what’s happening now. Anybody with eyes knows the kid is struggling. When will it end ? When it does.

 

No need for you to take that as a personal jab. It’s ok if you feel better with stats to justify opinion. Same as it’s ok for me to not really value them.

[Shilgy]

> @agolf1 said:

> > @Shilgy said:

> > > @agolf1 said:

> > > > @tiderider said:

> > > > he's -7 with 2 doubles ... made a double from the fairway today on 18 ... it's a pretty bad slump by any standards, but he's making lots of birdies each round, so it's 3 or swings ... and he just got married ... he's adjusting ... jordan will be back, in spades ...

> > > Maybe. People have been saying this for the entire year and so far the slide has just continued. It was "Just wait for Augusta."

> > >

> > > I tend to believe that he's a bit closer given the birdies and few bad holes he's putting up. But I thought this a couple months ago too.

> > >

> > > I guess he's in a good spot to post a decent result this week, if he can avoid imploding on the weekend. I guess anything is a positive for him at this point, **but this week isn't exactly the greatest field.**

> > >

> > > It would be amazing if he can somehow find it for 4 days next week at Bethpage. Doesn't seem likely (state of game and course setup on paper), but it would shut a lot of people up, and his place in history would be cemented.

> >

> > Not to pick on this past but I have read similar so many times. Exactly hope much more difficult would this event be with more top players? The leader is 16 under for two rounds. Spieth is t9 and 9 strokes back.

> > I am a firm believer, certainly could be wrong, that the winning scores rarely are lower with the top players active in an event. They are top players usually because they are more consistent week to week. For one event Amy of these guys can compete with the best.

>

> Maybe the lead wouldn't be any higher. I believe there's a better chance more people would be somewhere between -12 (T2) and -8 (9th) ahead of Spieth if the field was stronger. Regardless, does a Top 10 at a Major, the Players, or WGC sound like a better showing than a Top 10 at this tournament?

 

Sure a top 10 is better/more impressive in a tougher field. The post I replied to implied that Spieth having a good week would be more because of lack of competition in the field than a real accomplishment for him..

[Titleist_PT23]

> @Shilgy said:

> > @agolf1 said:

> > > @Shilgy said:

> > > > @agolf1 said:

> > > > > @tiderider said:

> > > > > he's -7 with 2 doubles ... made a double from the fairway today on 18 ... it's a pretty bad slump by any standards, but he's making lots of birdies each round, so it's 3 or swings ... and he just got married ... he's adjusting ... jordan will be back, in spades ...

> > > > Maybe. People have been saying this for the entire year and so far the slide has just continued. It was "Just wait for Augusta."

> > > >

> > > > I tend to believe that he's a bit closer given the birdies and few bad holes he's putting up. But I thought this a couple months ago too.

> > > >

> > > > I guess he's in a good spot to post a decent result this week, if he can avoid imploding on the weekend. I guess anything is a positive for him at this point, **but this week isn't exactly the greatest field.**

> > > >

> > > > It would be amazing if he can somehow find it for 4 days next week at Bethpage. Doesn't seem likely (state of game and course setup on paper), but it would shut a lot of people up, and his place in history would be cemented.

> > >

> > > Not to pick on this past but I have read similar so many times. Exactly hope much more difficult would this event be with more top players? The leader is 16 under for two rounds. Spieth is t9 and 9 strokes back.

> > > I am a firm believer, certainly could be wrong, that the winning scores rarely are lower with the top players active in an event. They are top players usually because they are more consistent week to week. For one event Amy of these guys can compete with the best.

> >

> > Maybe the lead wouldn't be any higher. I believe there's a better chance more people would be somewhere between -12 (T2) and -8 (9th) ahead of Spieth if the field was stronger. Regardless, does a Top 10 at a Major, the Players, or WGC sound like a better showing than a Top 10 at this tournament?

>

> Sure a top 10 is better/more impressive in a tougher field. The post I replied to implied that Spieth having a good week would be more because of lack of competition in the field than a real accomplishment for him..

