Opinion & Analysis
The stats say Spieth’s collapse at The Masters was no fluke
Before the 2016 Masters, I published my annual column, The 20 Players Who Can Win the Masters, which did not include Jordan Spieth. That drew the ire of a lot of fans, and through 65 holes it looked like I was ready to eat some crow on that prediction.
I originally filtered Spieth out of the top-20 due to his struggles on straight-away par-4s, since there is a correlation between that stat and a player’s performance at Augusta. But just as importantly, his performance from 150-225 yards had dropped, as well. Shots from 150-225 yards are absolutely critical to performance at Augusta, and Spieth’s disastrous 12th hole was due to hitting a 150-yard tee shot into the water.
Spieth didn’t hit the ball particularly well by his standards throughout the 2016 Masters. In fact, Bryson DeChambeau said he felt he outplayed Spieth in Round 1, but Spieth was able to score better than DeChambeau. And throughout the first three rounds, Spieth had quite a few hiccups and was on pace to have the most double bogeys of any eventual Masters winner in the history of the event. But the victory was not to be his.
Here’s a look at Spieth’s current rankings in the key metrics of golf.
Spieth did not drive the ball well at Augusta despite driving it well so far this season. But what we can see this season is a large decline in his iron play. In fact, he ranks 119th in shots from 75-225 yards from the fairway/tee box.
Before I go on, I do need to clear up a couple of the biggest myths in golf.
- Jordan Spieth isn’t great at anything; he’s just not bad at anything.
- Spieth plays so well because of his short game, and his putting bails him out.
Here’s a look at Spieth’s key metrics in his first three seasons on Tour that should dispel both of those myths.
The decline in his Yellow Zone (125-175 yards) performance and his performance on approach shots from the short grass is what stands out the most.
We know that Spieth started making some changes to his swing last year, so here’s a look at his performances from all of last season to today.
To read the charts: 0 percent is the average for the field in the event. Therefore, anything better than 0 percent is better than the average. Anything less than 0 percent is worse than the average. The dotted line is the trend line to show how Jordan’s performance is trending.
Spieth’s Driving Effectiveness has sustained a flat trend over time. However, his iron play from each of the zones is on a significant decline over time. And it appears to have started right around the 2015 John Deere Classic.
I should remind you, however, that we are talking about the No. 2-ranked golfer in the world who has won two of the past five majors with a worst finish of T4 during that timeframe. And he had held the lead in Masters for 137 consecutive holes before he came to hole No. 12 on Sunday at Augusta National.
I would imagine the swing changes he has been working on were done to help out with his driving, which could be sporadic and have the rightward miss. It just appears that those swing changes have come at the expense of his iron play, however, and that is why I did not have Spieth in my 20 Players That Can Win the Masters list. And that will be what he needs to improve in order to get back to his old ball-striking form.
Club Junkie
Tour Edge Exotics mini driver review + TaylorMade Spider ZT Max first look – Club Junkie
On this episode of Club Junkie, I put the new Tour Edge Exotics Mini Driver to the test and break down the performance, forgiveness, distance, and where it fits compared to a traditional driver or strong fairway wood. If you have been curious about adding a mini driver to the bag, this one is worth a look.
I also dive into the new TaylorMade Spider ZT Max putter that was recently spotted and discuss the growing zero torque putter trend. Plus, there is a closer look at the new Project X Titan Yellow shaft showing up on the PGA Tour and what makes it different from other profiles currently out there.
Opinion & Analysis
AVL: We’re talking about practice! My best tips for taking your game to the course
With the beginning of June on the horizon and courses rounding into peak condition for the season, it’s time to hone the finer skills that often get rusty over the winter. More sunlight also means more time to get out on the course and work on your game.
Whether it’s the practice green or the driving range, there’s always something to improve—whether you’re enjoying the fresh air or preparing for a weekend game or tournament. You can work on drills or freestyle around the green, and friendly competition is a great way to sharpen your skills.
While there are endless ways to get better at golf, I’m going to focus on practicing around the green. Let’s take a look at a few things to keep in mind as we head into the summer months.
Drills
From the driving range to the practice green, it’s important to incorporate drills into your routine. Years ago, I spent a weekend working on my short game with James Sieckmann. He recommended doing drill work for 5–10 minutes, then returning to your main practice.
This way, you create a balance between structured drills and real-world scenarios, so you’re not confined to “perfect” situations. For example, hitting the same three-foot putt over and over is good for repetition, but after a while, it becomes less interactive for your brain.
My approach is to use a putting trainer with a narrow gate for the ball to pass through, or simply place tees just outside the width of the ball. I’ll hit a series of four putts through the gate for three sets. Then, from a similar distance, I’ll hit four putts without the training aid and repeat that sequence three times.
Next, I’ll hit a number of 15–25 foot putts in a random fashion, then circle back to repeat the short putt drills with and without the training aid.
