Who are the strategists that the Tour guys use?

[Willy_ONoonan]

You hear them on TV talking about strategists that the PGA Tour (and probably all levels of play) but they rarely name them. I know about the guy with Decade, but does anyone know who the other gurus are? Like the NBA, NFL, and baseball, analytics and those who know how to analyze and use the data are changing the way golf is played. I'd love to learn more about these people and how they do what they do for the players we watch every week on TV.

[c7015]

Mark Broadie is one (strokes gained guy) 

 

For some reason I feel like Richie Hunt is another, who posts here (maybe my memory is failing me and he is just a stats guy who posts here)

[TiScape]

Analytics. I can think of about 4-5 guys from over in the ‘19th hole’ baseball thread that will never watch golf again if this becomes the norm! 😂 

[Creedo77]

Scott Fawcett is the main guy out there 

[kingnthenorthjb]

I hear a lot of speculation about how many players use DECADE but never anything confirmed. I would be curious how many use it.

[JungleJimbo]

1 hour ago, c7015 said:

Mark Broadie is one (strokes gained guy) 

 

For some reason I feel like Richie Hunt is another, who posts here (maybe my memory is failing me and he is just a stats guy who posts here)

OP @Willy_ONoonan: You might like this recent Freakonomics interview with Mark Broadie

”Greg Norman & Mark Broadie: Why Golf Beats an Orgasm and Why Data Beats Everything (People I (Mostly) Admire Ep. 23)”

..https://freakonomics.com/podcast/pima-greg-norman-mark-broadie/

 

[Creedo77]

1 hour ago, kingnthenorthjb said:

I hear a lot of speculation about how many players use DECADE but never anything confirmed. I would be curious how many use it.

He basically takes credit for any player who has ever been to one of his seminars 

 

So it’s a big over exaggerated on his part 

 

He offers players full view layouts (via google earh) that he sends to a lot of players. Those are useful for course strategy but that’s as far as it goes for my use of them. 

Edited May 5, 2021 by Creedo77

[m d g]

58 minutes ago, Creedo77 said:

He basically takes credit for any player who has ever been to one of his seminars 

 

So it’s a big over exaggerated on his part 

 

He offers players full view layouts (via google earh) that he sends to a lot of players. Those are useful for course strategy but that’s as far as it goes for my use of them. 

When I coached JV high school golf I would have my players go online and use Google maps to check out the courses ahead of a match. 

 

Another 'trick' I would drill into them was to pay attention to the pin positions of holes you hadn't played yet, but passed by while playing other holes.

 

It's amazing how many 'good' golfers don't know where the pin is on a hole they just passed while driving a cart.

[Willy_ONoonan]

3 hours ago, JungleJimbo said:

OP @Willy_ONoonan: You might like this recent Freakonomics interview with Mark Broadie

”Greg Norman & Mark Broadie: Why Golf Beats an Orgasm and Why Data Beats Everything (People I (Mostly) Admire Ep. 23)”

..https://freakonomics.com/podcast/pima-greg-norman-mark-broadie/

 

Thank you JJ. I look forward to listening to the podcast.

Willy

[bscinstnct]

“This was driven home during the recent telecast of the Zozo Championship, when commentator Paul Azinger, a card-carrying member of the Old School, blurted out regarding a player facing a full-swing wedge from the fairway, “The guys can land the ball within a 3-foot circle most of the time.

 

 

Fawcett’s friend and collaborator Lou Stagner, whose Twitter name is Golf Stat Pro, immediately tweeted that, from 100 yards, only 3% of shots, in fact, finish inside of 3 feet — while 43% are outside of 15 feet. The Decade system is built on the unassailable truths in these dispersion patterns. It provides probabilities on where the ball will wind up for every club and yardage, helping players pick targets into the greens that reduce their chance of making a bogey.

“Yes, it would be cool to draw a 6-iron into a back-left pin position, but that’s not the right play,” Fawcett says, noting the steep penalty for missing short, long or left in this hypothetical. “You play to the middle of the green and two-putt and pick up your birdies somewhere else. You gain shots by not losing shots on purpose.”

