I think it's time for the Tour to change the Strokes Gained moniker for the good of golf everywhere.

[GoGoErky]

3 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

The good ones.

 

Whoever argued it was just distance?

Theres an entire thread where comments have been made that today’s players don’t have skills other than distance. But you already know that from that thread

[smashdn]

To speak to some of the "pre The Way" (PTW) stats, GIR was one of the better indicators.  It was up there in terms of correlation to winning.  Logically, if you were high on GIR (including under GIR for par fives and short par fours) you had birdie putts.  If you were high up on GIR and Scrambling, you were avoiding bogeys in the rare instances you missed the green in regulation.

 

So would you rather lead the tour in SG-Total Driving or GIR?

[Titleist99]

1 hour ago, GoGoErky said:

Theres an entire thread where comments have been made that today’s players don’t have skills other than distance. But you already know that from that thread

I watched Peter Manati's interview where he stated as a touring Pro none of that stuff matters. You just added them up at the end and the lowest score wins. I'm paraphrasing her but it is what it boils down to.

[Dutch1008]

2 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

Collective you.

 

 

For the most part I am in agreement.  SG is definitely a better indicator.  Five of the top six stats from that article I linked were SG of some flavor.  As a whole it is better than the old stuff.

 

What I will say and come to the old head announcers' defense to an extent here is, these former players, these old dude talking heads, probably either A) don't understand/appreciate the math or B), if they were players in a certain era, sort of resent this stuff as pseudoscience as you say, because they somehow found a way to play the game and self-reflect on their play without it. So I think I understand why they may not be jumping on-board with both feet or pumping the SG tires as full or as fast as one may think necessary. 

 

"Some men you just can't reach."

 

Baseball went through this war over 15 years ago. In the end, the old pros like Joe Morgan lost the WAR. Pun intended. 

 

 

[golfortennis]

34 minutes ago, Titleist99 said:

I watched Peter Manati's interview where he stated as a touring Pro none of that stuff matters. You just added them up at the end and the lowest score wins. I'm paraphrasing her but it is what it boils down to.

 

That's called boilerplate media drivel.  It sounds good.  They say stuff they know plays well with the public.    In a particular round, he's right, add them up and she who is lowest.  What these stats do is show where you can put yourself in a better position to be the one with the lowest score at the end of the week. 

 

[GoGoErky]

1 hour ago, Titleist99 said:

I watched Peter Manati's interview where he stated as a touring Pro none of that stuff matters. You just added them up at the end and the lowest score wins. I'm paraphrasing her but it is what it boils down to.

The winner is the one with the fewest strokes. Score card doesn’t care about fairways hit, gir, putts/round or any of the strokes gained stuff. 
 

At the end of the day low score wins

[smashdn]

30 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

At the end of the day low score wins

 

The Y is a result of all those X's added together.

[GoGoErky]

58 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

The Y is a result of all those X's added together.

The X’s being score per hole. Nothing on the score card about how the score was achieved just the score itself. 

[smashdn]

16 hours ago, GoGoErky said:

The X’s being score per hole. Nothing on the score card about how the score was achieved just the score itself. 

 

No.  Y is score, or could be score.  Y is the process outcome.  The X's are the variables or other measured data sets.

 

It is just Y=mX+B, slope-intercept equation.  You just drop the B cause we don't care about the intercept.  The m is a measure of the importance or weight of the variable X to the process Y.

 

Y=X_{SG-Approach the Green} + X_{SG-Off-the-Tee} + X_{scoring average} + X_SG-Total + …. 

 

And so for as many X's as you want, for as deep in the variables you want to go.  You could quantify the impact of SG-Rough over 4" if you were inclined to.

 

 

Edited March 28 by smashdn

[GoGoErky]

2 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

No.  Y is score, or could be score.  Y is the process outcome.  The X's are the variables or other measured data sets.

 

It is just Y=mX+B, slope-intercept equation.  You just drop the B cause we don't care about the intercept.  The m is a measure of the importance or weight of the variable X to the process Y.

 

Y=X_{SG-Approach the Green} + X_{SG-Off-the-Tee} + X_{scoring average} + X_SG-Total + …. 

 

And so for as many X's as you want, for as deep in the variables you want to go.  You could quantify the impact of SG-Rough over 4" if you were inclined to.

 

 

There are a lot of strokes gained categories and most don’t matter to

determine the winner. Scottie led strokes gained off the tee at the players, Harmon led for approach.

 

Using some formula isn’t going to determine the winner. The lowest score is all that matters.

[Titleist99]

16 minutes ago, GoGoErky said:

There are a lot of strokes gained categories and most don’t matter to

determine the winner. Scottie led strokes gained off the tee at the players, Harmon led for approach.

 

Using some formula isn’t going to determine the winner. The lowest score is all that matters.

