Forums

Is the R1 Driver making the WGT less competitive? An empirical investigation.

• andyson 6,415 Posts

  Sat, Apr 27 2013 11:41 AM

  MBaggese:

  I did a quick count and 51 out of the top 100 are level 98 and above.

  This mean 49% (if I counted right) do not use the R1 -due to level restriction.  I didn't look at the players 98 and above in the top 100 that do not use the R1..so there is probably more than 1/2 the top 100's not using it.

  So yes Andy, you numbers for earnings makes the R1 look like the money winner, but my numbers show you don't need the R1 to be competitive.

   

  Lol..it's how data is displayed.

  Why not use all 250 then?  Only 65/250 have the R1!  75% of the top 250 don't use the R1!  Well duh!!  174 of them can't buy it!

  See how stupid that is?

  If ALL the R1 users were in the top 100 then it would be 65% and 35% don't use it.

  To be fair, the key finding is 90% of those eligible have bought it.

  How much you earn depends a lot on how many you play. 

  Earnings per RG entered is what we need.  That would normalize the data.

  I do think the OP made a valid point.  If the R1 helps on just 1 shot per round that makes a big difference in a RG.

  What I really want to know is why those 11 who are eligible for the R1 don't have one?  Can't be the lack of credits ffs!  They're in the top 250 earners!

   

• YankeeJim 25,827 Posts

  Sat, Apr 27 2013 1:27 PM

  andyson:

    If the R1 helps on just 1 shot per round that makes a big difference in a RG.

  Yes it would but that's assuming the driver actually makes that kind of difference. Playing at that level of competition, I doubt it would. What it does do is bring into the mix the average golfer that's average because of the driving %. All of a sudden, tee shots that used to land in the rough aren't anymore, consistently. Now that player is hitting decent approaches instead of recovering, the GIRs go up and the scores come down. 

  I would venture to guess the impact of the R1 on an average player's game is what's going to make the difference and there are a lot more of those than there aren't.

• MBaggese 15,367 Posts

  Sat, Apr 27 2013 5:26 PM

  andyson:

  What I really want to know is why those 11 who are eligible for the R1 don't have one?  Can't be the lack of credits ffs!  They're in the top 250 earners!

   

  LMAO...this is where reality separates "data"...in effect, you don't know what you are talking about.

   

  I'd say maybe...just maybe, the top 60-70 players each month, are building a bank....unless they are very good and just enter 2-3 RG's here and there and place very high...they are just keeping their heads above water to sustain playing here...and more than likely any below the top 60-70 in earnings,  have to reach into their pockets to buy the R1...unless they are video watching, survey hunting, free offer folks-nothing wrong with that by the way...just stating what I know as fact, and being in the top 100 several times, and usually top 120-or so-and below.

   

  I'm in the top 100 right now for this month, and if I spent 3K in credits for the R1...I'd have to give up my CC numbers and play with starter balls.

   

    Playing in many community tourneys where you have to post green shot's, etc, you'll notice many of those you thought would be credit heavy...have 1500-4-5K credit balance.

   

  I think some scratch out the credits because they don't want gift requests, others do it because they don't want others to know how tough it is.;)

   

  Now back to the case in point...I stand by what I say.

   

  I'll go as far to say that the "normal" top 10-15 players here, could play with just the R11, and STILL be in the top 10-15 each month..the new toys are a feel good thing...keeps that "grr...if I had the same club John has...I'd be hitting wedge here instead of PW"....out of the equation.

    RG's and MPC's are just like Golf in real life...you have to be able to play "mentally" to succeed.

   

  You play well, and can now play RG's...jump in, play 4-6 a day...I'm sure you'll be in the top 250...and say after you come in at the end of the month in 177th place...tell me then how many credits you are ahead;)

• mantis0014 8,946 Posts

  Sat, Apr 27 2013 5:38 PM

  The R1 off the yellows on St.A is an Eye Opener....lol

• Jimbog1964 8,378 Posts

  Sat, Apr 27 2013 5:58 PM

  If advertising is about creating thought about a product in peoples minds (and it is) TM must be over the moon, as must WGT the hype generated. In the end the player makes the real difference all other things equal or roughly equal...........These are the area's people look for the edge................And some just like fiddling with new stuff!

  The question remain's should WGT open things up, then by how much and still make a $..........................Most people just want the playing field more level, a bit sooner, more often, not sprain winner's ankles!

