28 replies to this topic

[Roadking2003]

Here is a startling data analysis.

Masters winners are much better at ball striking than putting (Obviously, they had to have a good week putting to win the Masters.)

62% of the winners were top 10 in ball striking the year they won.

Only 23% were top ten in putting the year they won.

77% of the winners were ABOVE top 20 in putting for the year.

And for all except Zach their SG:TTG was much better than their SG:Putting.

The average gap between SG:TTG and SG:Putting was 1.12 strokes.  That's huge.

Attached Thumbnails

• 

[Viewing As Guest]

[Hawkeye77]

Need the Masters stats separate to compare? Not saying those stats aren't important, but what happened at the tournament proper would be helpful.

And I don't know where to find them! ;-)

Edited by Hawkeye77, 16 April 2018 - 05:27 PM.

[Roadking2003]

Hawkeye77, on 16 April 2018 - 05:26 PM, said:

Need the Masters stats separate to compare? Not saying those stats aren't important, but what happened at the tournament proper would be helpful.

And I don't know where to find them! ;-)

I don't think they are published and maybe not even measured.

[smartstrike]

Unfortunately The Masters does not seem to have the strokes gained stats like the other tour events and without knowing how the winners putted at The Masters it is impossible to make a definitive statement. I did a check of all 14 stroke play events this year and in 13 of them the winner putted better than his yearly average the week he won. What would really be startling is if the winners of The Masters didn't follow that trend.

[Roadking2003]

I suspect the winner of every tournament has a better than his average week putting.

But what is interesting is that Masters winners have had much better stats tee to green than putting for that season.

[Big Cat 3]

Ugh ... last 5 or 6 years not exactly a thrilling list of Masters champs

[anth]

This is not surprising.  Augusta is a ballstriking course.

You need to hit your irons to the right parts of the green and make your fair share of putts.  But if your striking is off and you’re missing on the wrong side you won’t win because you can’t make enough of those difficult putts to contend.

Edited by anth, 16 April 2018 - 09:37 PM.

[Roadking2003]

Big Cat 3, on 16 April 2018 - 09:30 PM, said:

Ugh ... last 5 or 6 years not exactly a thrilling list of Masters champs

What ???????????????

Watson, Spieth and Reed are as thrilling as it gets.

anth, on 16 April 2018 - 09:37 PM, said:

This is not surprising.  Augusta is a ballstriking course.

You need to hit your irons to the right parts of the green and make your fair share of putts.  But if your striking is off and you're missing on the wrong side you won't win because you can't make enough of those difficult putts to contend.

Exactly !!!! and McIlroy showed us what happens when you can't hit your irons accurately.

[lowheel]

Big Cat 3, on 16 April 2018 - 09:30 PM, said:

Ugh ... last 5 or 6 years not exactly a thrilling list of Masters champs

Your username gives your agenda away....

[smartstrike]

Checking the strokes gained tee to green and strokes gained putting for the 14 tour winners this year seems to reinforce the OP's (and many others on this forum) belief that at Augusta approach shots to the greens are more important than at other tournaments. Year to date this years 14 winners rank an average of 58th in strokes gained tee to green and 64th in strokes gained putting. In the OP's stats for the last 14 Masters winners they averaged 17th in strokes gained tee to green and 93rd in strokes gained putting for the year. This is not conclusive of course but is quite a difference.

[Viewing As Guest]

[Hawkeye77]

smartstrike, on 17 April 2018 - 12:15 PM, said:

Checking the strokes gained tee to green and strokes gained putting for the 14 tour winners this year seems to reinforce the OP's (and many others on this forum) belief that at Augusta approach shots to the greens are more important than at other tournaments. Year to date this years 14 winners rank an average of 58th in strokes gained tee to green and 64th in strokes gained putting. In the OP's stats for the last 14 Masters winners they averaged 17th in strokes gained tee to green and 93rd in strokes gained putting for the year. This is not conclusive of course but is quite a difference.

Actually means nothing without knowing their stats for the Masters.

Reed top 3 in strokes gained putting this year at the Masters, led in average putts of those playing all 4 days, not really the same story as his last 12 months.

[Roadking2003]

Hawkeye77, on 17 April 2018 - 12:21 PM, said:

Actually means nothing without knowing their stats for the Masters.

No.  What it means is that masters winners have a much stronger tee-to-green game than putting game.

Quote

Reed top 3 in strokes gained putting this year at the Masters, led in average putts of those playing all 4 days, not really the same story as his last 12 months.