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/golf.com/news/decade-stats-course-strategy-changing-how-pros-play/amp/

 

 

 

 

[DavidCrockett]

A lot of the guys have been using Wharton MBAs from McKinsey, Bain, BCG, and the like.  Of course, they get absolutely nothing in return for the exorbitant fees they're paying.  What mostly happens is the "gurus"/consultants, having never actually done the thing on which they're consulting (golf), just make up a bunch of buzzword bingo nonsense, package it into a sweet slide deck, and then bill a fortune for it.

 

 

[ryan84]

9 hours ago, bscinstnct said:

“This was driven home during the recent telecast of the Zozo Championship, when commentator Paul Azinger, a card-carrying member of the Old School, blurted out regarding a player facing a full-swing wedge from the fairway, “The guys can land the ball within a 3-foot circle most of the time.

 

 

Fawcett’s friend and collaborator Lou Stagner, whose Twitter name is Golf Stat Pro, immediately tweeted that, from 100 yards, only 3% of shots, in fact, finish inside of 3 feet — while 43% are outside of 15 feet. The Decade system is built on the unassailable truths in these dispersion patterns. It provides probabilities on where the ball will wind up for every club and yardage, helping players pick targets into the greens that reduce their chance of making a bogey.

“Yes, it would be cool to draw a 6-iron into a back-left pin position, but that’s not the right play,” Fawcett says, noting the steep penalty for missing short, long or left in this hypothetical. “You play to the middle of the green and two-putt and pick up your birdies somewhere else. You gain shots by not losing shots on purpose.”

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/golf.com/news/decade-stats-course-strategy-changing-how-pros-play/amp/

 

 

 

 

This doesn't really address Azinger's comment though does it? That might be relevant if every single approach from 100y was aimed to carry and finish within 3 ft of the pin, but we know that is not the case. They may be aiming for 6 ft below the hole, a ridge behind to spin it back, etc. 

 

I am sure Azinger was exaggerating, but these guys are stupid good. I remember Phil posted on Instagram working on knockdown 9i, and 5 swings in a row I think carry was 140 +/- 1 yard. And he commented that every pro can do that.

[Superbrit]

9 hours ago, bscinstnct said:

“This was driven home during the recent telecast of the Zozo Championship, when commentator Paul Azinger, a card-carrying member of the Old School, blurted out regarding a player facing a full-swing wedge from the fairway, “The guys can land the ball within a 3-foot circle most of the time.

 

 

Fawcett’s friend and collaborator Lou Stagner, whose Twitter name is Golf Stat Pro, immediately tweeted that, from 100 yards, only 3% of shots, in fact, finish inside of 3 feet — while 43% are outside of 15 feet. The Decade system is built on the unassailable truths in these dispersion patterns. It provides probabilities on where the ball will wind up for every club and yardage, helping players pick targets into the greens that reduce their chance of making a bogey.

“Yes, it would be cool to draw a 6-iron into a back-left pin position, but that’s not the right play,” Fawcett says, noting the steep penalty for missing short, long or left in this hypothetical. “You play to the middle of the green and two-putt and pick up your birdies somewhere else. You gain shots by not losing shots on purpose.”

 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/golf.com/news/decade-stats-course-strategy-changing-how-pros-play/amp/

 

 

 

 

Clearly zinger wasn't watching Rory

[bladehunter]

So you’re looking for a list of soothsayers ?   Dr Seuss is one of my favorites.  As is Dr Phil.   But breaking with the Dr theme , how about Tiresias ?  Probably get more accurate info from him than today’s guys.  He was using his 3rd eye.  🤦‍♂️

 

 

 

 

in seriousness though. A zinger didn’t say they aimed for the ball to finish 3 feet from the pin. He said land 3 feet from the pin.  With a wedge I can absolutely see that as being the goal.  Why wouldn’t it be ? 
 

 

 

 

[bladehunter]

15 hours ago, kingnthenorthjb said:

I hear a lot of speculation about how many players use DECADE but never anything confirmed. I would be curious how many use it.

I haven’t found anyone here who will confirm using it either.  Not and give any data of their own out.    It interests me. I tried the trial on the app.  But..... id love to hear/see just 1 actual data set of a players improvement with it.   

Edited May 5, 2021 by bladehunter

[kingnthenorthjb]

21 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

I haven’t found anyone here who will confirm using it either.  Not and give any data of their own out.    It interests me. I tried the trial on the app.  But..... id love to hear/see just 1 actual data set of a players improvement with it.   

