Crazy Tour Stats Courtesy of Golf Digest

d_in_la

Not so in LA.
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
4,380
Reaction score
37
Location
Las Vegas, NV
Handicap
?? & Rum.
Some of these just :bomb: my mind:

http://www.golfdigest.com/golf-tours-news/2013-10/16-stats-photos#slide=1

There was a stretch in May when Ryan Moore hit 40 consecutive fairways.
The average PGA Tour player's longest consecutive fairways streak, by contrast, was nine.


Jordan Spieth made $3,879,820 in 2013.
That's more than Gary Player and Arnold Palmer made on the tour in their careers combined.


There were 11 five-putts on the PGA Tour in 2013, and 193 four-putts.


Sergio Garcia gained more than half a stroke on the average PGA Tour field putting.
That's more than a full stroke better than his stokes gained putting average in 2010, the year he switched to the claw.


Phil Mickelson has never won PGA Tour Player of the Year.
42 wins, five majors, being a member of the World Golf Hall of Fame and 700 weeks in the top-10 of the World Golf Rankings just doesn't cut it.


Tiger Woods won 38 percent of the prize money in the tournaments he entered in 2013.


Jim Furyk became the first player to shoot 59 with a bogey.
The five men who did it before him all finished bogey free.


Tommy "Two Gloves" Gainey hit 40 golf balls into the water in his 80 non-major PGA Tour rounds this year.


Five players -- Gary Woodland, Sergio Garcia, Freddie Jacobson, Luke Donald and Jin Park -- made every putt they faced from three feet and in (a combined 2,837 putts).


Only four players -- Phil Mickelson, Tiger Woods, Stephen Ames and Richard Lee -- played the par 3s under-par in 2013.
Only twice since 2000 have less people finished under-par on the par 3s.


Tiger Woods missed 11 putts between three and four feet.
That ranked him 158 out of 180 players.


Billy Horschel hit 20 consecutive greens in regulation at the U.S. Open, including all 18 on Saturday.
Merion was the toughest course of the year, and Horschel became the first golfer to accomplish that feat in a U.S. Open in more than 20 years.


No golfer in 2013 led the field in driving accuracy the week they won.


Matt Kuchar was the only player on the PGA Tour to make at least six figures in eight different geographical locations in 2013.


Steve Stricker ranked in the top three on the PGA Tour in:
Driving Accuracy
Greens in Regulation
Strokes Gained Putting
Holes Per Eagle
Scoring Average
All-Around Ranking
FedEx Cup Playoffs Points
Par Breakers
GIRs From Fairway Bunkers
Par 5 Birdie or Better
Scoring Average Before Cut
Round Three Scoring Average
Par 4 Performance
Putting From 10 to 15 Feet
Putting From 5 to 15 Feet
Scrambling From the Rough
Back Nine Scoring Average
Rough Tendency
Total Distance Efficiency


Chris Stroud and Brendon de Jonge each had tee shots that flew with a hang time of just 0.8 seconds.
Or, to borrow a phrase from the average golfer: a top.
 
Some amazing stats. Thank you for sharing. Hard to believe Phil has never won player of the year.

And Stricker is the man!
#savage
 
I just saw this post as well. The par 3 stat really surprised me, it would seem like those holes should be easier than they actually are.
 
Stricker is a machine

Those putting stats are ridiculous. Sergio's putting stats are even more ridiculous.
 
Very cool stats. Some of those are hard to believe, but awesome! Thanks for sharing those.
 
Some amazing stats in there. Surprised that no golfer led the field in driving accuracy the week they won. I would have thought that would have happened a couple times.

Also....Stricker is amazing!
 
"There were 11 five-putts on the PGA Tour in 2013, and 193 four-putts." This somehow makes me feel better about my putting.
 
"There were 11 five-putts on the PGA Tour in 2013, and 193 four-putts." This somehow makes me feel better about my putting.

Made me feel better too!
 
thanks for posting. some really interesting stats.
 
Tiger Woods won 38 percent of the prize money in the tournaments he entered in 2013.
How is that even possible when 38% isn't the winner's share? I believe it is like 18%. And that is only if you win. Unless they are counting appearance fees, but that not winnings.
 