 

It's both. Look at who is playing this week. Not as hard to finish Top 10 against this field vs others.

[Shilgy]

> @agolf1 said:

> > @Shilgy said:

> > > @agolf1 said:

> > > > @Shilgy said:

> > > > > @agolf1 said:

> > > > > > @tiderider said:

> > > > > > he's -7 with 2 doubles ... made a double from the fairway today on 18 ... it's a pretty bad slump by any standards, but he's making lots of birdies each round, so it's 3 or swings ... and he just got married ... he's adjusting ... jordan will be back, in spades ...

> > > > > Maybe. People have been saying this for the entire year and so far the slide has just continued. It was "Just wait for Augusta."

> > > > >

> > > > > I tend to believe that he's a bit closer given the birdies and few bad holes he's putting up. But I thought this a couple months ago too.

> > > > >

> > > > > I guess he's in a good spot to post a decent result this week, if he can avoid imploding on the weekend. I guess anything is a positive for him at this point, **but this week isn't exactly the greatest field.**

> > > > >

> > > > > It would be amazing if he can somehow find it for 4 days next week at Bethpage. Doesn't seem likely (state of game and course setup on paper), but it would shut a lot of people up, and his place in history would be cemented.

> > > >

> > > > Not to pick on this past but I have read similar so many times. Exactly hope much more difficult would this event be with more top players? The leader is 16 under for two rounds. Spieth is t9 and 9 strokes back.

> > > > I am a firm believer, certainly could be wrong, that the winning scores rarely are lower with the top players active in an event. They are top players usually because they are more consistent week to week. For one event Amy of these guys can compete with the best.

> > >

> > > Maybe the lead wouldn't be any higher. I believe there's a better chance more people would be somewhere between -12 (T2) and -8 (9th) ahead of Spieth if the field was stronger. Regardless, does a Top 10 at a Major, the Players, or WGC sound like a better showing than a Top 10 at this tournament?

> >

> > Sure a top 10 is better/more impressive in a tougher field. The post I replied to implied that Spieth having a good week would be more because of lack of competition in the field than a real accomplishment for him..

>

> It's both. Look at who is playing this week. Not as hard to finish Top 10 against this field vs others.

 

I would say if Spieth plays well he can hang with any field. If he doesn't, well, for the last year and a half we've seen how that works.

[JAMH03]

> @bladehunter said:

> > @JAMH03 said:

> >

> >

> > @bladehunter

> > @JAMH03 said:

> >

> > » show previous quotes

> > By that standard JS has already won so no worries.

> >

> > Lol. I guess touché. But you know I mean ball in the hole , in least tries. That’s a stat technically. But it’s a stat that directly correlates to score. These “ if you’re 109 out in the first cut and not too close to a fire ant mound , you should gain .035% strokes on the field “ stats are the issue in my mind. It’s useless conjecture at best.

> >

> > I don't enjoy specious #'s just for #'s sake by any means. But I'd like you to understand exactly what I was asking for and then showed you.

> >

> > Percentage of available money won rankings 100% correlates with the ball in the hole, "clutchness", "golfing your ball" our useless eye test observations and beyond that they are predictive. Even if you want to only go on what's happened its actually a better and less biased method of comparing relative PGA pros performances over the duration of a season than most any. If you want to substitute scoring average or net scoring average that would be fine. But this stat is about as useful as any.

> >

> > So I requested the stat, looked it up showed you and explained to you why. Given that you can maybe imagine I don't appreciate your

> >

> > "I don't like stats because I like to "keep" it real type minimization of a standard that fulfills your stated preferences. I fully admit that maybe I've missed the point though if you want to explain to me how does JS's % of money won not indicate his level of performance vs his peers on the PGA tour?

> >

> > > @JAMH03 said:

> > > @bladehunter

> > > I was hoping that someone might have useful #'s available to help me put JS's performances in perspective.