Same, it sounds great but it’s odd no tour players talk about it if they are actually using it. Sometimes seems odd about it.

[kingnthenorthjb]

13 hours ago, Creedo77 said:

He basically takes credit for any player who has ever been to one of his seminars 

 

So it’s a big over exaggerated on his part 

 

He offers players full view layouts (via google earh) that he sends to a lot of players. Those are useful for course strategy but that’s as far as it goes for my use of them. 

That’s the sense I get as well, the way he tweets it sounds like the whole tour is using it but I have yet to hear anyone on tour talk about it or give him credit.

[Golfingfanatic]

The whole DECADE thing seems a bit cult-like to me. 

[smashdn]

I would think the strategy would be fluid based upon what swing you have that day.  Go to the range and you are finding you are pushing the ball a little would that not potentially change how you are going to play some holes?

 

There is some very good strategy discussion in Lowest Score Wins.   I would be surprised if the two guys that wrote that book (Erik Barzeski and Dave Wedzik) are not consulted some.

 

Maybe this aspect is also handled by someone serving the dual role as swing coach and strategist?

 

I was reading on another forum where there was a hole on a course where a fairly well-known amateur tournament took place where the locals played a par three short of the green and pitch/chip and get down for 3.  Non-locals typically play for the green and most often end up bogey or worse because of it.  That is the kind of thing I would think a good strategist could bring about.  Also, when you are better to play aggressively on a par 4 or lay back a bit.  Developing landing areas on holes based upon hole location for the day.

[bladehunter]

16 minutes ago, kingnthenorthjb said:

Same, it sounds great but it’s odd no tour players talk about it if they are actually using it. Sometimes seems odd about it.

I’ll get flamed yet again for saying this.  
 

but.  Last discussion here about it got answers like “ well , I’ve not played much since starting it “ and “ I don’t want to give out too many secrets it’s proprietary “.  This was from the biggest proponents.  
 

 

im a skeptical guy.  But.  An open minded one.  Anyone who doubts that can say so and I’ll go over my recent equipment experiences and experiments.    But these stats programs are touted as life altering , until you ask them to show their work.  I still think there’s something good here.  But I have a hard time paying to find out . Why ?  Because it screams of confirmation bias.   As in “ i must praise the thing I just spent $69.95 on ,or else risk feeling like I wasted money.  If i praise it. The others will too “ and the cycle rotates. 
 

 

again. I think there’s some value in the stats themselves.  But.  I don’t really agree with the praise they receive unless someone can show me their 5 shot scoring average drop.  Or similar.  Like I said. The app is on my phone.  Can’t make myself pay the fee without info that makes me think it’s worth it.  

[bladehunter]

5 minutes ago, smashdn said:

I would think the strategy would be fluid based upon what swing you have that day.  Go to the range and you are finding you are pushing the ball a little would that not potentially change how you are going to play some holes?

 

There is some very good strategy discussion in Lowest Score Wins.   I would be surprised if the two guys that wrote that book (Erik Barzeski and Dave Wedzik) are not consulted some.

 

Maybe this aspect is also handled by someone serving the dual role as swing coach and strategist?

 

I was reading on another forum where there was a hole on a course where a fairly well-known amateur tournament took place where the locals played a par three short of the green and pitch/chip and get down for 3.  Non-locals typically play for the green and most often end up bogey or worse because of it.  That is the kind of thing I would think a good strategist could bring about.  Also, when you are better to play aggressively on a par 4 or lay back a bit.  Developing landing areas on holes based upon hole location for the day.

Yes. One of my main questions.   How does it account for the fluidity of a golf swing that’s neutral ?   Some of us don’t play a huge shot shape.  Some days it falls one way or the other.  
 

thays plus the mental side.  Such as being asked to hit driver into small spots.  Missing and therefore the mental let down of knowing you can par that hole 99% of the time with an iron off the tee. But you pressed as you were asked to do and made bogey or worse.  

Edited May 5, 2021 by bladehunter

[cwilk]

I think DECADE is great, but it's not rocket science.  The essential concepts involve Scott Fawcett's flow chart on tee club selection, using your dispersion yardages (cones) for shot selection, and entering that data into his system to clearly see where you are losing strokes.  Most of this is information is available for free on his YouTube channel.