Strokes Gained is a touchy subject because some believe in it as a be-all-in performance on the golf course and some accept it as just a tool to help point out a player's weakness to work on, I fall in the latter. Strokes gained is also a tool for the betting public to try and handicap golf tournaments. I will be more in the Strokes Gained camp when Professor Mark Brodie comes up with Strokes Gained pressure.🙂

[GoGoErky]

6 minutes ago, Titleist99 said:

Strokes Gained is a touchy subject because some believe in it as a be-all-in performance on the golf course and some accept it as just a tool to help point out a player's weakness to work on, I fall in the latter. Strokes gained is also a tool for the betting public to try and handicap golf tournaments. I will be more in the Strokes Gained camp when Professor Mark Brodie comes up with Strokes Gained pressure.🙂

I’m with you on it being a tool rather than the be all. It’s great for seeing who is doing well and where/why on tour or to lay out a practice plan for improving on course performance.
 

 

[smashdn]

4 hours ago, GoGoErky said:

Using some formula isn’t going to determine the winner. The lowest score is all that matters.

 

You're right.  Using a formula doesn't determine the winner, it gives you insight into who will most likely win.  Better still, from the pros perspective, it gives them insight on what is most important to work on to win.

 

They have a finite amount of time to practice and perfect their craft.  Best not to waste it on aspects that aren't as heavily weighted towards winning or offer you the opportunity to differentiate your game from the field's.

[PedronNiall]

Sick Gains is simply part of the picture for both knowing how players are doing relative to the field in different categories and how awesome golf is on the global scale of hot fire. Through Sick Gains so much about the game comes into focus. 

[Titleist99]

Strokes Gained or Sick Gains also give the talking heads on TV something to bloviate about.🤣

[notsohard]

Do the winners get the "stats" engraved on the trophy?  

 

[GoGoErky]

2 hours ago, smashdn said:

 

You're right.  Using a formula doesn't determine the winner, it gives you insight into who will most likely win.  Better still, from the pros perspective, it gives them insight on what is most important to work on to win.

 

They have a finite amount of time to practice and perfect their craft.  Best not to waste it on aspects that aren't as heavily weighted towards winning or offer you the opportunity to differentiate your game from the field's.

Does it give an insight into who will most likely win? If Scottie is leading most categories he should most likely win every week except he’s not.

 

then there’s which strike as gained category or categories would determine the most likely winner. What happens when the guy who doesn’t lean many of them wins.

 

Agree it gives the pros something to work, but is also does the same for amateurs.
But again which category or categories dictate what to work on. Other than maybe in Scottie’s case strokes gained putting is one he would need the most at, but he doesn’t even have to increase that one much. Might be a little easier for pros to decide, but what the lines they choose for a particular week may change how well they do, so it really comes down to where they are at the end of the year and not so much week to week.

 

[jarhead]

Well, NBC stopped using "dormie" because some halfwit at the network felt the audience was too stupid to understand the meaning. I for one, hope that the gentleman at Augusta National, maintain the traditions of previous generations. Don't fix what ain't broke.

[jdl]

On 3/29/2024 at 6:21 PM, jarhead said:

Well, NBC stopped using "dormie" because some halfwit at the network felt the audience was too stupid to understand the meaning. I for one, hope that the gentleman at Augusta National, maintain the traditions of previous generations. Don't fix what ain't broke.

The term was removed from the rules of golf by the USGA

[smashdn]

On 3/28/2024 at 4:51 PM, GoGoErky said:

Does it give an insight into who will most likely win? If Scottie is leading most categories he should most likely win every week except he’s not.

 

then there’s which strike as gained category or categories would determine the most likely winner. What happens when the guy who doesn’t lean many of them wins.

 

Agree it gives the pros something to work, but is also does the same for amateurs.
But again which category or categories dictate what to work on. Other than maybe in Scottie’s case strokes gained putting is one he would need the most at, but he doesn’t even have to increase that one much. Might be a little easier for pros to decide, but what the lines they choose for a particular week may change how well they do, so it really comes down to where they are at the end of the year and not so much week to week.

 

 

You should grab "Lowest Score Wins" and read it.  It will answer your questions far better than I can here in this space.  It is a very practical application of strokes gained.

 

https://www.amazon.com/Lowest-Score-Wins-Techniques-Strategies/dp/0991382102/ref=sr_1_1?crid=2YILG7Y8698VU&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.HCsB4e0rQDGF-39m76X8FbTMN-5Jhw7nRlW0e-thgsd2Xg8NR-W4LEeyOzygn8Ev74XnyfA7R9OkDnwM_EfFOfQleZwaVlP-S7kNhQGrDtXB8dRbq7s_9HRb25dyWjB_2acAYPBxEFSEEUbI6_mW2onRzV6wfZnZnXIuiVUez8SkEAi4uD5Y2_ty3mpjGSCbLTfoxKvc-fLx_I45xBqGFgVU0uwGAeTg83QZV2kcQac.1aIN8umHz88hq-g4A4A-XptAdf7lrv1hcJjNEIokgsc&dib_tag=se&keywords=lowest+score+wins&qid=1713378321&sprefix=lowest+score+wins%2Caps%2C126&sr=8-1

 

***Not affiliated with the author or anything like that and that is just a generic link to amazon where I bought the book in the past.***

Edited April 17 by smashdn
added the link to the book. Not affiliated with book or link. Just passing along info.

[gato_plomo]

Our goal is to recruit even more dumbasses to take tee times? No thank you.

[Greg_B]

I'm not sure the world needs any more obscure metrics that nobody understands.