> > >

> > > Percentage of total money won when I followed the tour more this was one of my favorite stats because I felt like it was reflective of the golfer who played the best when it meant the most. JS's finishing #'s by year and so far in 2019.

> > >

> > > * 2019 #211

> > > * 2018 #37

> > > * 2017 #2

> > > * 2016 #6

> > > * 2015 #1

> > > * 2014 #16

> > > * 2013 #9

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> > >

> >

> > Beyond that... the other stats that I requested would've been helpful in understanding where JS is at now and if he is improving, falling back or maintaining compared to his performances previously and lately.

> >

> >

>

> There are just sooooo many variables in any grouping of stats. I don’t trust them as a predictor of anything. Ever. And we don’t need them as a barometer for what’s happening now. Anybody with eyes knows the kid is struggling. When will it end ? When it does.

>

> No need for you to take that as a personal jab. It’s ok if you feel better with stats to justify opinion. Same as it’s ok for me to not really value them.

 

 

I appreciate your kind tone, none the less we have a disconnect and I think its based on logic more so than opinions.

 

As I didn't use a stat to justify my opinion. I used stat to establish a baseline of performance.

 

I did claim the stat was predictive and that was based on my opinion seems so obvious as to be almost circular in definition but am absolutely willing to entertain that the leaders in % of potential $$$ won were not the best performers for any given year.

 

My premise being

 

"If you're playing for prize money how much you win is representative of your performance."

 

Boring and pedantic yet here we are.

 

Beyond that for you to say it's not predictive seems to be just a stab in the dark based on nothing.

 

So as we go further I'd appreciate working from the general to the specific vs the other way around. If that doesn't fit your world view that's OK too.

 

 

[Kevinnz]

Jordan was winning with his wedge and putter, he cannot fall back to rely on his long game when the shortest of his clubs are not gaining him momentum.

Will he come back? Unlikely as there are so many talents on tour now.

[bladehunter]

Lol. I think I’ve heard this “ the fields are too deep “ story before. Where was it ? Anybody remember ? Lol.

[Shilgy]

> @Kevinnz said:

> Jordan was winning with his wedge and putter, he cannot fall back to rely on his long game when the shortest of his clubs are not gaining him momentum.

> Will he come back? Unlikely as there are so many talents on tour now.

 

Except we know that's not true.

Spieth was a very solid driver in 2015-2017

15th-32nd-44th strokes gained off the tee.

And elite in ballstriking SG tee to green

4-26-2

 

That is not indicative of a guy that just made a bunch of putts.

[new2g0lf]

> @Shilgy said:

> > @agolf1 said:

> > > @tiderider said:

> > > he's -7 with 2 doubles ... made a double from the fairway today on 18 ... it's a pretty bad slump by any standards, but he's making lots of birdies each round, so it's 3 or swings ... and he just got married ... he's adjusting ... jordan will be back, in spades ...

> > Maybe. People have been saying this for the entire year and so far the slide has just continued. It was "Just wait for Augusta."

> >

> > I tend to believe that he's a bit closer given the birdies and few bad holes he's putting up. But I thought this a couple months ago too.

> >

> > I guess he's in a good spot to post a decent result this week, if he can avoid imploding on the weekend. I guess anything is a positive for him at this point, **but this week isn't exactly the greatest field.**

> >

> > It would be amazing if he can somehow find it for 4 days next week at Bethpage. Doesn't seem likely (state of game and course setup on paper), but it would shut a lot of people up, and his place in history would be cemented.

>

> Not to pick on this past but I have read similar so many times. Exactly hope much more difficult would this event be with more top players? The leader is 16 under for two rounds. Spieth is t9 and 9 strokes back.

> I am a firm believer, certainly could be wrong, that the winning scores rarely are lower with the top players active in an event. They are top players usually because they are more consistent week to week. For one event Amy of these guys can compete with the best.

 

I agree, a tougher field doesn't usually result in lower scores, just who is posting them.

[new2g0lf]

> @JAMH03 said:

>

>

> @bladehunter

> @JAMH03 said:

>

> » show previous quotes

> By that standard JS has already won so no worries.

