Difference between an 80 golfer and a 90 golfer

[-CRW-]

Lol so many assumptions.

This thread is a good example of how many ways there are to make scores.

Again, no assumptions, just actual statistics. This thread is about going from a 90’s golfer to an 80’s golfer, not the statistical outliers.

To peel back another layer to this, if a guy averages 33 putts but is taking a couple gimmes a round is he really averaging 33 putts? That’s why the statistics are valuable for the majority.

 

[Elbow Jobertski]

Again, no assumptions, just actual statistics. This thread is about going from a 90’s golfer to an 80’s golfer, not the statistical outliers.

To peel back another layer to this, if a guy averages 33 putts but is taking a couple gimmes a round is he really averaging 33 putts? That’s why the statistics are valuable for the majority.

The number of putts isn't much of a measure of putting skill. If you get up and down that is one putt no matter if it is a tap in or a fifteen footer. Plus there is a ton of variance based on the course. If you play somewhere with tiny greens this number is going to be a lot lower than with large greens.

Average putts per missed green is the more relevant stat, and even that has problems.

It is not so much outliers as looking at the wrong part of the distribution. If 20% of those golfers are averaging 30 putts or lower per missed 18 greens, that is a lot of people that can regularly break 90 without hitting a green.

 

[dcorun]

Try to eliminate double bogey's and worse plus no 3 putts. That gets me in the 80's.

 

[OGputtnfool]

Because the putting average for 6-10 index’s is 33.7 and 11-15 is 34.8. So neither index range is 1 putting enough to compensate. Maybe once in a while when they are playing their best and better than their index.

Me thinks you're too focused on averages.

 

[-CRW-]

Me thinks you're too focused on averages.

The opposite. A few of you are thinking about your own games and not what it takes for the majority to go from scoring in the 90’s to the 80’s.

You, millsan, and others may be statistical outliers, but the bell curve exists for a reason.

 

[OldandStiff]

The opposite. A few of you are thinking about your own games and not what it takes for the majority to go from scoring in the 90’s to the 80’s.

You, millsan, and others may be statistical outliers, but the bell curve exists for a reason.

It doesn't exist for you to say someone is wrong, or inflating their true cap, or cheating with gimmies though. You made the blanket statement and assumptions of people's games and scores, said they were impossible and used averages to back that up, and don't want to allow what you consider possible outliers to prove you wrong.

I never mentioned a majority. I said you were making a lot of assumptions that probably made you wrong to whatever degree, and absolutely with regards to a specific player.

Semantics can get in the way of some of so this, but probably not the simple beginning of it.

I play with a few people who don't fit the things you say must be true, and are therefore impossible, and cheating, and that's just not the case.

 

[GenErr]

To shoot in the 80's, I think you need to get the ball somewhere around the green in regulation (on the green would be ideal, but then we'd be talking 80 vs. 70), at which point a decent short game should get you bogey, with an occasional par, or double bogey thrown in.

 

[-CRW-]

I play with a few people who don't fit the things you say must be true, and are therefore impossible, and cheating, and that's just not the case.

Ok. Seems like you are unreasonably emotional about this for some reason.

I don’t play with any statistical outliers when it comes to scoring. I’ve played with many who thought they were until taken to task. Tournament play usually brings it to light and most amateurs don’t play in any tournaments, which allows feelings, emotions, and unreasonable ideas to permeate this sort of topic.

 

[OldandStiff]

Ok. Seems like you are unreasonably emotional about this for some reason.

I don’t play with any statistical outliers when it comes to scoring. I’ve played with many who thought they were until taken to task. Tournament play usually brings it to light and most amateurs don’t play in any tournaments, which allows feelings, emotions, and unreasonable ideas to permeate this sort of topic.

Assuming my emotions now.

It's just a discussion, and I mentioned earlier I thought it is a great thread because to some people it means avoiding penalties, others being near GIR, etc, in making that leap in scoring. We all have different weak parts in our game (that aren't necessarily typical, or consistent) we'd benefit most by improving. Someone actually said that really well in here I think.

 

[Joshnoble01]

I feel like someone that is shooting 90 is just avoiding penalty strokes for the most part and at least getting to the green in +1 and bogeying most holes. I feel like 80 means you are hitting fairways and a large percentage of GIR or close to green for up and downs.

