Conference 7.286::golf

    gee walt how'd you know i was just working on a software program to
    record my stats, the output looks like this:
    
    Number of rounds = 3
    Average Score =  79.00
    Average GIR =   9.67
    Average Fairways =   8.33
    Average Sand Traps Visited =   2.33
    Percent Sand Saves =   0.29
    Percent Sand Double Bogies =   0.14
    Average Up and Down Chances =   7.00
    Percent of Up and Downs =   0.57
    Average Penalty Shots =   0.67
    Average Duffs =   0.33
    Average Missed Putts in side of 5 feet =   2.00
    
    i still working on it
    
    peter

    walt,
    
    if i play from the high handicappers tees (some people call them ladies
    tees but my wife taugh me differently), does it count in the women's
    event.....)))))))
    
    p

    Hi,
    
    Please don't take this reply as a criticism,Iam really just trying
    to understand a (possibly cultural)difference in the approach to
    statistics in sport.
    
    It has always mystified us Brits why there is such a craving for
    what we view as 'relatively insignificant' statistics in sport,
    by the US sporting fraternity.
    
    I cannot see where this aids improvement.
    
    We all know when we missed fairways,missed short putts,got up and
    down from sand. The problem comes in analysing why this happened
    and learning from it ,good or bad.
    This is a mental process. 
    
    I stress this is not a criticism,so please help me understand the
    reason for different approaches.
    
    ken

    
    HI Ken,
    
    	Why take stats?
    
    	This will be my first year trying it... so I really don't know
    	for sure if it will help or hinder . My feeling is I hope to
    	identify weaknesses with my game, that recollections of my last
    	round won't show... but by recalling data from the last 10 rounds
    	will show. To play better, I want to identify consistent areas
    	I screw up... and work on them, while brushing up on the areas
    	that are working OK. This way I'll keep my practice sessions
    	more focused on my consistent weaknesses, not my day to day
    	failures. Sometimes it's not you, but course conditions or
    	weather conditions etc. that cause problems... looking at a
    	season of golf stats and working on the weak areas I feel will
        help more than tackling the day to day failures.
    
    	I'd be interested in hearing from others that already take stats,
    	and find if they feel it has helped... 
    
    	thanks Walta

    re: .3
    
    That's a good observation.
    
    I think it is a symptom of the major differences in philosophy behind
    each country's approach to the game.  One way in which this is manifest
    is the way in which the stereotypical courses are designed on each side
    of the pond.
    
    In the US, there is a great deal of importance placed upon personal
    performance, whereas in Europe there is a certain amount of fatalism
    that is accepted as an integral part of the game.  The US player
    expects to be the master of the environment, the consummate shot-maker.
    The European approach is to inject an element of risk into the game
    which is totally out of the player's control.
    
    The most extreme manifestations of this philosophical difference in the
    US are arguably the TPC (notably Sawgrass) courses, as well as virtually 
    everything designed by Pete Dye.  On these venues, players are required
    to execute a particular shot in order to be successful, like needing to
    hit a 20 yard landing zone from a distance of 275 yards.  Scores are a
    direct indication of individual performance; good ones indicate a 
    mastery of the elements of swing and strategy.  The course reponds in 
    a consistent way to identical shots.
    
    The prototypical British course is St. Andrews.  There is no mastering
    the course.  Hazards of one sort or another are sprinkled throughout
    the fairways.  A perfectly executed shot can go wrong because of a bad
    bounce and a poorly executed one can leave you in a wonderful position
    due to a good bounce! The course does not respond consistently.  This 
    element of randomness negates the use of statistics as a single measure of 
    individual performance, which is probably why Americans (the losers, at
    least) seems to hate St. Andrews so much.
    
    At any rate, this is my personal theory which you can shoot all the
    holes in you like.
    
    Al
    

    Stats are interesting to look at.
    A player can be surprised at the way they turn out.
    I tried it for a while last year and found that the GIR was my main
    problem. However to compensate for that deficiency my up/down from the
    green side was outstanding usually. My putting figures were very good
    as a result ( 25 putts being my lowest ever ). One round i had which
    was a 6 over 78 had only 5 greens hit in regulation.
    It's weird how it goes sometimes.
    
    martin

    Hi Walta
    
    
    I'm not so sure it's the US or Brtish or any other country's mentality
    that determines whether or not you keep statistics, but more a matter
    of how you approach your own individual golf game. 
    
    I went for some lessons here in England last year and was advised to
    keep a record of how I performed on each hole. This included fairways
    hit, GIR and no. of putts. An additional useful measure was to note
    where there were any events such as losing a ball, or being bunkered. 
    I tried this and it did help. Ofcourse like you said it takes a while
    to build a pattern up, no use looking at just one or two rounds. Now I
    know more specifically the areas I need to work on most. 
    
    For me it's a way of improving. If you don't know where your mistakes
    lie then it's hard to put them right. So it's a case of cutting down on
    the putts taken that can help me significantly.
    
    I have to disagree with Al somewhat when he refers to there being more
    luck in the end results of shots on some courses in the UK. It takes a
    different type of shot. We all know that water is used extensively on
    many US courses and this must mean to miss a green can be costly. But
    remember that on links courses, for example, it's not just a case of
    hitting the ball forward in the general direction of the hole. The
    speed and line of approach is very important as is the consideration
    of playing conditions. A mis-directed shot can leave you in some awful
    spots of some of the links courses. It's all a question of trying to 
    adapt to wherever you're playing.....not whether or not you get lucky.
    
    
    Good idea to run this in the conference Walta. Looking forward to
    making some British contribution...8^)
    
    Phil.
    
    
    

    Ken,
    this mania for numbers I believe starts with baseball as the
    national American past time , as we like to believe, for
    100 years and basebal is highly suited to "the numbers" game.
    
    So I think it fell over to golf, another sport suited for the numbers
    game. And since TBS is actually televising in prime time, a golf
    tournament, golf could be the "game of the ninties" unless we have
    a world wide depression and WWIII !!
    
    The pros are now actually rewarded for this numbers game:
                           sand saves
                           greens hit in reg.
                           fairways hit in reg
                           birdies
                           eagles
                           etc, etc,
    Even though Walt is my partner, I still agree with him!!!
    
    In fact , just saw a "note book" at Nevada Bob's for this very purpose.
    And I have kept these stats for the senior pros at the DEC Classic.
    So they are becoming "valuable".
    
                      my two cents, Ang
    
    
     

    fairwarys hit
    
    gir
    
    puts per round
    
    # time won / # tournaments entered
    
    # times won / # match play events

    I have not found stats helpful for me but then I don't play that much. 
    i manage to play nine holes in a league every week and an occasional 18
    maybe once a month.  My scores are always within 2 or 3 strokes per
    round.  I've had 18 fairways hit but this doesn't show the six dribbles
    off the tee.  I've had four greens in regulation and they were only the
    par 3's.  I've had as many as 48 putts and as little as 27.  So what
    does all this tell me?  I need to practice EVERY aspect of the game.
    
    Just my input.
    Stuart

    .10
    it tells you that you knew you had 27 putts at your best and 48
    at your worst. So "variance analysis" tells you are already
     keeping stats. I " budget" for 36 putts a round.
    Then mentally do a "+ or -" from this number.
    I'm not long, so I have to make it up here.
    
    I think it breaks out for guys who can go over 250 on a regular
    basis and those like me that can't.
    
    I either have to "gain distance" OR watch my small game numbers,
    either "hard copy" or "video".
                      AV