This breaks up the rhythm of hitting short putts with the training aid. When you hit the same short putts over and over, it’s easy to get into a groove—which is great for the drill, but not reflective of actual course play. While finding a rhythm is fundamental for drills, I like to introduce variation with longer putts to keep things realistic.
Game Mode
Once you’ve established a foundation with drills, it’s time to simulate on-course scenarios. This is where a few practice games come in handy.
One that I’ve been enjoying lately involves putting 10- to 15-footers with two balls. If I make the putt, great! If I miss, I pull the missed ball back a putter length. Suddenly, that little tap-in becomes a nerve-wracking three-footer—at least at first. As you get better at this game, those three- and five-footers become much more comfortable and routine.
It may sound cliché, but each shot is just what it is—it’s how we react that makes the difference. I like this game because it blends the pressure of on-course putting with the consequence of leaving yourself a much longer putt than usual.
Another game I like is one I recently learned from Brad Faxon. Place three tees in a line at four different locations around the hole: one at 3 feet, one at 6 feet, and one at 8 feet. The 3- and 6-foot putts count as par, and the 8-footer is for birdie.
This game keeps you focused on scoring and helps you get into a competitive mindset. You can even think about this putting game while you’re on the course. I just started playing it, and last week I couldn’t get better than two under par.
Competition
Competition during practice is when drills and games come to life, and you start to see results. For me, nothing beats a putting contest with a friend or two. In the right setting, these contests can become talking points for the whole season.
Match play, a game of 21, or simply seeing who can make the most one-putts (with a small prize on the line) are all great ways to simulate real on-course pressure. Recently, I played in a putting contest where one competitor made back-to-back 30- and 50-foot putts. As they say, expect your opponent to make every putt—and he nearly did. That’s impressive, and it’s something you see on the course, too: you have to stay committed to your game plan, no matter what.
When it comes to practice, it’s important to blend feedback from recent rounds with the fundamentals you want to reinforce. Drills, games, and competition—from the driving range to the putting green—form the backbone of skills you’ll rely on during actual rounds.
Finding the right balance is something we’re all working on, one practice session at a time. With the beginning of June on the horizon and courses rounding into peak condition for the season, it’s time to hone the finer skills that often get rusty over the winter. More sunlight also means more time to get out on the course and work on your game. Whether it’s the practice green or the driving range, there’s always something to improve—whether you’re enjoying the fresh air or preparing for a weekend game or tournament. You can work on drills or freestyle around the green, and friendly competition is a great way to sharpen your skills. While there are endless ways to get better at golf, I’m going to focus on practicing around the green. Let’s take a look at a few things to keep in mind as we head into the summer months.
Drills
From the driving range to the practice green, it’s important to incorporate drills into your routine. Years ago, I spent a weekend working on my short game with James Sieckmann. He recommended doing drill work for 5–10 minutes, then returning to your main practice. This way, you create a balance between structured drills and real-world scenarios, so you’re not confined to “perfect” situations. For example, hitting the same three-foot putt over and over is good for repetition, but after a while, it becomes less interactive for your brain.
My approach is to use a putting trainer with a narrow gate for the ball to pass through, or simply place tees just outside the width of the ball. I’ll hit a series of four putts through the gate for three sets. Then, from a similar distance, I’ll hit four putts without the training aid and repeat that sequence three times. Next, I’ll hit a number of 15–25 foot putts in a random fashion, then circle back to repeat the short putt drills with and without the training aid.
This breaks up the rhythm of hitting short putts with the training aid. When you hit the same short putts over and over, it’s easy to get into a groove—which is great for the drill, but not reflective of actual course play. While finding a rhythm is fundamental for drills, I like to introduce variation with longer putts to keep things realistic.
Game Mode
Once you’ve established a foundation with drills, it’s time to simulate on-course scenarios. This is where a few practice games come in handy. One that I’ve been enjoying lately involves putting 10- to 15-footers with two balls. If I make the putt, great! If I miss, I pull the missed ball back a putter length.
Suddenly, that little tap-in becomes a nerve-wracking three-footer—at least at first. As you get better at this game, those three- and five-footers become much more comfortable and routine. It may sound cliché, but each shot is just what it is—it’s how we react that makes the difference. I like this game because it blends the pressure of on-course putting with the consequence of leaving yourself a much longer putt than usual.
Another game I like is one I recently learned from Brad Faxon. Place three tees in a line at four different locations around the hole: one at 3 feet, one at 6 feet, and one at 8 feet. The 3- and 6-foot putts count as par, and the 8-footer is for birdie.
This game keeps you focused on scoring and helps you get into a competitive mindset. You can even think about this putting game while you’re on the course. I just started playing it, and last week I couldn’t get better than two under par.