>

> Lol. I guess touché. But you know I mean ball in the hole , in least tries. That’s a stat technically. But it’s a stat that directly correlates to score. These “ if you’re 109 out in the first cut and not too close to a fire ant mound , you should gain .035% strokes on the field “ stats are the issue in my mind. It’s useless conjecture at best.

>

> I don't enjoy specious #'s just for #'s sake by any means. But I'd like you to understand exactly what I was asking for and then showed you.

>

> Percentage of available money won rankings 100% correlates with the ball in the hole, "clutchness", "golfing your ball" our useless eye test observations and beyond that they are predictive. Even if you want to only go on what's happened its actually a better and less biased method of comparing relative PGA pros performances over the duration of a season than most any. If you want to substitute scoring average or net scoring average that would be fine. But this stat is about as useful as any.

>

> So I requested the stat, looked it up showed you and explained to you why. Given that you can maybe imagine I don't appreciate your

>

> "I don't like stats because I like to "keep" it real type minimization of a standard that fulfills your stated preferences. I fully admit that maybe I've missed the point though if you want to explain to me how does JS's % of money won not indicate his level of performance vs his peers on the PGA tour?

>

> > @JAMH03 said:

> > @bladehunter

> > I was hoping that someone might have useful #'s available to help me put JS's performances in perspective.

> >

> > Percentage of total money won when I followed the tour more this was one of my favorite stats because I felt like it was reflective of the golfer who played the best when it meant the most. JS's finishing #'s by year and so far in 2019.

> >

> > * 2019 #211

> > * 2018 #37

> > * 2017 #2

> > * 2016 #6

> > * 2015 #1

> > * 2014 #16

> > * 2013 #9

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

>

> Beyond that... the other stats that I requested would've been helpful in understanding where JS is at now and if he is improving, falling back or maintaining compared to his performances previously and lately.

>

>

 

Overall it's a good indicator of ones performance but doesn't reflect when a golfer or golfers have a hot streak which impacts the percentage of money won. During Tigers best seasons he was winning or finishing near the top for an entire season. In 2000 Tiger won 9 times and finished Top 10 17 times in 20 starts. If you were a top golfer and had the misfortune of being in all or most of the tournaments Tiger played that year your stat wouldn't properly reflect your performance.

[straightshot7]

> @Shilgy said:

> > @Kevinnz said:

> > Jordan was winning with his wedge and putter, he cannot fall back to rely on his long game when the shortest of his clubs are not gaining him momentum.

> > Will he come back? Unlikely as there are so many talents on tour now.

>

> Except we know that's not true.

> Spieth was a very solid driver in 2015-2017

> 15th-32nd-44th strokes gained off the tee.

> And elite in ballstriking SG tee to green

> 4-26-2

>

> That is not indicative of a guy that just made a bunch of putts.

 

But would he have won 10 PGA Tour tournaments, including 3 Majors, in that time span if his putting was not super elite?

 

Let's not pretend his incredible putting, especially from 15-25 feet, wasn't a huge factor in his success.

[bladehunter]

> @straightshot7 said:

> > @Shilgy said:

> > > @Kevinnz said:

> > > Jordan was winning with his wedge and putter, he cannot fall back to rely on his long game when the shortest of his clubs are not gaining him momentum.

> > > Will he come back? Unlikely as there are so many talents on tour now.

> >

> > Except we know that's not true.

> > Spieth was a very solid driver in 2015-2017

> > 15th-32nd-44th strokes gained off the tee.

> > And elite in ballstriking SG tee to green

> > 4-26-2

> >

> > That is not indicative of a guy that just made a bunch of putts.

>

> But would he have won 10 PGA Tour tournaments, including 3 Majors, in that time span if his putting was not super elite?

>

> Let's not pretend his incredible putting, especially from 15-25 feet, wasn't a huge factor in his success.