Putts per day is a meaningless stat at best and probably a very misleading stat.  The best thing we can glean from average putts is that there is probably an inverse relationship between GIRs and total putts.

Where did you get your SG: Putting stat for Reed?  I don't think those are tracked.

[Hawkeye77]

Roadking2003, on 17 April 2018 - 03:57 PM, said:

Hawkeye77, on 17 April 2018 - 12:21 PM, said:

Actually means nothing without knowing their stats for the Masters.

No.  What it means is that masters winners have a much stronger tee-to-green game than putting game.

Quote

Reed top 3 in strokes gained putting this year at the Masters, led in average putts of those playing all 4 days, not really the same story as his last 12 months.

Putts per day is a meaningless stat at best and probably a very misleading stat.  The best thing we can glean from average putts is that there is probably an inverse relationship between GIRs and total putts.

Where did you get your SG: Putting stat for Reed?  I don't think those are tracked.

We've been there - gave you the link to the article that cited the strokes gained stat, you wanted to know where the author got it, told you to ask him because there is no way I would know, you suggested he just made it up, lol.  Since it's not about Tiger's childhood, I'm assuming the author actually cited a correct stat, can't do anything about your choosing not to believe it.

Jack was great tee to green/awesome putter - did pretty well.

Tiger not so hot tee to green, great from wherever he landed to the green, awesome putter - did pretty well.

Those stats are helpful, but since the question is about the Masters, they are still meaningless without the stats for the Masters winner/top performers from the actual Masters tournament they played in.  I don't care whether the outcome supports any particular theory, but those stats are essential.

This is just rehashing the existing thread at this point, and happy to rehash, just doesn't advance the arguments.

Edited by Hawkeye77, 17 April 2018 - 05:28 PM.

[Big Cat 3]

Roadking2003, on 16 April 2018 - 09:51 PM, said:

Big Cat 3, on 16 April 2018 - 09:30 PM, said:

Ugh ... last 5 or 6 years not exactly a thrilling list of Masters champs

What ???????????????

Watson, Spieth and Reed are as thrilling as it gets.

Really maybe one time for the Bubber ... Spieth yawn   Reed tba

anth, on 16 April 2018 - 09:37 PM, said:

This is not surprising.  Augusta is a ballstriking course.

You need to hit your irons to the right parts of the green and make your fair share of putts.  But if your striking is off and you're missing on the wrong side you won't win because you can't make enough of those difficult putts to contend.

Exactly !!!! and McIlroy showed us what happens when you can't hit your irons accurately.

[Roadking2003]

Hawkeye77, on 17 April 2018 - 05:28 PM, said:

We've been there - gave you the link to the article that cited the strokes gained stat, you wanted to know where the author got it, told you to ask him because there is no way I would know, you suggested he just made it up, lol.  Since it's not about Tiger's childhood, I'm assuming the author actually cited a correct stat, can't do anything about your choosing not to believe it.

I read the link.  Some of us here have searched high and low for the actual stats and cannot find any evidence that they even track SG at the Masters.   If they exist, why would they be hidden?

So yes, I think he made them up.

[Hawkeye77]

Roadking2003, on 18 April 2018 - 07:50 AM, said:

Hawkeye77, on 17 April 2018 - 05:28 PM, said:

We've been there - gave you the link to the article that cited the strokes gained stat, you wanted to know where the author got it, told you to ask him because there is no way I would know, you suggested he just made it up, lol.  Since it's not about Tiger's childhood, I'm assuming the author actually cited a correct stat, can't do anything about your choosing not to believe it.

I read the link.  Some of us here have searched high and low for the actual stats and cannot find any evidence that they even track SG at the Masters.   If they exist, why would they be hidden?

So yes, I think he made them up.

Maybe he had access that isn't generally published?

I'm not saying you are wrong.

[Hawkeye77]

Found one from a few years ago, so some of these stats geeks are calculating.  Maybe someone will publish something for this year, but gives me a little more comfort that folks are doing it.

http://everyshotcoun...is-first-major/

[lawst4days]

I thought these stats we're useful!

Thanks to the OP for taking the time to do this.

[Roadking2003]

Hawkeye77, on 18 April 2018 - 08:03 AM, said:

Found one from a few years ago, so some of these stats geeks are calculating.  Maybe someone will publish something for this year, but gives me a little more comfort that folks are doing it.

http://everyshotcoun...is-first-major/

Yes.  It's strange that the PGA Tour refuses to compute these and make them available like they do for other tournaments.