Competition
Competition during practice is when drills and games come to life, and you start to see results. For me, nothing beats a putting contest with a friend or two. In the right setting, these contests can become talking points for the whole season. Match play, a game of 21, or simply seeing who can make the most one-putts (with a small prize on the line) are all great ways to simulate real on-course pressure. Recently, I played in a putting contest where one competitor made back-to-back 30- and 50-foot putts. As they say, expect your opponent to make every putt—and he nearly did. That’s impressive, and it’s something you see on the course, too: you have to stay committed to your game plan, no matter what.
When it comes to practice, it’s important to blend feedback from recent rounds with the fundamentals you want to reinforce. Drills, games, and competition—from the driving range to the putting green—form the backbone of skills you’ll rely on during actual rounds. Finding the right balance is something we’re all working on, one practice session at a time.
For Korean golfers, we always look forward to the last of the kkot-saem-chu-I for the true start of a new golf season. The term refers to a cold snap, but literally translates as “winter being jealous of the flowers beginning to bloom, thus lashing out one final time before surrendering to spring”.
A rather poetic mouthful packed into a short expression.
Koreans can be like that. Understated, yet oddly expressive at the same time. And nowhere is this more true on the golf course and in our golf bags. In fact, I suspect many Korean golfers look forward to new apparel and accessory drops more than they do actual equipment launches each year.
At this point, Korean golf fashion may exist on its own timeline. (courtesy of @seonbi_golfer)
There is ample evidence to support that suspicion. Korea is the world’s third-largest golf market behind the United States and Japan, yet its appetite for golf apparel exceeds that of both countries combined. Recent estimates suggest that Korea accounts for nearly 40 percent of the global golf apparel market, placing it among the world’s most influential golf fashion markets and punching well above its size.
Simply, we care deeply about how new golf clubs look and feel, but enjoy looking good while swinging them even more.
Golfers in the West may laugh and say that golf is played on a course, not a fashion runway. Perhaps. But what’s the harm in trying to look and feel good, if the added self-confidence can help actual performance? It certainly seems to have worked for Jason Day, who may have unlocked a new stats category: dormant strokes gained. Coincidence?
During the COVID-era, estimates placed the market near $9 billion, an astonishing figure for a single country.
As a proud member of Gen X, I’ve witnessed the highs and lows of golf fashion firsthand. The pleated trousers and wing-tipped shoes of Jack Nicklaus, the stylish plus-fours and knickers of Payne Stewart, the baggy black trousers and fitted mock-necks of Tiger Woods, and the thigh-hugging athletic tailoring of Rory McIlroy. Golf fashion, like the golf swing itself, has rarely stood still.
But nowhere have those trends shifted, evolved, and been scrutinized quite as relentlessly as in Korea. Here, golf fashion moves faster than fairway gossip, and consumers dissect brands with a level of discernment that can be both impressive and mildly terrifying. New brands are studied, judged, embraced, or dismissed with startling efficiency.
The result is a consumer base with one of the sharpest eyes for quality and authenticity anywhere in the world. It is difficult to quantify, but easy to recognize. Clean lines without trying too hard. Luxury mixed with utility. Trend awareness balanced by restraint and purpose.
It’s golf fashion shaped by one of the world’s most style-literate cities, something I like to call Seoul Sensibilities, referring to the taste level forged by a uniquely competitive environment.
And increasingly, global brands have noticed.
Many golf brands in Korea have their own flagship shops dedicated to apparel only
Titleist understood this years ago, when its apparel business in Korea took on a life of its own under new ownership and local direction. What had once been a straightforward extension of an iconic equipment giant became something sharper and more premium. By going all in on the serious Tour-player look (I couldn’t even fit into their XL sizes), Titleist struck the right chord with Korean consumers and helped its fledgling apparel business break into the mainstream. Titleist became a household name even for non-golfers who wore its caps, shirts, and windbreakers in daily life. In many ways, it proved that even heritage golf brands could carry real fashion credibility when viewed through a Korean lens.
Several years later, PXG took a page out of Titleist’s playbook and followed suit. Korean consumers helped transform the brand from one known largely for irons and loud commercials into something broader and more stylish. PXG apparel’s growth in Korea was explosive, where it found an early audience and turned the category into something more than mere logo merchandise. It is still hard to walk anywhere in Seoul without seeing its palindrome logo.
Malbon’s meteoric rise in the United States was genuine, but its ascent into a global golf lifestyle brand owes much to Korea, where it was elevated by a market already fluent in modern golf style. Korea did not simply embrace Malbon. It pressure-tested the concept, refined its appeal, and helped push it into the global spotlight.
As such, new brands may arrive from abroad, but more often than not, their sharpest evolution happens here. If a brand can earn credibility in Seoul, it’s deemed to have passed one of the toughest style audits in the game.
That is why the next meaningful chapter may not come from outside, but from a Korean brand moving in the opposite direction, carrying those Seoul Sensibilities outward as K-pop once did.
Play young Stay dope.
From Seoul, With Intent
Khalhon is a label that feels less like a trend-chasing newcomer and more like the product of a market that has already seen everything. Golfers here have long been surrounded by luxury logos, technical fabrics, and tour uniforms disguised as lifestyle wear and vice-versa. In other words, novelty alone rarely lasts here, and the Koreans seems to understand that instinctively.