 

[greenOak]

I agree that if you‘re always on the green in regulation plus one but never on the green in regulation it’s going to be near impossible to average 80 regardless of how great your short game is. However, this player just doesn’t exist in real life. The player who isn’t able to hit more than 2-3 greens in regulation per round isn’t a good enough ball-striker to consistently be on the green in regulation plus one. The player is almost always on the green in regulation plus one (or better) will consistently be close to the green and will just naturally hit his fair share of GIR.

 

[Snickerdog]

I notice a lot of you are talking about GIR, while this is important it is not the end all to scoring. Having a good/great short game around the green will and can make up for a tremendous amount of strokes as long as you can putt good too. Getting up and down is what you need to be in the low to mid 80's. While being consistent off the tee is crucial it isn't always going to save you strokes.

 

[-CRW-]

Assuming my emotions now.

It's just a discussion, and I mentioned earlier I thought it is a great thread because to some people it means avoiding penalties, others being near GIR, etc, in making that leap in scoring. We all have different weak parts in our game (that aren't necessarily typical, or consistent) we'd benefit most by improving. Someone actually said that really well in here I think.

The irony of using an emoticon to imply your not letting your emotions play a role here is spectacular.

The second half of your statement is why people post here every single day about how hard the game is, how they never get better, blah, blah, blah.

The people who will improve stop looking at themselves at special (statistical outliers) and use the data to their advantage.

 

[greenOak]

I notice a lot of you are talking about GIR, while this is important it is not the end all to scoring. Having a good/great short game around the green will and can make up for a tremendous amount of strokes as long as you can putt good too. Getting up and down is what you need to be in the low to mid 80's. While being consistent off the tee is crucial it isn't always going to save you strokes.

It’s hard to get up and down if you’re not somewhat close to the green. And if you’re consistently close to the green, you’ll hit a number of greens through sheer luck. If you’re consistently trying to get up and down for par from 30+ yards, you’re not going to average low 80s.

 

[OldandStiff]

The irony of using an emoticon to imply your not letting your emotions play a role here is spectacular.

The second half of your statement is why people post here every single day about how hard the game is, how they never get better, blah, blah, blah.

The people who will improve stop looking at themselves at special (statistical outliers) and use the data to their advantage.

I'm a big fan of statistics, and encourage people to use them for their benefit. Often.

And I see people getting better here everyday.

Thanks, btw. Irony isn't a strength of mine. You and I might get along famously out in the world.

 

[Snickerdog]

It’s hard to get up and down if you’re not somewhat close to the green. And if you’re consistently close to the green, you’ll hit a number of greens through sheer luck. If you’re consistently trying to get up and down for par from 30+ yards, you’re not going to average low 80s.

While probably true, 30 yards is a good distance away and you would have to be throwing darts. I hit on average 5-8 greens a round and can stay in the upper 70's low 80's consistently. I think for most if they would concentrate on that range around the green and really practice it they could save quite a few strokes around.

 

[Flipit]

Being that I’m both, I can tell you, with confidence, it’s about 1 mm. That’s the difference.

 

[OldandStiff]

I notice a lot of you are talking about GIR, while this is important it is not the end all to scoring. Having a good/great short game around the green will and can make up for a tremendous amount of strokes as long as you can putt good too. Getting up and down is what you need to be in the low to mid 80's. While being consistent off the tee is crucial it isn't always going to save you strokes.

Sometimes I think it's an overused stat when I see that 6-10 handicaps only hit the green on average 37% of the time. That's missing the majority of the time and they're playing some solid golf. I think some newer stats paint a better picture, but still fail in ways. Even proximity is more useful in ways, but not in others depending on someone's strengths.

 

[Snickerdog]

Sometimes I think it's an overused stat when I see that 6-10 handicaps only hit the green on average 37% of the time. That's missing the majority of the time and they're playing some solid golf. I think some newer stats paint a better picture, but still fail in ways. Even proximity is more useful in ways, but not in others depending on someone's strengths.

That is a great point, and as @greenOak said, 30 yards is a huge difference compared to 5 yards from the green. My miss is generally pretty close to pin high or just short so an easier up and down to save par.
Thats why I say short game around the green is a game changer.

