Faldo vs. Mickelson, who was better?

[cdnglf]

 

seven of the top ten are 6’1+

only about 12% of the general population in that age range is that tall

https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2010/compendia/statab/130ed/tables/11s0205.pdf

 

 

 

[gmarchese]

Something dumb to add here. Athletes, including golfers, inflate their height. I'm a legitimate 6'3 and have stood next to Phil, Tiger, DJ, Nicklaus in the 80's, Tom Weiskopf and others. Very few are actually the reported height. Tiger for one is MAYBE 6'0, definitely not 6'1. Phil is just a hair taller, maybe 6'1. Nicklaus in the 80's was maybe 5'10. Weiskopf was shorter than I was. DJ is the only one who seems to be his reported size - he definitely was taller than I am. All this aside, Rory is about the same size as Tom Cruise and that doesn't seem to make much difference in his power production. Just saying that reported size from the tour are likely inflated, and probably always have been. Short dudes in the top 10 all time include Hogan, Trevino, Watson and Nicklaus - all short to medium height. Top 5 today include Rory, Koepka (who's not 6' tall either IMO) and Justin Thomas (maybe 5'10). The real difference today is that those guys are way stronger and the courses are not nearly as varied as the old days.

All this said, I have to believe the players of today are better than those of the past. Simply because of refined kinematic sequences, better swing analysis tools and better putting. One should expect this to be the case if we're all evolving:).

[cdnglf]

 

Ernie is as advertised. Some of the other guys may be WWE’ing it. For many years, Phil was definitely reverse-WWE’ing his weight.

[bscinstnct]

 

Maybe ; )

[NoTalentLefty]

Phil overall career . Faldo for the years he was a threat.

[dalehead]

Way too small a sample to be significant.

[cdnglf]

 

Uh, nope.

[Lark]

Not sure how tall Gil Hanse is, but he makes Tiger look shorter here:

 

[braincramp52]

I think Phil's 26 consecutive years in the top 50 is pretty special.

[dalehead]

So if you wanted to to know the average height of the American male population you would pick 10 guys you know and base your conclusion on their data?

[Hawkeye77]

DIdn't know he was that tall.

[dalehead]

Exactly. Height inflation aside, your points about why today’s golfers are better are spot on. All we can conclude is great golfers come in all sizes. Based on history the ideal height for a male golfer would be between 5’8” and 6’4”. Shorter or taller than that it’s hard to draw conclusions because we don’t have much data. I’m sure there are great players on each end of the spectrum.

[cdnglf]

We already know the mean height. It is between 5’9 and 5’10. Standard deviation is between 3 and 4’.

 

If you picked 10 guys at random from the population, how often do you think you would get a group where:

the average was 1 std dev above the mean7 individuals were at least 1 std dev above the meanthe shortest individual was fractionally below the mean

I see guys like Ernie, Bubba and DL3 in the next 10, so I suspect the numbers hold for the top 20 too

[dalehead]

I don’t know the answer to your question and neither do you. I do know that the results you cite with a sample size of 10 could happen by chance.

That aside, what is your point? That pro golfers today are taller than in Ben Hogan’s generation? I concede that. But so are professional baseball, basketball, and football players. If your point is success in golf is correlated with height you need more data than the 10 or even 20 players you cite.

[doublehans]

I think it's fair speculation that the change in equipment w drivers/ball helped phil. He really struggled in the 90s with over-spinning the ball with the driver. High Speed players with too much spin (and often wild) is exactly the kind of player the new equipment benefited. Now, we'll never KNOW that was the reason. He may well have adapted anyway. But it's pretty reasonable to speculate he benefited more than others with the equipment changes.

The sort of opposite is Greg Norman, one of the big reasons he was so good in his prime was that with the old equipment he had a knack for generating power without over-spinning it (talking driver here, he could overspin his wedges). And that was much harder to do then. If he'd come along later, he'd still be a great golfer but his driving advantage would have likely been a lot less because the new equipment meant that many could now do what only a few could before. The equipment changes didnt help everyone the same.

Not sure that matters tho to Faldo v Phil tho. Guys play in the era the were born into.

[cdnglf]

 

It could "happen by chance" that they were all under 5 feet or over 7 feet. But the odds are so astronomically low that nobody would believe it was a random selection.

Same principal applies here. Obviously way more likely than either of the above scenarios, but still extremely unlikely. You mentioned statistical significance; that's why I described it this way.

 

That there is positive correlation between height and success is obvious. Even your own posts agree:

'Based on history the ideal height for a male golfer would be between 5’8” and 6’4”'

In other words: slightly below average to very tall.