Its style language leans into clean silhouettes, relaxed but tailored proportions, muted palettes, and premium materials that speak quietly but confidently. There is a modern city aesthetic running through it all, with strong layering pieces, thoughtful textures, and subtle branding that suggests sophistication rather than demanding attention.
“Built for the course. Designed beyond it.”
Most importantly, the garments seem designed to blur the line between golfwear and everyday style. Shirts, trousers, knitwear, and outer layers move comfortably between a game of screen golf, a lunch reservation, an airport gate, or an afternoon coffee in Gangnam with friends.
It raises the question of whether this is golfwear that happens to look good off the course, or everyday clothing that performs beautifully on the fairways.
Personally, I have long appreciated Nike Golf for its clean, athletic modernization of golf attire. It also has the useful side effect of making me look like a more serious golfer than I probably am. But off the course, there are times when being instantly identified as the golf guy in a crowd of non-golfers can feel a touch self-conscious.
“Built for the course. Designed beyond it.”
That is part of what drew me to Khalhon, which seemed to blend golf and everyday wear naturally. While some of the outfits may be slightly beyond my personal confidence level, the brand also offers tasteful options for older guys like me who still want to express a little personality without regretting the decision later.
These are not simply flashy outfits worn on the course and then banished to the closet until the next tee time. They work surprisingly well off the course too, and I suspect many of the pieces will still look right a couple of years from now, which would certainly be kinder to my wallet than most golf fashion trends tend to be.
And perhaps that broader lifestyle positioning also helps explain why someone like Sean Wotherspoon would find Khalhon creatively interesting in the first place.
“Built for the course. Designed beyond it.”
“Korea is not only one of the most fashion-forward golf markets in the world, but one of the most fashion-forward markets globally. Korea is ahead, and I love to watch and try to catch up.” – Sean Wotherspoon, Creative Director at Khalhon
Seoul and Beyond
If Khalhon’s rise says something about where Korean golf fashion is today, its relationship with Sean Wotherspoon says even more about where it is heading.
For readers less familiar with Sean Wotherspoon, his arrival at Khalhon is not some routine celebrity endorsement or influencer collaboration. In design and streetwear circles, Wotherspoon is regarded as one of the more influential creative voices of his generation, particularly when it comes to blending nostalgia, storytelling, and contemporary culture into products that people can connect with.
He first gained widespread attention through his now-famous Nike sneaker collaborations, where his vintage-inspired designs and instinct for color helped turn him into one of the defining artists of the late-2010s sneaker era. His work gradually expanded beyond footwear into apparel, automotive collaborations, collectibles, and broader lifestyle design.
Modern golf style now extends well beyond the fairways, where performance and functionality are largely expected by default. And while plenty of brands already make technically competent golfwear, Khalhon seems more focused on designing clothes people would genuinely want to wear even after the round ends.
And when guys at Wotherspoon’s level show genuine interest in working with a Korean golf brand as its new Creative Director, fashion circles tend to sit up and pay attention. There’s already a huge buzz among the fashion-conscious here about upcoming collabs with iconic sports stars and brands.
“My creative direction for Khalhon is disruptive, colorful, nostalgic, and modern. My goal is to blend these avenues seamlessly within each collection.” – Sean Wotherspoon
In chatting with Sean, what stood out most to me was how genuinely energized he sounded about the project itself. Despite having already worked across and countless other creative spaces, he described golf as a completely fresh category for him, saying that Khalhon “will be an amazing vehicle for my design work.”
At the same time, his enthusiasm seemed tied just as much to Korea itself. He spoke openly about admiring Korea’s fashion culture while repeatedly insisting he is still a terrible golfer.
There was something oddly refreshing about that humility. Rather than sounding like a celebrity parachuting into golf simply because the category suddenly became fashionable, Sean sounded genuinely curious about what Korea might do with the category next.
And perhaps that is what makes Khalhon feel interesting right now. The brand feels less like a trend-chaser and more like the natural result of a market now confident enough to export its own point of view.
For years, global brands came to Korea to sharpen their image against one of the most discerning audiences anywhere. Now, a Korean label appears ready to send those Seoul Sensibilities outward instead.
Which brings us back to kkot-saem-chu-i.
That final cold snap before spring always arrives with a reminder that seasons are changing, whether we notice it immediately or not. Golf fashion feels a little like that right now as well, as the old boundaries between sport, streetwear, luxury, and everyday style continue to soften.
And somewhere in Seoul, a Korean golf label already seems prepared for whatever season comes next. I just hope they have everything in my size.
Justin Rose WITB 2026 (April): Full WITB breakdown with new McLaren irons
What’s the story behind Webb Simpson’s custom-stamped irons?