 

[greenOak]

While probably true, 30 yards is a good distance away and you would have to be throwing darts. I hit on average 5-8 greens a round and can stay in the upper 70's low 80's consistently. I think for most if they would concentrate on that range around the green and really practice it they could save quite a few strokes around.

While 5-8 is kind of low for a 3 handicap, I would still call that a decent number of greens hit.

 

[OGputtnfool]

The opposite. A few of you are thinking about your own games and not what it takes for the majority to go from scoring in the 90’s to the 80’s.

You, millsan, and others may be statistical outliers, but the bell curve exists for a reason.

Well, you weren't talking about the majority. The post I quoted that started this line of debate referenced ME.

Lol, no. It’s simple math. Take @millsan1 for example, he says he is frequently GIR+1. I don’t know what frequently is to him, but if you do that for 18 holes you are at 90 before any other mistakes/strokes. This just goes back to many, if not the majority, dramatically under-estimating their real index. I think for many it’s not on purpose.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm telling you that it doesn't hold true for ME since that's what you said.

 

[millsan1]

We'll this has developed. I'm just hopeful that some of the shade being thrown around isn't at me, my honesty or my scores.

I play just about every round strictly by the rules. If I don't play strictly by the rules, I don't post the score.

The stats I posted are from data gathered during rounds of play, not snatched from the air and made up.

I am not sure if I'm an "outlier" but I know my game. 50% of the time I am GIR+1 and my average score over the last 20 rounds is 85-86. There is a 97 in there, and there is a 78 in there. Removing those two, the average is 85-86. I've worked really hard to improve, but I don't think I am anything special, just have results based on work.

I believe I have a good reputation around here, and I work hard to be helpful, informative and supportive on this site and in my life.

If any poster wishes to be direct and call bs on me, I'd appreciate it.

 

[OGputtnfool]

We'll this has developed. I'm just hopeful that some of the shade being thrown around isn't at me, my honesty or my scores.

I play just about every round strictly by the rules. If I don't play strictly by the rules, I don't post the score.

The stats I posted are from data gathered during rounds of play, not snatched from the air and made up.

I am not sure if I'm an "outlier" but I know my game. 50% of the time I am GIR+1 and my average score over the last 20 rounds is 85-86. There is a 97 in there, and there is a 78 in there. Removing those two, the average is 85-86. I've worked really hard to improve, but I don't think I am anything special, just have results based on work.

I believe I have a good reputation around here, and I work hard to be helpful, informative and supportive on this site and in my life.

If any poster wishes to be direct and call bs on me, I'd appreciate it.

Eh, don't let it bother you. You know your game just as I know my game (and @OldandStiff knows my game, too ). Some people just want to be contrarians.

 

[greenOak]

We'll this has developed. I'm just hopeful that some of the shade being thrown around isn't at me, my honesty or my scores.

I play just about every round strictly by the rules. If I don't play strictly by the rules, I don't post the score.

The stats I posted are from data gathered during rounds of play, not snatched from the air and made up.

I am not sure if I'm an "outlier" but I know my game. 50% of the time I am GIR+1 and my average score over the last 20 rounds is 85-86. There is a 97 in there, and there is a 78 in there. Removing those two, the average is 85-86. I've worked really hard to improve, but I don't think I am anything special, just have results based on work.

I believe I have a good reputation around here, and I work hard to be helpful, informative and supportive on this site and in my life.

If any poster wishes to be direct and call bs on me, I'd appreciate it.

When you say 50% of the time you are GIR+1 are you including the times you got a GIR or not?

 

[millsan1]

To shoot in the 80's, I think you need to get the ball somewhere around the green in regulation (on the green would be ideal, but then we'd be talking 80 vs. 70), at which point a decent short game should get you bogey, with an occasional par, or double bogey thrown in.

You just surmised my game. If not on in reg, I am usually pretty darn close. I pride myself on my chipping and my putting is pretty solid, usually saving me 2-3 strokes per round.

When you say 50% of the time you are GIR+1 are you including the times you got a GIR or not?

I posted some stats earlier in the thread. I am GIR 49.x%. the balance is +1 (or worse) but mostly +1.