 

If it was truly random, we'd expect to see as many 5'3 guys as 6'3 guys, as they are equally common in the general population.

How many great players were 5'3? How many players at all? Woosnam at 5'4 is the shortest player who comes to mind. Most of the other guys one might think of as "short" (Weir, Toms, ZJ, JT, Rory) are all actually pretty close to average.

 

Shilgy's original premise was that modern fitting meant taller players didn't have to adapt to the equipment and allowed them to perform better. You disagreed, claiming the average height of successful pro golfers historically was roughly the same as the average height of the general population. That may have been true in the one-size-fits all era, but it clearly isn't today.

 

The money list is a quick, rough measure of career performance for "modern" players (guys who started in the 90s and onward). Any way you slice it, the list is not representative of the general population's height.

 

[Hawkeye77]

I will say suddenly Ty Webb is looking like he was on to something!

[dalehead]

Well we can agree that there have been very few very short or very tall great players. But is this because there is a disadvantage to being a very short or very tall golfer? Possibly. Even likely. But the population of very tall or very short golfers is small so we would expect to see fewer great players from those groups.

Going back to your 10 player example 90% of that population were within one standard deviation of the mean height for adult American males. How do you think that correlates to the US population?

BTW if we are discussing statistics of tour pros we can’t compare to the entire population. We have to start by comparing to the population between say 20 and 40 years of age. For example, 30% of US males age 20-29 are 6 feet or taller. And even those stats are a decade old.

[cdnglf]

 

I provided a link with the relevant data. I was eyeballing the categories in the 20-50 age range, which covers most of the players we're discussing.https://www2.census.gov/library/publications/2010/compendia/statab/130ed/tables/11s0205.pdf

 

Estimating the bell curve, 6'1 is the same distance from the mean as 5'6, 6'2 as 5'5, 6'3 as 5'4, etc.

Obviously, there are way more guys on the right side of the curve (above the mean) than the left.

 

"Going back to your 10 player example 90% of that population were within one standard deviation of the mean height for adult American males. How do you think that correlates to the US population?"

 

I don't follow. The average is between 5'9 and 5'10. The first standard deviation (34%) goes to about 6'0.5". Most of the guys are taller than that. The average of the ten is just over 6'1, more than 1 standard deviation above the general population mean. Put really simply: these guys are collectively way, way taller than what you'd expect in a random sample.

 

 

 

 

 

[dalehead]

Yes they are taller than you would expect in a random sample. But you would never use a sample size of ten to estimate the average height of an American adult male. If you picked 10 guys at random off the street and got the same result as the 10 tour players you would find the results unremarkable because of the small sample size. You asked earlier how often that would happen. I don’t know. Do you? But if it did happen you wouldn’t be surprised.

The male population is getting taller. The population of tour players is getting taller with them. Are potential tour players even taller on average than the general population. An interesting question which might be influenced by a variety of genetic and socio-economic factors. I’ll leave that for another discussion.

We cannot say based on the statistics we are quoting so far that height over 6 feet tall is a determining factor in success as a modern tour player. Especially in a game with success depending heavily on factors that are independent of height like short game and putting.

[braincramp52]

Damn! The train has really left the tracks on this thread.

[dalehead]

You’re right. I’ve enjoyed it but it’s time to move on.

[cdnglf]

https://www.dummies.com/education/math/statistics/how-to-find-probabilities-for-a-sample-mean/

 

[Hankshank]

So, all has been said of the qualities of Nick and Phil? Like 7 pages ago when the length discussions started. What’s the forum verdict? Who was best?

[gmarchese]

Phil was better for the game. Faldo was a better golfer with less longevity and he just missed the equipment revolution. Faldo was also ice, can't say that about Phil. Though Phil is definitely more entertaining, especially on 18 at Winged Foot :)

[Lark]

Faldo couldn’t get himself in contention nearly as much as Phil. I don’t call that ice, I call it streaky. Phil has accomplished more over his career and had to compete against the GOAT. The only point for Faldo is one more major. But Phil won the Players and Faldo didn’t. The Players is the same level as a major. Phil wins.

[MUNIGRIT]

Phil never got the Scott Hoch moment in a major or a Norman meltdown. He threw away his fair share though but that happens when you are in contention as much as he was.

[Body_Visions]

Maybe because he was the Hoch, or Norman?

 

 

[ChrisL52188]

Phil most certainly had a meltdown... US Open of 2006? The last hole? Can't get much worse than that drive he hit. And I am a fan of him.

[iBanesto]

Rock at 5'10. McIlroy at 5'9. McDowell at 5'11. Wilson at 5'11. Fisher at 6'3. Wall at 6'2.