Cadillac Championship Tour Report: Spieth’s sizable changes, McLaren Golf launches, and more
Kristoffer Reitan’s winning WITB: 2026 Truist Championship
Russell Henley’s winning WITB: 2026 Charles Schwab Challenge
Cameron Young’s winning WITB: 2026 Cadillac Championship
Aaron Rai’s winning WITB: 2026 PGA Championship
Nelly Korda WITB 2026 (April)
Justin Rose on the switch to McLaren Golf, learnings from previous equipment moves
Photos from the 2026 CJ Cup Byron Nelson
Chris Gotterup WITB 2026 (June)
Chris Gotterup had >14 clubs in his bag when photographed prior to the Memorial Tournament. Drivers: TaylorMade Qi4D (8 degrees), Ping...
Jason Day WITB 2026 (June)
Jason Day had >14 clubs in his bag when photographed prior to the Memorial Tournament. Driver: Ping G430 LST (10.5 degrees...
Nastasia Nadaud WITB 2026 (June)
Driver: Titleist TSR4 (9 Degrees) Shaft: Project X EvenFlow Riptide CB 6.0 S 3-wood: Titleist GTS2 (15 degrees) Shaft: Graphite Design Tour AD DI...
Keith Mitchell WITB 2026 (June)
Driver: TaylorMade Qi4D LS Shaft: Project X Titan Yellow 6 X 3-wood: TaylorMade Qi10 (16.5 degrees) Shaft: Mitsubishi Tensei 1K Blue 90...
-
News3 days agoRussell Henley’s winning WITB: 2026 Charles Schwab Challenge
-
Whats in the Bag2 weeks agoAaron Rai’s winning WITB: 2026 PGA Championship
-
Tour Photo Galleries2 weeks agoPhotos from the 2026 CJ Cup Byron Nelson
-
Equipment2 weeks agoCJ Cup Byron Nelson Tour Report: Koepka and Kim’s newest putters finally get hot
-
News5 days agoCharles Schwab Challenge Tour Report: MacIntyre, Åberg and Spaun all switch putters, TaylorMade launches new Spider
-
Equipment7 days agoDetails on J.J. Spaun’s surprise putter switch
-
Popular Photo Galleries1 week agoPhotos from the 2026 Charles Schwab Challenge
-
Equipment3 weeks agoPGA Championship Tour Report: Fitzpatrick, Koepka among big-name putter switches for Aronimink
Freddy
Apr 22, 2016 at 1:27 pm
Your point would be more convincing if Spieth had never gotten into contention due to his iron play.
Brendan
Apr 21, 2016 at 6:27 pm
In my opinion, (which doesn’t carry much weight), Rich did a great job of analyzing Spieth’s issues over the past three years from a statistical standpoint. However golf isn’t a game played between numbers, it is a game played between human players. I think the reason Spieth has been so successful so far is simply due to his mental strength and attitude and the style of his play. He can poke his drives out there relatively consistently and when his irons can do him more good than harm, he really stands out. In reality, his short game is what keeps him relevant, while his mental ability and attitude sets him apart in big spots when others seem to let the moment get to the best of them. He’s a grinder in the fullest sense of the term and I feel that sometimes viewers forget that. Rory, Jason, and other big names are most likely statistically better in most of the areas listed above, but that isn’t what wins tournaments sometimes. Nobody (maybe Rory) comes close to outplaying other great players on Sundays.
Nick Coleman
Apr 21, 2016 at 9:16 am
Richie, do you have stats on scrambling or recovery? Jordan recovered from so many terrible situations during the Masters. And are there any stats available on where shots took place (right rough, left rough, etc)? I’m guessing that information isn’t recorded. Although it seems like it wouldn’t be too hard for the PGA to do it, given you can track shots live in the iPad app. I noticed that feature wasn’t available during the Masters, and I missed being able to see just how far offline a shot had gone. My gut is that the “missing” stats to explain Jordan’s inexplicable second place finish is related to A) play in the wind (he’s from Texas, where there’s a lot), B) recovery shots from bad lies, C) mental toughness. He’s great at all three of those. A lot of players start playing badly and never recover. Jordan bounces back quickly from a bad hole.
A golfer
Apr 21, 2016 at 1:05 am
Only one stat matters in majors and that is what goes on between the ears. In the last two years Jordan has been the best at it and is the only golfer I have seen since Tiger that can keep it for many years to come. He lost it on one hole, and it remains to be seen how he does from here on out, but I would not be surprised if he wins another major this year …..and more in the coming years.
