Strokes Gained Question...

[Obee]

Not sure where to post this, but since the pros use Strokes Gained, thought I'd put it here.

 

I'm using the GolfMetrics app to start tracking strokes gained and I noticed the following interesting quirk when I was posting my first round.

 

On the first hole, a 362-yard downhill par-4, when I input my tee ball at 220 in the fairway, it said I lost 0.75 shots off the tee. If that is the optimal shot on the hole because no one hits driver there due to the pinching of the fairway and water fronting the green, how does Strokes Gained handle that? Doesn't seem right to lose strokes on an optimal shot for everyone -- even PGA Tour pros...

Edited April 24, 2023 by Obee
typo

[Ferguson]

2 minutes ago, Obee said:

Not sure where to post this, but since the pros use Strokes Gained, thought I'd put it here.

 

I'm using the GolfMetrics app to start tracking strokes gained and I noticed the following interesting quirk when I was posting my first round.

 

On the first hole, a 362-yard downhill par-4, when I input my tee ball at 220 in the fairway, it said I lost 0.75 shots off the tee. If that is the optimal shot on the hole because no one hits driver there due to the pinching of the fairway and water fronting the green, how does Strokes Gained handled that? Doesn't seem right to lose strokes on an optimal shot for everyone -- even PGA Tour pros...

 

Remember that strokes gained is calculated using the average number of shots it takes players to finish a hole from various positions on the course.  Your 220 off the tee, while you managed the tee shot correctly for the hole, the loss of .75 is simply a delta from the benchmark created by the averages.  

 

 

 

 

And by the way, being a WRXer, we'd like to see better numbers from you off the tee.  

Most of us average in the low threes on a bad day.

 

[TLUBulldogGolf]

I think the idea is that weird situations like this that SG can't really account for are averaged out over very large samples. 

[Hawkeye77]

34 minutes ago, Obee said:

Not sure where to post this, but since the pros use Strokes Gained, thought I'd put it here.

 

I'm using the GolfMetrics app to start tracking strokes gained and I noticed the following interesting quirk when I was posting my first round.

 

On the first hole, a 362-yard downhill par-4, when I input my tee ball at 220 in the fairway, it said I lost 0.75 shots off the tee. If that is the optimal shot on the hole because no one hits driver there due to the pinching of the fairway and water fronting the green, how does Strokes Gained handle that? Doesn't seem right to lose strokes on an optimal shot for everyone -- even PGA Tour pros...

 

I'm assuming without knowing the strokes gained number isn't necessarily from experiences on just that particular hole, but against some broader metric?

 

Will your performance on the hole over time change the strokes gained number?  

 

No answers, but maybe helpful questions.

 

 

[Obee]

12 minutes ago, Ferguson said:

 

Remember that strokes gained is calculated using the average number of shots it takes players to finish a hole from various positions on the course.  Your 220 off the tee, while you managed the tee shot correctly for the hole, the loss of .75 is simply a delta from the benchmark created by the averages. 

 

And by the way, being a WRXer, we'd like to see better numbers from you off the tee.  

Most of us average in the low threes on a bad day.

 

I will continue to work to increase my distance. Apologies.

Regarding Strokes Gained. This doesn't make any sense to me:

How is it that on a 362 yard hole, GolfMetrics says I lose 0.84 strokes to a PGA tour pro with a par? That cannot be correct. Or am I doing something wrong with my inputs?

 

 

 

 

 

[Ferguson]

1 minute ago, Obee said:

I will continue to work to increase my distance. Apologies.

Regarding Strokes Gained. This doesn't make any sense to me:

How is it that on a 362 yard hole, GolfMetrics says I lose 0.84 strokes to a PGA tour pro with a par? That cannot be correct. Or am I doing something wrong with my inputs?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You're doing nothing wrong.  The only thing the software knows is your input against the known averages on that hole.  

It's not intuitive. 

 

 

[Obee]

3 minutes ago, Ferguson said:

 

 

You're doing nothing wrong.  The only thing the software knows is your input against the known averages on that hole.  

It's not intuitive. 

 

 

 

So if I play a course of 18 360 yard holes where 220 is the optimal drive, the system completely and totally breaks down. good to know... 😉

 

[ThinkingPlus]

31 minutes ago, Obee said:

 

So if I play a course of 18 360 yard holes where 220 is the optimal drive, the system completely and totally breaks down. good to know... 😉

 

It works better for the tour where they are comparing against the field each day.  SG is less applicable for generic play.  Statistically over many courses and many rounds it has value, but for situations like you describe it always will devalue your drive. 

 

At least you have data to work against.  As far as I know there is no database that is women specific. I am SOL using SG.