Thanks for posting.

[rawdog]

Hawkeye77, on 18 April 2018 - 08:03 AM, said:

Found one from a few years ago, so some of these stats geeks are calculating.  Maybe someone will publish something for this year, but gives me a little more comfort that folks are doing it.

http://everyshotcoun...is-first-major/

"This strokes gained analysis was possible because, for the first time, the Masters put TRACK shot information on their website. Thanks to Jake Nichols who did the strokes gained putting calculations that appear in the tables. From that I added the scoring information to determine the strokes gained tee-to-green results."

I am wondering how accurate the Masters measurement data is, since in real-time there were glitches showing players shanking shots or showing they missed short putts. There was much griping in the Masters thread.

However, if the TRACK system they use (why not just use what the PGA Tour uses? it's proven) is accurate, then props to Jake Nichols for compiling that publicly-available data into SG analysis.

You can read more of Jake's Work here:

https://golfanalytics.wordpress.com/

[Viewing As Guest]

Wanna get rid of this ugly yellow box? And remove other annoying "stuff" in between posts? Create a FREE GolfWRX account here.

[Roadking2003]

It's interesting how Spieth won with a very strong showing in every part of his game.

Also, I found this stat interesting;

"Interestingly, the top six players in strokes gained tee-to-green finished in the top six in the Masters tournament. "

You can't win the Masters with a weakness in any part of your game.

[Hawkeye77]

Maybe this is more of the same? Nothing real specific about the Masters stats specifically but summarizes generally.


https://www.google.c...he-masters/amp/

[rawdog]

Hawkeye77, on 18 April 2018 - 09:14 AM, said:

Maybe this is more of the same? Nothing real specific about the Masters stats specifically but summarizes generally.


https://www.google.c...he-masters/amp/

I like fivethirtyeight, and had read this article before, but it misses the mark as well.

We really need those strokes gained stats from the actual tournament.

[rawdog]

I posted this in the other thread, but here is general analysis of how players "win" in a given week. You do not need to have good putting for the year (obviously), but you typically need to have good putting for that week.

"I did find this 2016 article that had the last 10 years' worth of PGA winners, and where they gained strokes on the field that week.

Tour winners averaged 14.6 strokes better than the field in the weeks they won (across 4 rounds). Of those 14.6 strokes gained:

2.56 came from tee shots (18%)
5.12 came from approach shots (35%)
1.64 came from short game (11%)
5.28 came from putting (36%)

This is probably because there is more variation in quality of approach shots and putts. Ie, someone is going to catch lightning in a bottle for a week and putt lights out or have insane prox to the pin. Whereas it's harder to flat out destroy the field with tee shots or short game."



In addition, I posted this gem, which I pulled this data from Every Shot Counts:

"Between 2004 and 2012, 14 victories on Tour came with the winner putting worse than the field. That is 4% (14/315).

Vijay Singh was 5 of those wins

Between 2004 and 2012, 2 victories on Tour came with the winner having tee-to-green play worse than the field. That is 0.6%.

Both of those victories came from small-field events with 30 or 31 players.

So, it is possible to win with below-average putting."



To me, the tournament-level stats are needed. Going off full season in any way is extremely flawed.

Edited by rawdog, 18 April 2018 - 09:30 AM.

[LYG]

Ball striking: most greens, if you don't land it in a spot the size of the hood of your car, it will roll out to where you have a demanding two putt.

[Mfelix]

With Augusta's greens being so dependent on placing it in the right spot, these stats don't shock me at all.

[SheriffBooth]

It might also be worth noting that for the most part a top 10 putter is gaining around a stroke every 2 rounds on the field, whereas a top 10 tee-to-green player is gaining over a stroke per round.  "Drive and hit approach shots for dough, putt for show" doesn't have quite the same ring to it.

[bladehunter]

Hawkeye77, on 16 April 2018 - 05:26 PM, said:

Need the Masters stats separate to compare? Not saying those stats aren't important, but what happened at the tournament proper would be helpful.

And I don't know where to find them! ;-)

exactly .. only stats for the actual event matter to this question....

[rawdog]

bladehunter, on 19 April 2018 - 09:38 PM, said:

Hawkeye77, on 16 April 2018 - 05:26 PM, said:

Need the Masters stats separate to compare? Not saying those stats aren't important, but what happened at the tournament proper would be helpful.

And I don't know where to find them! ;-)

exactly .. only stats for the actual event matter to this question....

Are you a "stats guy" now?

We converted you!