Golf stats - are they worth bothering with?

[birdieman]

Played October Medal yesterday (I know its not October but that's what it's called).
Shot a +2 gross 72 which is pretty good for me just under my 4 handicap so a wee cut.
Anyway truth be told I didn't hit the ball at all well tee to green, got lucky with lies and sightlines, but short game was good and I scrambled well, only one three putt from off green.

My stats read -
Fairways - 3 out of 13.
Greens in regulation 9 out of 18.
Putts (green and fringe) - 33

Was getting quite cross as I went from -1 after 7 to +3 after 13 but steadied up and nabbed a birdie on 18 which cheered me up no end.

Over the piece I was delighted with the score as my iron play was very poor at times. I wasn't happy during play however but I took nothing worse than bogey and lagg putted well.

Point is the stats are looking very poor for a 4 handicap but the score was good. In that respect what use are those stats, it's the score that counts isn't it? Many people on here seem to be keen on software for recording golf stats

All I took from yesterday was that my old problem of pull-hooking via inside takeaway, hip sliding and leading downswing with arms was back. That was the root of the poor shots, nothing else. Once I realised that (its not always that obvious) I hit the last 5 greens in a row. No need for stats to know where the problem lay, that's all I'm saying.

 

[freddielong]

I know what you are saying but your stats show you immediatly that if you hit more greens you should score even better, it also shows that you short game is keeping you alive.

 

[Imurg]

You're a 4 handicap for a reason - you drop 4 shots! You're going to drop those shots somewhere - on average. If you improve you GIR it doesn't necessarily follow that you'll score better - you'll 2 putt more often and maybe be in 3 putt territiory a few more times. Your Fairways hit stat is the bad one but then you know that you don't hit many. But as you say its the score that counts. Would you definitely score better if you hit more fairways? Maybe not as your short game makes up for it. Stats can be useful but need to be looked at in the bigger picture not just in isolation.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

I think as a one off after a round they probably as you've said don't tell the whole picture but collated over a month, a quarter or the whole season it gives a much clearer indication where the strengths and weaknesses are. They also act as a great help to a teaching pro if you are looking to fix the weaker areas as he can see what to focus on.

 

[Deleted member 1147]

It can depend on what stats you look at.
On some programs you can delve a little deeper and come up with some very useful stats.

when missing fairways where do you miss?
when missing greens where do you miss?
what is your putts perGIR stat?
Whats your up & down %?
Birdie conversion %?
Sand save %?

You may have had more birdies than usual which masked the poor play?

I think stats can highlight areas to work on, and also calm the nerves after a nightmare round.

For example my putting stats are poor, so you'd think that means I should work mostly on my putting. But, as my stats also show poor up & down % maybe it's my chipping etc meaning I'm too far away too often?

 

[birdieman]

I think as a one off after a round they probably as you've said don't tell the whole picture but collated over a month, a quarter or the whole season it gives a much clearer indication where the strengths and weaknesses are. They also act as a great help to a teaching pro if you are looking to fix the weaker areas as he can see what to focus on.

I understand that but I think I know where my strengths and weaknesses lie after 11 years active golf, I dont need to collate stats to figure that out. Surely for all of us it's the same problems week to week. For me I don't know what the right side of any golf course looks like, the left however I'm all too familiar with!

I know my weakness is long to mid iron play and thats where I focus much practice and any lesson time on.

The stats would suggest my tee play is poor but it was ok, only hit two into serious rough, all the other 'misses' were 1st cut and quite playable.

I see that gathering stats over a long period would average out the percentages but I can't really be bothered doing that. I think we should have a good take on these things without needing to formally record them, never to be looked at again probably.

 

[DCB]

Having just had another shocker at the weekend I know exactly where my problem is at the moment. I can look at SS2 and see that it backs up my own feelings on the matter.

All the SS2 is doing is confirming that I'm playing like a donkey and that I can add bigger numbers up correctly.

Saturday was a new low, a really bad score and I hit every one of them

Still, there's always next week....

 

[HomerJSimpson]

The other advantages to SS2 is you can record details of your practice sessions so you can look back and see what you've been working on and how it went and also details of any lessons you have and any drills/tips you were given to sort a particular fault out. So its not just a number crunching package.

 

[Earl]

Ok lets say after 16 holes -2 last 2 holes both 3 over so finish 4 over and get handicap increase is it a good round of golf ?

 

[freddielong]

Ok lets say after 16 holes -2 last 2 holes both 3 over so finish 4 over and get handicap increase is it a good round of golf ?

Depends what you wanted to achive from the round but IMO no

 

[JustOne]

Ok lets say after 16 holes -2 last 2 holes both 3 over so finish 4 over and get handicap increase is it a good round of golf ?

I'd be happy to be standing -2 on the 17th tee in every round I play. Chances are sooner or later I'd par the last two holes

 

[Herbie]

I understand where birdieman is comming from, if I recorded stats, my stats would show a very poor outing more often than not in the various sections of stat records, yet the scores might reflect a good round of golf.

I do not need stats to tell me if I played well or not, I dont need them to tell me if my putting was good that day, or my driving was bad, I dont need them to tell me the things I frequently do wrong either. To me stats are of no use whatsoever. I think stats make too many golfers focus on one particular area only to neglect another in the process, and stats can show a complete turn around in areas of play after every single round, which I find a nonsense, but thats just my opinion.