 

His ball striking and wedge play was better. His putting from that distance was great. But was bad from short range. So a wash.

[straightshot7]

In 2015, when he won 2 of his majors, he was 1st on Tour in Putts Per Round at 27.82...

 

If he was the ball striking machine you say, hitting many greens, how could he average the least amount of putts per round on Tour without phenomenal putting?

 

I don't understand the downplay of his putting. Yeah his ball striking was great, but so was his putting. Everyone who watched him play those years was blown away at his putting ability. It's all anyone was talking about.

 

> @bladehunter said:

> > @straightshot7 said:

> > > @Shilgy said:

> > > > @Kevinnz said:

> > > > Jordan was winning with his wedge and putter, he cannot fall back to rely on his long game when the shortest of his clubs are not gaining him momentum.

> > > > Will he come back? Unlikely as there are so many talents on tour now.

> > >

> > > Except we know that's not true.

> > > Spieth was a very solid driver in 2015-2017

> > > 15th-32nd-44th strokes gained off the tee.

> > > And elite in ballstriking SG tee to green

> > > 4-26-2

> > >

> > > That is not indicative of a guy that just made a bunch of putts.

> >

> > But would he have won 10 PGA Tour tournaments, including 3 Majors, in that time span if his putting was not super elite?

> >

> > Let's not pretend his incredible putting, especially from 15-25 feet, wasn't a huge factor in his success.

>

> His ball striking and wedge play was better. His putting from that distance was great. But was bad from short range. So a wash.

 

 

[bladehunter]

Notice I said. “ and wedge play “. Scrambling. I don’t know his stats by heart. But isn’t strokes gained the only metric accepted now. And putts per round considered a dinosaur stat ? As in all he has to do is get up and down more than others and he will have that stat.

[straightshot7]

You said "His ball striking and wedge play was better". Meaning better than his putting.

 

When I hear wedge play I don't just think of short game (getting up and down). Doesn't wedge play typically include full wedge shots, from 125 yards and 100 yards, etc?

 

Either way, no, putts per round is not a dinosaur stat. It's just a factual measure of how many putts someone has in a round.

 

And you didn't explain or even try to explain how he can have the lowest amount of putts per round while simultaneously being a great ball striker, without being a phenomenal putter. Which he obviously was.

 

If you want to talk about Strokes Gained Putting he was 9th in 2015 and 2nd in 2016...so even by that metric, elite.

 

Have a good Sunday!

 

> @bladehunter said:

> Notice I said. “ and wedge play “. Scrambling. I don’t know his stats by heart. But isn’t strokes gained the only metric accepted now. And putts per round considered a dinosaur stat ? As in all he has to do is get up and down more than others and he will have that stat.

 

[bladehunter]

> @straightshot7 said:

> You said "His ball striking and wedge play was better". Meaning better than his putting.

>

> When I hear wedge play I don't just think of short game (getting up and down). Doesn't wedge play typically include full wedge shots, from 125 yards and 100 yards, etc?

>

> Either way, no, putts per round is not a dinosaur stat. It's just a factual measure of how many putts someone has in a round.

>

> And you didn't explain or even try to explain how he can have the lowest amount of putts per round while simultaneously being a great ball striker, without being a phenomenal putter. Which he obviously was.

>

> If you want to talk about Strokes Gained Putting he was 9th in 2015 and 2nd in 2016...so even by that metric, elite.

>

> Have a good Sunday!

>

> > @bladehunter said:

> > Notice I said. “ and wedge play “. Scrambling. I don’t know his stats by heart. But isn’t strokes gained the only metric accepted now. And putts per round considered a dinosaur stat ? As in all he has to do is get up and down more than others and he will have that stat.

>

 

What is he now ? 50th ish ( too lazy to look ). What’s the difference from 1st to 50? Not much I’d wager. His approach and driving is the slumps reason. So it conversely is a huge part of his success when it’s on. The-idea that he was a mediocre player who was a lucky putter is absurd. Now and was so then. If that’s not what you’re driving at I apologize.