I personally loved the last stat haha
 
those stats are crazy!

Stricker played some seriously consistent and great golf this year.

The par 3 stat seems unreal, but those 200+ yard par3's are killer for less than par.

Furyk with a 59 and a bogey is crazy to think about par the hole shoot 58 birdie shoot 57 :bulgy-eyes:

Ryan More 40 FIR in a row is nuts
 
That was a fun read. And, Stricker, how about that for a condensed schedule?!
 
How is that even possible when 38% isn't the winner's share? I believe it is like 18%. And that is only if you win. Unless they are counting appearance fees, but that not winnings.

Might be the wording of it that's messed up, but I think they mean if you took all the prize money in the events he played in and then paid him based on performance, he would have taken home 38% of that available money.
 
How is that even possible when 38% isn't the winner's share? I believe it is like 18%. And that is only if you win. Unless they are counting appearance fees, but that not winnings.

Of all the prize money awarded in 2013. Woods won 38% of it. I believe that is the stat.

Those are some pretty cool stats.
 
Might be the wording of it that's messed up, but I think they mean if you took all the prize money in the events he played in and then paid him based on performance, he would have taken home 38% of that available money.
If you mean that he won 38% of of money he would have won had he finished first in every tournament he entered, then that is definitely possible. It was definitely not what was said though! That does make sense though, now!
 
Of all the prize money awarded in 2013. Woods won 38% of it. I believe that is the stat.

Those are some pretty cool stats.
And that is not possible. Even if he entered and won every tournament on the schedule, he would have won 18% of the total prize money.


Mward got what they meant, I think.

Aside from that stat, it was a pretty cool list!
 
Might be the wording of it that's messed up, but I think they mean if you took all the prize money in the events he played in and then paid him based on performance, he would have taken home 38% of that available money.

That's how I read it. Prize Money Tiger Won / Total Prize Money from Tournaments Tiger Played = 38%

WHICH IS CRAZY. Especially given that putting stat!
 
That's how I read it. Prize Money Tiger Won / Total Prize Money from Tournaments Tiger Played = 38%

WHICH IS CRAZY. Especially given that putting stat!
I think we all are in agreement with what they meant, but again, the way you have it above, is not right at all!

I hate to keep talking about this since we are pretty much in agreement of what they meant, it's saying it incorrectly that is what is wrong. It should read that in all of the tournaments Tiger entered, he took home 38% of what he would have won had he finished in first place in each of those tournaments.

Saying "Winning 38% of the total prize money" is completely different than saying "he won 38% of the total winner's share of the tournaments he entered". What would make your and GD's statement correct would be if it said he won 6.8% (38% of 18%) of the total prize money from tournaments Tiger played. Which is still a ridiculous number since the most he can win is 18%!

I promise I will stop now and I apologize for beating the horse who has died.

It really is a sickness that I have.
 
Thread killer :)
 
Only four players -- Phil Mickelson, Tiger Woods, Stephen Ames and Richard Lee -- played the par 3s under-par in 2013.
Only twice since 2000 have less people finished under-par on the par 3s.

Thats a surprising stat. So I play par 3s as well as most tour players!
 
I think we all are in agreement with what they meant, but again, the way you have it above, is not right at all!

I hate to keep talking about this since we are pretty much in agreement of what they meant, it's saying it incorrectly that is what is wrong. It should read that in all of the tournaments Tiger entered, he took home 38% of what he would have won had he finished in first place in each of those tournaments.

Saying "Winning 38% of the total prize money" is completely different than saying "he won 38% of the total winner's share of the tournaments he entered". What would make your and GD's statement correct would be if it said he won 6.8% (38% of 18%) of the total prize money from tournaments Tiger played. Which is still a ridiculous number since the most he can win is 18%!

I promise I will stop now and I apologize for beating the horse who has died.

It really is a sickness that I have.

hardest-ocd-decision.jpg
 
I would bump it to $40.00 but then have to go to $41.00 because it stopped on $40.01.
 
Those stats are incredible. Thanks for sharing.
 
Back
Top