If you are a record keeper and believe they help you then fair enough, I would rather play 5 mins more practice than use the time it takes to record stats and read through them.

 

[Marko77]

Birdieman, I say it's not how but how many. Yes, it would be nice if the how was lots of fairways and GIRs but at the end of the day as long as the ball goes down in as little shots as possible I'm happy...

 

[Leftie]

The other advantages to SS2 is you can record details of your practice sessions so you can look back and see what you've been working on and how it went and also details of any lessons you have and any drills/tips you were given to sort a particular fault out. So its not justgoing a number crunching package.

Reading through some of your recent posts about your practice sessions and how your swing and game have been this season, it this a thumbs up or down for this facility of SS2?

 

[nulassilb]

I don't need stats to tell me I'm playing badly etc either - but since keeping FiR, GiR, putts (I include all shots with a putter) it has had one major advantage. I keep going better. Keeping stats mean I have an overall average and I also have averages for each hole on my course. Even after a really bad hole, I keep ploughing on whereas in the past I might have really let my head drop and finished up with a cricket score.

I play 5p a putt with my regular partner. Not because either of us win or lose a fortune, but we hate giving each other even the smallest of rewards and will concentrate over every single putt. The same sort of logic applies to keeping stats.

 

[HomerJSimpson]

Still a thumbs up. I was barking up the wrong tree with what I thought was wrong. Probably thinking way too much about technique again instead of trying to bash the bloody thing as far as I can

 

[Earl]

Ok what is more satisfying Drive hit fairway, iron hit green, 2 putts par or Drive hit fairway, iron miss green in bunker, bunker shot 5 feet to pin, par putt ? Your stats will be totally different though

 

[Herbie]

Ok what is more satisfying Drive hit fairway, iron hit green, 2 putts par or Drive hit fairway, iron miss green in bunker, bunker shot 5 feet to pin, par putt ? Your stats will be totally different though

Or what is the best golf,Average Driver lucky bounce stays on fairway, 2nd to green hits rake as it heads into bunker, kicks left and finishes on green 30' from the hole, 1st putt finishes 6feet long but 8 feet wide, 2nd putt spin round the lip and helped in by friendly gust of wind, par......OR Perfect drive taking a bad bounce runs into light rough, 2nd perfect line hitting the green 3 feet in front of the pin, but green so hard it doesnt hold well and trickles off to the left catching a steep slope into bunker, bunker shot lands 3 feet beyond the pin and spins back to 1" leaving barely a tap in?

What would stats make of that?

Scenario one would show FIR/GIR/2 putts.
Unlikely to show.......Poorly hit with Lucky bounce when heading for a bunker/lucky second shot hit badly heading right into bunker but hit rake/ crap fist putt miles off line and way too long, 2nd putt poor and lucky gust helped it in.

No it won't say that and I am pretty sure all the stat recorders never record reality of the game in most cases.
When those stats are reviewed at a later date will memory of the true golf value come into it or just numbers. In which case, do those who record stats fool themselves from time to time?

In golf, its not HOW its HOW MANY?
In stats, its not HOW MANY, its HOW?

 

[toonarmy]

Simple question - do pros use them with their coaches?

Answer - yes they do.

If you don't want to keep stats, then don't. They are useful (they are, after all statistics...) but like anything they won't necessarily tell the whole story. This is the main difference between quantatative and qualatative statistical gathering.

I am amused by how many people imply that they 'don't need anything to tell them how good/bad they were'. Oh really? So you can tell me off the top of your head how often you have 3 putted in the last 10 rounds? What we think we know and what we've actually done can often be quite diverged.

If you want to know what you've done, how and what to work on (or what you've neglected), then keep stats. If you don't, then don't. Will either make you a better or worse golfer? There's only one way to find out...

(Incidentally, my old Social Sciences tutor would be peeing himself laughing at my advocacy of data gathering and analysis when he knows full well I was somewhat lacking in this discipline as an undergraduate!)

 

[Herbie]

Simple question - do pros use them with their coaches?

Answer - yes they do.

If you don't want to keep stats, then don't. They are useful (they are, after all statistics...) but like anything they won't necessarily tell the whole story. This is the main difference between quantatative and qualatative statistical gathering.

I am amused by how many people imply that they 'don't need anything to tell them how good/bad they were'. Oh really? So you can tell me off the top of your head how often you have 3 putted in the last 10 rounds? What we think we know and what we've actually done can often be quite diverged.

If you want to know what you've done, how and what to work on (or what you've neglected), then keep stats. If you don't, then don't. Will either make you a better or worse golfer? There's only one way to find out...

(Incidentally, my old Social Sciences tutor would be peeing himself laughing at my advocacy of data gathering and analysis when he knows full well I was somewhat lacking in this discipline as an undergraduate!)

Well I do know if I three putt and I know how often in a year, let alone 10 rounds, for a start.

You are looking at this from the point of view of an avid stat user, now I said earlier thats fair enough, why is my opinion of not needing them so worthy of critical comment almost insulting and certainly facetious or demeaning.

You are amused? then stop playing with yourself and your memory may improve!



Pro's use stats because their game is so precise and rarely flawed that it may be of some use or long term benefit to review stats, because their stats will be much, much more consistant than the average player and they tend to play more than the average player, but even so, I think they could manage just as well without them, if not better, who knows?