[sethdavidsdad]

Unless you have an app that takes into account course layout it will be this way. Similar to fairway hit stat if you drive it up close to a short par 4 but it's in the ruff 4 feet from the green it still counts as a fairway missed. In your situation if the hole is 350 yards but there is water at 240 out unless the app knows that and can include it, you will still be docked for hitting it 220. 

[ThinkingPlus]

BTW, you might want to look up the SG data for pros from 140 yards.  Seems low to get down in 2.16 strokes.  Your tool may be working incorrectly.

[Ferguson]

1 hour ago, Obee said:

 

So if I play a course of 18 360 yard holes where 220 is the optimal drive, the system completely and totally breaks down. good to know... 😉

 

 

Sorry, it only knows what has been loaded. 

[Obee]

1 hour ago, ThinkingPlus said:

BTW, you might want to look up the SG data for pros from 140 yards.  Seems low to get down in 2.16 strokes.  Your tool may be working incorrectly.

 

I lost the most (by far) strokes off the tee, not on the approach. Like Fergie was saying, it only knows that I hit it 220 off the tee, right? Or am I missing something?

[sethdavidsdad]

18 minutes ago, Obee said:

 

I lost the most (by far) strokes off the tee, not on the approach. Like Fergie was saying, it only knows that I hit it 220 off the tee, right? Or am I missing something?

Think you can also run into this on sharp doglegs. It only knows distances off the tee

[Dutch1008]

14 minutes ago, Obee said:

I lost the most (by far) strokes off the tee, not on the approach. Like Fergie was saying, it only knows that I hit it 220 off the tee, right? Or am I missing something?

I could be mistaken but I believe strokes gained is all based on shotlink data. So unless a PGAT event has been held at that course, it's all just an approximation. A 220 yd drive may be the optimal tee shot, but I'd guess that the app doesn't know the layout and is assuming that on a 360 Par 4, the average tour pro is going to hit a 300 yd drive, followed by a 60 yd chip. You're 220 optimal shot is being incorrectly compared to a 300 yd benchmark.  

[jvincent]

2 hours ago, Obee said:

I will continue to work to increase my distance. Apologies.

Regarding Strokes Gained. This doesn't make any sense to me:

How is it that on a 362 yard hole, GolfMetrics says I lose 0.84 strokes to a PGA tour pro with a par? That cannot be correct. Or am I doing something wrong with my inputs?

 

 

 

 

 

 

It's been a while since I played with Golfmetrics, but I think you are inputting the data incorrectly. IIRC you have to input the distance from the hole, not the distance of the shot.

[Hawkeye77]

29 minutes ago, jvincent said:

 

It's been a while since I played with Golfmetrics, but I think you are inputting the data incorrectly. IIRC you have to input the distance from the hole, not the distance of the shot.

Edit: I'm confused after looking at some of it, lol.

 

 

Edited April 24, 2023 by Hawkeye77

[jimecherry]

2 hours ago, Hawkeye77 said:

Edit: I'm confused after looking at some of it, lol.

 

 

strokes gained off the tee is a calculation based on how likely you are to get down in the fewest strokes compared to your handicap. so if the app doesnt allow you to input your handicap its not accurate. also the app should ask you your lie aswell as the distance you have left to the hole.

[Obee]

3 hours ago, jvincent said:

 

It's been a while since I played with Golfmetrics, but I think you are inputting the data incorrectly. IIRC you have to input the distance from the hole, not the distance of the shot.

turns out I was in putting the dead incorrectly, but only on the first shot. That drastically changes everything though…

[Obee]

Fixed!!

 

 

[m d g]

On 4/24/2023 at 8:38 AM, Ferguson said:

And by the way, being a WRXer, we'd like to see better numbers from you off the tee.  

Most of us average in the low threes on a bad day.

He was hitting an 8-iron for position. With driver he'd fly the green.

[golfortennis]

Glad to see you got it straightened out.  One thing I will caution, you will likely hear of guys saying they want "how does it compare to my peer group".  Don't fall into that trap.  The reason I say that is because the data used to compile "peer group" is unreliable(cause it's people like us saying we had "about 225" a lot of times.)  Just focus on the table you are working off, and watch the trend of your numbers against the standard.  That will tell you everything you need to know.

[mhudson111]

On 4/24/2023 at 9:20 AM, Obee said:

 

So if I play a course of 18 360 yard holes where 220 is the optimal drive, the system completely and totally breaks down. good to know... 😉

 

220 is almost never the optimal drive.  Since pros average 290, they only have 70 yards left, you had 144.

 

Average number of strokes for you to finish the hole from 144 is going to be on average much worse then what it takes them to finish the hole from 70 yards.  
 