Brendan
Apr 21, 2016 at 6:25 pm
Couldn’t possibly agree more. After reading this article I immediatly thought that to myself even before reading one user comment. In my opinion, (which doesn’t carry much weight), Rich did a great job of analyzing Spieth’s issues over the past three years from a statistical standpoint. However golf isn’t a game played between numbers, it is a game played between human players. I think the reason Spieth has been so successful so far is simply due to his mental strength and attitude and the style of his play. He can poke his drives out there relatively consistently and when his irons can do him more good than harm, he really stands out. In reality, his short game is what keeps him relevant, while his mental ability and attitude sets him apart in big spots when others seem to let the moment get to the best of them. He’s a grinder in the fullest sense of the term and I feel that sometimes viewers forget that. Rory, Jason, and other big names are most likely statistically better in most of the areas listed above, but that isn’t what wins tournaments sometimes. Nobody (maybe Rory) comes close to outplaying other great players on Sundays.
theaveragepunter
Apr 20, 2016 at 4:01 pm
Nice work Rich. Your top 20 for the masters made me some $$. Other posters are right – most readers don’t understand your info and think Sugar Diabetes is a Greek boxer.
mlecuni
Apr 21, 2016 at 1:59 pm
: )
Patrick
Apr 20, 2016 at 1:35 pm
Rich every time you write an article I sincerely believe that 90% of the posters either don’t comprehend statistics or haven’t read the article.
It’s pretty clear that your a statistician interpreting PGA tour stats.
You then clearly show the numbers and what strengths / weaknesses they identify.
And it’s clear, bias or emotion are not statistically measurable. Except by most of the commenters on this board.
Another substantive, relevant article. No argument here. I love stats and what they represent. I took three units of stats in university. Still don’t think you need that level of knowledge to get your articles. Maybe I’m wrong. Apparently.
N.
Apr 20, 2016 at 7:16 am
A lot of you seem to be missing the point of these stats, calling spieths 12th hole a fluke so it was irrelevant and so on.
If you’re statistically bad from 150yrds and you then dump it in the water on a 150yrd par 3 then this only serves to further prove the statistic.
Had he been statistically good from that distance then maybe he would have been less likely to be nervous or choke on that tee shot. If you’re ranked 1st on tour from say 150-200yrds id say the chances on you dumping it in the water are much slimmer.
CallawayLefty
Apr 20, 2016 at 8:05 am
A lot of you seem to be missing the point that the whole argument is that a guy who was #2 in the OWGR and had finished 2nd and 1st in his prior two trips to Augusta should probably have been in the top 20 picks to win the tournament, as proved by the fact that he almost did as such and finished in 2nd. I get it – statistics are cool. But I could probably find a statistical deficiency with every single person in the top 20 of the OWGR. But they appear to overcome them regularly, and a good list of the top-10 to win the Masters would be #1 through #10 of the OWGR. Omitting #2 from your top-20 is just being a sensationalist, and then acting like it was so easy to see his loss coming and that we’re all just idiots/fanboys after what happened at the Masters is just hilarious. I don’t mind the statistical analysis. I mind the over the top gloating in the face of reality.
N.
Apr 20, 2016 at 11:04 am
In my opinion from a betting stand point, if you are picking a group as large as 20 different people that have a chance of winning you’re just saying that you don’t really have any idea who will. And to be honest with golf, its very hard week in week out to pick winners.
I would agree with you that not picking speith in the 20 was bold, but he wasn’t in my top 3 picks at the start of the week, although i didnt do much better!
birly-shirly
Apr 20, 2016 at 6:27 am
Wow. I think any prediction, including anyone’s top 20 picks for the Masters, needs cut a little slack.
But to try and argue, with the benefit of hindsight, that you were RIGHT to exclude the chances of the guy who finished second (especially in those circumstances) just seems a little reckless with your credibility.
Mlecuni
Apr 20, 2016 at 4:55 am
So Rich, Jordan had one good 2014/15 year with an average yellow zone and good putter. But now is being less efficient in several area (yellow, red and green) and the putter can’t save him anymore / nobody can win only by putting well ?
Richie Hunt
Apr 20, 2016 at 9:23 am
Jordan had great years in 2013, and 2013-2014. He was a great ballstriker in his first 3 seasons. He can still perform well and win with his current metrics, but essentially his Short Game and Putting will have to bail him out because at this rate, he’s going to miss GIR and/or have longer birdie putts. As I wrote in this article, one of the myths of Spieth was that the ‘putter bails him out’, but as you can see in his first 3 seasons he was a great ballstriker who putted well and thus why it is a myth.
mlecuni
Apr 21, 2016 at 1:57 pm
thank you
:-p
Apr 20, 2016 at 2:41 am
Them SM6 wedges suck. Totally over-rated. He never should’ve switched from the SM5.
Desmond
Apr 20, 2016 at 2:05 am
By his own assessment, Jordan played his B- game at Augusta. Watching him play, most had to think that he was on the verge of collapse most of the week. That it took 66 holes is a testament to Spieth.
Richie Hunt
Apr 20, 2016 at 9:27 am
I agree. I thought it was one of the grittiest performances I’ve seen in recent memory. He hit a lot of bad shots and started to have a 2-way miss. And it was one of those things where he would hit some great shots and then an awful shot would show up. A situation where you’re about to go off the rails, but are trying to get the round in before that happens. And even after the 12th hole, he came back fairly strong with birdies at #13, #15 and then stuck it close on #16, but couldn’t convert.
