Oops, probability he was correct just dropped considerably.
Thank you, Robert. Yours, BTW, is extremely high.
Cicero733:A player with a 49% rating is “statistically better” than a player with a 32% ranking.
Not really true, you could total up all the %'s and know the player with the higher total misses a smaller % of his their putts. But it would be telling you the same thing as the pph does, and looking at that doesn't involve any arithmetic.
Yiannis1970:Thanks for your answer but that does not make sense at all to me. Now, i am even more confused, so i leave it here.
Sorry I couldn't explain clearly, I think I may do the same.
No worries.
Robert
I think we are possibly saying the same thing. If I want to evaluate a player’s putting performance, I first look at ADP - how close on average is the player to the hole. Then I look at the 1, 2, 3 putt percentages. If a player has an ADP of 12 the putt number percentages indicate the likelihood of him/her making the putt. If the player is 12’ or under and his one putt percentage is 52% then there is a good chance the putt will be made. The percentage of putts by distance doesn’t really provide any additional data other than telling me when he is 0’ - 5’ from the hole the likelihood of him/her making the putt is x%. The numbers don’t tell me how the player got to within 5’ - was it his first putt that put him/her there, was his/her approach that close. I generally ignore those numbers as I don’t view them as performance statistics.
@Cicero733
On all points, I agree.