That’s why you lost SG on the drive

 

Edit: see your entry discrepancy now.  Yeah, I imagine 4 is average score for pros, so your 4 is pretty close to SG=0

Edited April 28, 2023 by mhudson111

[ThinkingPlus]

4 minutes ago, mhudson111 said:

220 is almost never the optimal drive.  Since pros average 290, they only have 70 yards left, you had 144.

 

Average number of strokes for you to finish the hole from 144 is going to be on average much worse then what it takes them to finish the hole from 70 yards.  
 

That’s why you lost SG on the drive

How about laying up to a lake that's 100 yards across.  There are situations where 220 yards is optimal.  SG is statistical by definition and cannot take into account specific situations such as this one.

[larrybud]

On 4/24/2023 at 6:10 PM, Obee said:

Fixed!!

 

 

 

You can reverse engineer this and say that tour pros average 3.9 strokes from 360 yards (because you lost 0.10 from 360)

In your original post, since you lost -0.75, that was from 220. so they average 2.25 from 220 yards.

 

[Guest RobS]

15 hours ago, ThinkingPlus said:

How about laying up to a lake that's 100 yards across.  There are situations where 220 yards is optimal.  SG is statistical by definition and cannot take into account specific situations such as this one.

SG, in its most detailed application, accounts for specific situations as it's a comparison against the field.  In your example, the rest of the field would likely be laying up so the SG would be calculated based on the relative quality of your lay up against the field.  On the other hand, the rest of us non-tour players using an app are judged based on a relatively generic data set that won't specifically account for those situations.  With that being said, over the long term, the averages will indirectly reflect the specific situations that all golfer inevitably face on the golf course.

 

[ThinkingPlus]

51 minutes ago, RobS said:

SG, in its most detailed application, accounts for specific situations as it's a comparison against the field.  In your example, the rest of the field would likely be laying up so the SG would be calculated based on the relative quality of your lay up against the field.  On the other hand, the rest of us non-tour players using an app are judged based on a relatively generic data set that won't specifically account for those situations.  With that being said, over the long term, the averages will indirectly reflect the specific situations that all golfer inevitably face on the golf course.

 

That only applies at tour venues/tournaments. For amateur golfers playing any old course there is no field to compare to except for the pro statistical database which consists of averages over many tournaments. Those averages will not compare well against the specific situation described by the OP.

[Guest RobS]

12 minutes ago, ThinkingPlus said:

That only applies at tour venues/tournaments. For amateur golfers playing any old course there is no field to compare to except for the pro statistical database which consists of averages over many tournaments. Those averages will not compare well against the specific situation described by the OP.

I didn't clarify "tour" in my opening but that's what I was referring to, but we're saying pretty much the same thing.  Outside of the tour level, the data is useful over the long term even if not applicable to a somewhat unique situation The OP's specific 1 hole situation is not directly comparable to the averages but over time the averages will compare to the averages of the user. 

[ThinkingPlus]

35 minutes ago, RobS said:

I didn't clarify "tour" in my opening but that's what I was referring to, but we're saying pretty much the same thing.  Outside of the tour level, the data is useful over the long term even if not applicable to a somewhat unique situation The OP's specific 1 hole situation is not directly comparable to the averages but over time the averages will compare to the averages of the user. 

Yes. Statistics 101.

[mhudson111]

On 4/28/2023 at 3:40 PM, ThinkingPlus said:

How about laying up to a lake that's 100 yards across.  There are situations where 220 yards is optimal.  SG is statistical by definition and cannot take into account specific situations such as this one.

Yeah no doubt.  Unless you have SG for the field on this specific hole, only going by what SG data generically includes (distance, type of lie (FW, rough, bunker, etc) gives the results Obee got.  I just assumed since this thread was talking about generic SG based results for this hole, it was ok to talk generics.  Ie - original post was a SG discussion, not an optimal strategy to play this hole discussion.

You're right in that optimal strategy for a specific hole for a specific player with specific skills is by definition too small a sample size for a statistical description to be optimal.

 

Would be interesting to see what SG for different strategies on this hole would be

Edited April 30, 2023 by mhudson111

[isaacbm]

On 4/24/2023 at 9:29 AM, Obee said:

Not sure where to post this, but since the pros use Strokes Gained, thought I'd put it here.

 

I'm using the GolfMetrics app to start tracking strokes gained and I noticed the following interesting quirk when I was posting my first round.

 

On the first hole, a 362-yard downhill par-4, when I input my tee ball at 220 in the fairway, it said I lost 0.75 shots off the tee. If that is the optimal shot on the hole because no one hits driver there due to the pinching of the fairway and water fronting the green, how does Strokes Gained handle that? Doesn't seem right to lose strokes on an optimal shot for everyone -- even PGA Tour pros...

We both know you hit driver off the tee on one… 😂