This article isn’t a knock on Spieth. It’s is to show that his ballstriking has regressed from last year and it was trending downward at a pretty good rate leading into the Masters.
8thehardway
Apr 19, 2016 at 11:11 pm
a branch of mathematics dealing with the collection, analysis, interpretation, and presentation of masses of numerical data
Statistics would have missed a 59-year-old Watson leading after 71 holes at the British Open in 2009 and Jack winning the 1986 Masters.
Yes, he was almost wrong so let’s get him. He was SO CLOSE to being wrong I can’t stand it; if only I had bet on Spieth I would have been so happy for so many holes – how could he not pick him?
So here’s the best part of what Richie Hunt gave you, and I know all you ingrates used them – great reasons to trash your buddies’ picks… “You went with Kevin Na? But he hits the low ball… that’s death at Augusta.” Yes, your buddies taunted you for 3+ rounds for going off Spieth but before it started, when they were most vulnerable, you skewered them good and, in the end, Spieth lost and you were right again. Now THAT’s entertainment.
CallawayLefty
Apr 19, 2016 at 9:42 pm
It’s incredible. You have to be the least sincere statistician I’ve ever read. JUST ADMIT IT – YOU WERE COMPLETELY WRONG ABOUT JORDAN SPIETH THIS YEAR AT THE MASTERS. You’re gloating about the fact that you basically picked the field against one guy and it proved to be correct (by the skin of your a$$). Yes, you’re right. The guy you said had no chance to win did not in fact win. He just held the lead for 65 holes and finished in 2nd place due to one fluke hole that a player like him will see about 1 time in his career.
Let me ask you this – is your argument proved because Jordan Spieth finished in 2nd place, or is it disproved by the fact that Rickie Fowler, Marc Leishmann, and Phil Mickelson (all in your top 10) missed the cut? If you’re ok with picking one example to prove your argument is correct, shouldn’t we all be ok with picking one contrary example (or in this case three) to prove your argument is wrong?
Really – you picked a list of people that included a substantial majority of the top players in the world (omitting the guy who is arguably the best of all of them), and then one of them won. That’s awesome, but in no way overrides the fact that you’re just trying to grab headlines by saying Spieth had no chance. If a guy who was such a statistical outlier was ONE bad shot away from winning, what does that say about the statistics?
Nath
Apr 20, 2016 at 4:33 am
Whatever, its all in the numbers, moneyball my friend
CallawayLefty
Apr 20, 2016 at 6:24 am
Check me if I’m wrong, but didn’t the A’s end up losing to the teams that valued the more traditional subject analysis? The point was that they had to use numbers to find diamonds in the rough. But their only goal was to be competitive with the front runners, not to prove that Derrek Jeeter was all smoke and mirrors. In sports there are people who do things that defy objective analysis. Or maybe statisticians overlook the real statistics that determine what makes a winner. But I will stand by that it’s disengenous to say that a guy who has now finished 2, 1, 2 in three tries at Augusta doesn’t statistically show what it takes to win there. There’s always two sides to the story – including in statistics. And if Richie’s statistics show what a poor choice he is, maybe his performance merits another look at what statistics really are most important. So he sucks from the yellow zone – well he’s finished 2, 1, 2, so perhaps yellow zone scoring is less meaningful, statically speaking, than Richie argues.
Richie Hunt
Apr 20, 2016 at 9:36 am
The core of Moneyball was to help the Oakland A’s find undervalued players because they were a team with a very small budget. A team like the Yankees or Red Sox (at that particular time) didn’t use advanced analytics, but most of their players would have looked favorable according to the statistics. If you look at the all-time greats like Ted Williams, Babe Ruth, Sandy Koufax, etc…their stats would line right up with what Moneyball values. The same with many top players from that Moneyball era like Albert Pujols, A-Rod, etc. It’s just that the A’s ownership simply would not pay for those players. So instead they got players for say $250K that were more accurately valued at $2-3 million.
Advanced analytics is becoming a growing trend in almost all sports. Two teams that use it the most out of any teams in any sports leagues are…Golden State Warriors and San Antonio Spurs.
CallawayLefty
Apr 20, 2016 at 10:30 am
I understand and am obviously puffing a little. I actually find the statistical analysis fascinating and instructive for sure. I just think that you have to OVERLOOK facts to rule Jordan out. I haven’t done statistical research on the Masters in particular. But my guess is there is one or more categories that Jordan did very well in that back up his 2nd place finish (and near win) this year. The problem with a statistical analysis, except one that is very objective, is that it tends to start with a desired result and then find statistics that support it rather than objectively investigating those that do not. I question whether you truly picked apart all objective factors, or whether you just settled on Jordan Spieth being omitted because of the road you were already headed down. I don’t mean that to sound accusatory – I’m actually interested…if Jordan is so bad at something that is so important at Augusta, then what makes him so good at Augusta? Really, there must be numbers to support it.