• Tightrope 1,072 Posts

  Sat, Apr 27 2013 6:20 PM

  mmikkeelee:

  all said and fair enough to all the posts but my concern is were are wgt going in the future with the new equipment.?

  one day they will reach the end of this long cul de sac .

  i meen how much can they improve things i.e balls, clubs, slowing down the meter ?

  its a worry in my eyes i already think the game is to easy just my opinion of course

  :)

  Worries me too. Scores get's lower, but the challenge... I would not really say it becomes easier, but it is IMO getting further away from real golf. With a calculator and a high ding percentage, you score will always be decent. There is a huge difference between a approach that rolls 10 yards and one that stops dead. Huge difference playing from 15 yds, just outside the green, and roll 1ft instead of 2 yards.
  
  More math than feel

• Jimbog1964 8,378 Posts

  Sat, Apr 27 2013 6:46 PM

  From average yards per club pro golfer 20585.html

   

  The average shot hit with a driver carried 260 yards and traveled a total of 287.3 yards, including the roll. An average 3-wood shot carried 238 yards and the average 5-wood carried 223 yards. The typical carry for a 3-iron shot was 203 yards; for a 4-iron 189; for a 5-iron 181; for a 6-iron 169; for a 7-iron 160; for an 8-iron 149; and for a 9-iron 136. The average PGA Tour pitching wedge shot carried 122 yards.

  WGT top player average ????????????

  My quick straw poll research indicated not as far apart as may have thought driver wise anyway, and so well done WGT. Other variable's exist I know.......

  Playing field more level, bit sooner and more often is the main point here I think - bearing in mind busy life styles of customer base. When my kids were growing up no way would they have got to level 98, unless they only played one game for years. Their computer game time was limited after they played RL sport!

  Any one wants an in depth discussion RL on a few extra yards.......I skimmed it LOL:

  importance driving distance and driving accuracy pga and champions tours

• andyson 6,415 Posts

  Sat, Apr 27 2013 8:37 PM

  MBaggese:

  andyson:

  What I really want to know is why those 11 who are eligible for the R1 don't have one?  Can't be the lack of credits ffs!  They're in the top 250 earners!

   

  LMAO...this is where reality separates "data"...in effect, you don't know what you are talking about.

  Mostly sarcasm.

  My main concern is not about RGs, its the edge the longer, more accurate R1 will give on Merion's narrow fairways, short par 5 2nd (556), long par 4 18th(521), and the 3 short par 4s (360, 359, 303).  Wondering if we'll see Cabo-like scores.

   

   

• Chinajohn 1,190 Posts

  Sat, Apr 27 2013 11:17 PM

  andyson:

  Chinajohn:

  For this research to be truly empirical it would have to use a 'double blind' methodology AND take into account ALL other variables, which as far as I can see has not happened.

  How would you propose doing a 'double blind' study on this data?  Hide which driver Tour Legends are hitting, even from the TLs?  LMAO!  Blind studies are done to eliminate bias.  Seems to me the OP has done a single blind study, not knowing which TL has an R1 while collecting the data on Levels.

  Empirical Research:  An empirical article is a research article that reports the results of a study that uses data derived from actual observation or experimentation.

  I think the criteria has been met.
  

  I must disagree, the research has not taken into account the huge amount of possible variables other than the R1, for his / her conclusions to be valid all other variables must have remained constant i.e. unchanged during his / her research period. I see no indication of this.

  My use of the words 'empirical' and 'double blind' were not entirely accurate I will freely admit but were intended to put over my opinion that the observations made had other possible explanations rather than the one offered and so was not as 'scientific' as the tone of the piece appeared to try to suggest.

   

• MBaggese 15,367 Posts

  Sun, Apr 28 2013 12:11 AM

  andyson:

  MBaggese:

  andyson:

  What I really want to know is why those 11 who are eligible for the R1 don't have one?  Can't be the lack of credits ffs!  They're in the top 250 earners!

   

  LMAO...this is where reality separates "data"...in effect, you don't know what you are talking about.

  Mostly sarcasm.

  My main concern is not about RGs, its the edge the longer, more accurate R1 will give on Merion's narrow fairways, short par 5 2nd (556), long par 4 18th(521), and the 3 short par 4s (360, 359, 303).  Wondering if we'll see Cabo-like scores.

   

   

  Sorry Bro,

   

  I took things another way.....hence my reply.

   

   

  Feel free to send me a "slap up the head" when ya feel fit:)