[smashdn]

17 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Yes. One of my main questions.   How does it account for the fluidity of a golf swing that’s neutral ?   Some of us don’t play a huge shot shape.  Some days it falls one way or the other.  
 

thays plus the mental side.  Such as being asked to hit driver into small spots.  Missing and therefore the mental let down of knowing you can par that hole 99% of the time with an iron off the tee. But you pressed as you were asked to do and made bogey or worse.  

 

The Broadie stats are also based upon the "long game" approach that is suited to a tour season setting.  They come about as generalities almost.  "In the long term or in general you are better off hitting driver as far as you can."  To your point, they don't well take into account the individual vagaries of the game or the vagaries of your swing.

 

Anecdotally, I was a follower of the "hit fairway at all costs" school for a good while.  In my league that I used to play in we played the middle set of tees and I was one of the younger guys that played.  I was as long with 3i as most of those guys were with their drivers.  In that context it made sense and my partner and I were pretty successful.  Lots of pars, usually no worse than bogey.  With that we won a lot of holes.

 

That being the case when I played with or against players who were as long or longer than I am and had good decent control of their driver, I could not score to beat them.  I was still playing that plodding, par and bogey golf game.  I was in the fairway a lot but in the fairway hitting 6-5-4 irons.  

 

Every Shot Counts changed my thought process.  I focused on developing a reliable driver swing and then turned to squeezing more distance out of it.  Once I had that shot golf started to get much easier.  My GIR went up.  When I missed a green it wasn't by much so I was getting up and down regularly.  Birdie entered my vocabulary occasionally.  My hdcp dropped about 8 shots.  I went from an average low-mid 90's to mid-upper 80's player.

 

What I have really wanted to do is apply the Lowest Score Wins dispersion cloud thing.  However, I have not found, in my area, a place where I can get to a decent range that has trackman or the like.  Most places here want to sell you a lesson and won't just rent time to develop the dispersion shape and true yardages.

 

Most guys I run into don't take into account the dispersion is not a horizontal (left to right symmetry)  shape but an elongated oval on an angle.  That is a critical point to understand when evaluating clubs and what club will miss where and where you can miss on a hole.

[canonlbp430]

1 hour ago, kingnthenorthjb said:

Same, it sounds great but it’s odd no tour players talk about it if they are actually using it. Sometimes seems odd about it.

 

Will Zalatoris went on Fawcett and Crossfields podcast and talked about the Masters and breaks down his final round and his "decade" targets on a lot of the holes.

[Willy_ONoonan]

Does Trackman have a setting that will show you your dispersion pattern for each club? I keep reading about applying your dispersion pattern to the hole but need to figure out what that is first! If they have some kind of setting on those things that show that it sounds like I need to go rent time on a Trackman or the like and see what my cones look like.

[kingnthenorthjb]

1 hour ago, bladehunter said:

I’ll get flamed yet again for saying this.  
 

but.  Last discussion here about it got answers like “ well , I’ve not played much since starting it “ and “ I don’t want to give out too many secrets it’s proprietary “.  This was from the biggest proponents.  
 

 

im a skeptical guy.  But.  An open minded one.  Anyone who doubts that can say so and I’ll go over my recent equipment experiences and experiments.    But these stats programs are touted as life altering , until you ask them to show their work.  I still think there’s something good here.  But I have a hard time paying to find out . Why ?  Because it screams of confirmation bias.   As in “ i must praise the thing I just spent $69.95 on ,or else risk feeling like I wasted money.  If i praise it. The others will too “ and the cycle rotates. 
 

 

again. I think there’s some value in the stats themselves.  But.  I don’t really agree with the praise they receive unless someone can show me their 5 shot scoring average drop.  Or similar.  Like I said. The app is on my phone.  Can’t make myself pay the fee without info that makes me think it’s worth it.  

I'm very open to the concept and to me it sounds like it probably helps a lot. If there wasn't this strange phenomenon of touting it as being used to give a massive advantage to tour pros when no pros will actually confirm they use it I would be much more open to trying it or at least believing in it. 

[jvincent]

Agree with the comments about the DECADE system not being rocket science. Golf has always been about knowing your shot tendencies and playing accordingly. 

 

@smashdn makes a good point about scoring. Playing for par / avoiding bad scores will take you to a certain point. It might even be successful up to the college level. But it falls apart as soon as you get to the tour level. Take a look at the Korn Ferry scores. They aren't playing easy courses and you have to go low to win there. That means taking chances to try and make birdies.