Richie Hunt
Apr 20, 2016 at 12:10 pm
Historically the winners at the Masters have hit 50+ GIR. This year was a little different because of the wind (which I mentioned with Zach Johnson as being able to change the outcome of the event). Willett hit 48 GIR, Westwood hit 51 GIR. Spieth? 43 GIR.
I think Spieth was playing with fire for those first 65 holes of the event and again, would have had the most double bogeys of any Masters winner in the history of the event. I think it’s safe to say that his short game and putting really helped propel him at ANGC for those first 3 rounds. The wind also helped because it took away the bombers ability to easily hit an iron into #13 and #15.
Spieth mentioned during the event that he didn’t feel comfortable with his irons and the metrics show that has been a problem for him going into the Masters.
Calling b.s.
Apr 21, 2016 at 10:21 am
If I understand this argument correctly, Richie is saying he didn’t pick Spieth as having a chance to win the masters because his stats from 125-175 are bad, and his shot from 150 on the 12th hole validates his argument. I’ll call b.s. on that. It wasn’t the tee shot that cost spieth the victory. It was the embarrassingly fat flip wedge he hit after the drop. We all agree that spieth has an amazing short game. But it was the short game that failed him. That was mental. His loss had absolutely nothing to do with his play from 125-175 yards. Stats are fun. But don’t try to make it out like you predicted spieth’s failure to win with your analysis. You didn’t.
ZQ
Apr 19, 2016 at 8:48 pm
Please fire this guy.
Brad
Apr 20, 2016 at 1:19 pm
Amen. Richie, just admit your omission of Spieth was inflammatory. Just because he didn’t win doesn’t mean your failure to include him in the TOP 20 was correct. Stats can make any conclusion you want them to make, which is what you’re doing here IMO…..lies, damn lies, and statistics.
Gubment Cheeze
Apr 19, 2016 at 7:48 pm
Jordan gave a good show and didn’t quit get the winners check. Golfs a tough game and some days you just ain’t got it.
MarkB A
Apr 20, 2016 at 8:33 am
+1
Seems the haters are gonna just hate. Jordan had a few major mistakes and it is Augusta on Sunday on the back 9. Danny Willet played well and it was a nice win. Last year Jordan was pretty astonishing because he had a real good shot at winning all the majors. I am not a fan boy. I enjoy golf and let the best man that week with the lowest score win.
Roger
Apr 19, 2016 at 7:31 pm
Jordan began seriously having issues at the world match play, then in Houston…….he looked good through three rounds but darn he seemed to be jumpy and nervous on Sunday.
Cronos
Apr 19, 2016 at 7:18 pm
I can only assume you’re a troll.
Spieth was T2, 1, and T2 in his three years at the masters. I’m sure it was all because of a “weak” field all 3 years.
/s
Gubment Cheeze
Apr 19, 2016 at 7:50 pm
Not to mention the other 3 majors last year and the FEC.
:-p
Apr 20, 2016 at 2:43 am
Good riddance!
Joe
Apr 19, 2016 at 5:19 pm
I hope Jordan doesn’t read this. Thanks for the article, it is a good read and interesting. But to my thinking all these stats mean very little, Jordan’s failure was the result of 1 hole, not an accumulation of stats over many holes.
Stats are just numbers and don’t always give the correct picture. The story here is that he choked/or made a bad swing, it happens. Get over it and move on.
Richie Hunt
Apr 20, 2016 at 9:42 am
I disagree. In golf, you are what you are. I don’t believe it’s just one hole. Like I said, he was on pace to have the most double bogeys as a winner in the history of the Masters before the 12th hole on Sunday. If he had not doubled all of those holes, he would have had a larger margin going into 12 and could have still won with that 12th hole.
Jordan only hit 59.2% of his GIR for the event. Willett hit 67% and Westwood hit 70%. Traditionally, GIR% plays a large role in who wins the Masters and typically the winner hits at least 50 GIR for the event. This year was a little different due to the winds, but I think Spieth was playing with fire.
RoGar
Apr 19, 2016 at 5:10 pm
Are you serious? Trends, tendencies, and plain old bad luck, are things that just happen. What about weather, stress, and pressure? Really!!! Speith lead almost the whole way, and even after 12 still almost made an epic comeback. If he had won, imagine the headlines then!!! Speith is great for the game, he’s very close to being human…
Johnny
Apr 19, 2016 at 4:41 pm
Jordan’s quadruple bogey on #12 in the 4th round was a total fluke. As was his 4 putt at #5 (forget what round).
Jay
Apr 19, 2016 at 6:29 pm
thats a lot of flukes for the #2 in the world….
CallawayLefty
Apr 20, 2016 at 6:45 am
Doesn’t that turn the statistical analysis on its head? If a guy who has no chance to win at Augusta has finished 2, 1, 2 in three tries, are we sure that the statistics Richie is focusing on are the ones that matter?