 

Sure, some risks are smaller than others and shot tendencies still matter but you can't play safe and make it on any professional tour.

[kingnthenorthjb]

42 minutes ago, canonlbp430 said:

 

Will Zalatoris went on Fawcett and Crossfields podcast and talked about the Masters and breaks down his final round and his "decade" targets on a lot of the holes.

I heard about that and he definitely gives a lot of credit to DECADE. It's the other pros I wonder about. I'm not doubting it's usefulness as it seems like an awesome concept to me. It just sounds like it's marketed as being utilized by a lot of pros to give them a big advantage over the field and I don't see that confirmed outside of Zalatoris. All that said, having Zalatoris tout it after what he has done this year is a big endorsement in itself.

[bladehunter]

1 hour ago, smashdn said:

 

The Broadie stats are also based upon the "long game" approach that is suited to a tour season setting.  They come about as generalities almost.  "In the long term or in general you are better off hitting driver as far as you can."  To your point, they don't well take into account the individual vagaries of the game or the vagaries of your swing.

 

Anecdotally, I was a follower of the "hit fairway at all costs" school for a good while.  In my league that I used to play in we played the middle set of tees and I was one of the younger guys that played.  I was as long with 3i as most of those guys were with their drivers.  In that context it made sense and my partner and I were pretty successful.  Lots of pars, usually no worse than bogey.  With that we won a lot of holes.

 

That being the case when I played with or against players who were as long or longer than I am and had good decent control of their driver, I could not score to beat them.  I was still playing that plodding, par and bogey golf game.  I was in the fairway a lot but in the fairway hitting 6-5-4 irons.  

 

Every Shot Counts changed my thought process.  I focused on developing a reliable driver swing and then turned to squeezing more distance out of it.  Once I had that shot golf started to get much easier.  My GIR went up.  When I missed a green it wasn't by much so I was getting up and down regularly.  Birdie entered my vocabulary occasionally.  My hdcp dropped about 8 shots.  I went from an average low-mid 90's to mid-upper 80's player.

 

What I have really wanted to do is apply the Lowest Score Wins dispersion cloud thing.  However, I have not found, in my area, a place where I can get to a decent range that has trackman or the like.  Most places here want to sell you a lesson and won't just rent time to develop the dispersion shape and true yardages.

 

Most guys I run into don't take into account the dispersion is not a horizontal (left to right symmetry)  shape but an elongated oval on an angle.  That is a critical point to understand when evaluating clubs and what club will miss where and where you can miss on a hole.

Incredibly good post.  
 

 

That’s exactly what I’ve seen and been thinking.   And why I ask so many questions that get no answers here.  How are these ams having such great success with it , but yet don’t ever bring this up ?   
 

to me it essentially boils down to the same way most scratch to plus handicaps have always played. Trial and error, but as aggressive as possible.  You learn where driver just doesnt pay and you learn where 3 iron just leaves too much work to do for par or better.   Especially on a slight mishit. Same for aiming on approaches.  It’s entirely dependent on your shot shape comfort and your strengths .  I don’t know why any of this is news.  It seems like the best kept secret , that’s never been a secret.  

[ThinkingPlus]

12 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

Incredibly good post.  
 

 

That’s exactly what I’ve seen and been thinking.   And why I ask so many questions that get no answers here.  How are these ams having such great success with it , but yet don’t ever bring this up ?   
 

to me it essentially boils down to the same way most scratch to plus handicaps have always played. Trial and error, but as aggressive as possible.  You learn where driver just doesnt pay and you learn where 3 iron just leaves too much work to do for par or better.   Especially on a slight mishit. Same for aiming on approaches.  It’s entirely dependent on your shot shape comfort and your strengths .  I don’t know why any of this is news.  It seems like the best kept secret , that’s never been a secret.  

Well some parts might have been less generally known or acknowledged.  Basically before the modern stats based strategies were publicized, fairways were over valued and proximity to the hole was under valued.  That is pretty much the zeroth order basics.  I have never seen anyone acknowledge those value judgements until the last 10 - 15 years.  It was always put the ball in the fairway to make the best score on every hole or put the ball on the green anywhere rather considering a chip or bunker might be a better spot than a much longer putt.