Forums

Help › Forums

% putts made from 25 - 50ft stats?

Sun, Dec 26 2021 6:08 PM (75 replies)
  • AnaNikolaj
    639 Posts
    Fri, Dec 24 2021 12:08 PM

    Easy explanation. In short, the putts made stat refers to the % of the total putts you took. Let's say I took 1000 putts (made and missed combined) and holed 600 of them, with 400 of them being from 0 - 5 feet, 150 of them from 5 - 15 feet, 40  from 15 - 25 feet and 10 from 25 - 50 feet. My stats would've shown as my success rate:

    - 0-5 feet : 40%

    - 5 - 15 feet: 15%

    - 15 - 25 feet: 4%

    - 25 - 50 feet: 1%

     

    When you add this all up, it means I've holed 60% percent of my putts, which would give me a putting avg of somewhere over 1,5 putts per hole (really not bothered to do the math). 

     

    I realise this doesn't sound like a logical way to do stats, but I really believe that's how they do it. As in real life, when sane theories don't match the numbers, try an insane one... ;-) 

  • HamdenPro
    2,468 Posts
    Fri, Dec 24 2021 12:44 PM

    SamSpayed:
    I agree 100%, Mio.  I don't trust that category of stats either

     

    Ditto, I know, looking at mine, they cannot possibly be right.

     

    THANKS OPY.

     

  • MioKontic
    4,643 Posts
    Fri, Dec 24 2021 1:17 PM

    Thank you Ana, that sounds like a plausible explanation, but as Spock would say, it's totally illogical captain  :)

  • DodgyPutter
    4,690 Posts
    Fri, Dec 24 2021 1:20 PM

    SamSpayed:
    I agree 100%, Mio.  I don't trust that category of stats either - and for the very reasons that you state.  I'm guessing those putting distance calcs are misprogrammed.

    Sam I've been asking you about /showing you the anomolies in your own and Mags stats all along and you didn't answer,

    It's pretty hard to take that rather than accept it's only holed putts in the stats people are assuming the stat's are wrong.  They're not misprogrammed they're just not programmed in a way that's logical to you.  My average is ridiculous but it's not misprogrammed.

  • DodgyPutter
    4,690 Posts
    Fri, Dec 24 2021 2:09 PM

    Lol Jure nice to see the person I totally confused with my thoughts on this years ago join in :-)   And of course you're right. All the best to you and yours, hope you have a good one. 

    The OP suggested his stats at a particular distance made him better at the range than some of the best players, although Sam suggested that was as he'd had more practice at that distance, the plain and obvious fact is it just isn't true.

    I said:.

    The number given is reflecting how many of your holed putts have been from that distance, not how many of your putts from that distance you have holed.  If you could compare the latter all of the named players would have a higher percentage than you.

    Which is the truth of it, even if it's not an explanation that's clear to others.

    I've now realised the easiest way to show this would be to look at someone that hasn't played much.

    This is someone who has only played one round.

    They had 46 putts with stats at 0% except for 0-5ft and 5ft-10ft. 

    % putts made 0-5ft 26.09% and % putts made 5ft-10ft 13.04%

    I think only successful putts count and others think only first putts count, both would result in the %'s being from 18. 

    12 from 46 is 26.09% and 6 is 13.04%.

    So whatever wgt are counting he made 12 putts from 0-5ft and 6 from 5ft-10ft.

    The one putt % is 11.11 so now we know 2 first putts were made, I think that rules out first putts being what is counted with the immediately apparent reason being there couldn't be two different %'s above. (as if the two putts were holed at different distances the  %'s would be the same)

    So in fact it's only the last  or successful putts  that count.  What is missing, although they are included when working out the %'s so that they don't total100% as seen, are unsuccessful putts: (missed putts 28 = 61%). 

    We don't know what distance the missed putts were from, so we don't know anyone's putting % from any particular distance. Which is back to the start, we know what % of successful putts were holed from each different distance but we don't what % of putts from each distance we've holed.

    Incidentally I'd say the fact most people are in the 40's% for 0-5ft will be as the better players hole a lot of the longer (probably mainly 5-10ft but others too) , so have less second putts in the shorter range, balanced by the fact(s) they miss less when they do have them, and hit the approach that close more often.

    Sorry if there's a detail or two wrong in this but iif there is it wont change the overall picture.

    ps can anyone tell me why the central part of my screen has gone small (in this only) making the writing hard to read.

  • HamdenPro
    2,468 Posts
    Fri, Dec 24 2021 2:25 PM

    AnaNikolaj:

    Let's say I took 1000 putts (made and missed combined) and holed 600 of them, with 400 of them being from 0 - 5 feet, 150 of them from 5 - 15 feet, 40  from 15 - 25 feet and 10 from 25 - 50 feet. My stats would've shown as my success rate:

    - 0-5 feet : 40%

    - 5 - 15 feet: 15%

    - 15 - 25 feet: 4%

    - 25 - 50 feet: 1%

     

    When you add this all up, it means I've holed 60% percent of my putts

    Which is the same percentage (in decimal form) using the HamdenMath Formula:

    P=U/T  600/1000=.60 OR 60%

     

  • HamdenPro
    2,468 Posts
    Fri, Dec 24 2021 2:32 PM

     

    In any event, may I suggest Sam and Dodgy appeal their cases to the WGT Elders. who have discussed this issue many years ago.

    Putting Percentages - World Golf Tour (wgt.com)

  • MioKontic
    4,643 Posts
    Fri, Dec 24 2021 3:07 PM

    Thanks for that link Hamden, unfortunately there was no definitive answer there either.

    Why are WGT so secretive about everything?  Is it really too much trouble to explain to us how the putting stats work???

    Keeping everything secret has always been their motto, a stupid motto, but that seems to be the thing that boosts their ego.  The same can be said about the signs on Chambers Bay - why no tell us, in words we can all understand, i.e. yes they exist on holes 8 and 9, or no they don't exist on holes 8 and 9.  What do they feel they are going to gain by not telling us?  It's not like we're using paid-for balls to go looking for the signs, it's free starter balls.  All they are achieving is winding up their customers, which, quite frankly, is something they have been very good at from day 1.

  • SamSpayed
    4,998 Posts
    Fri, Dec 24 2021 3:36 PM

    MioKontic:
    Thanks for that link Hamden, unfortunately there was no definitive answer there either.

    Actually, I see 2 succinct explanations in that thread that make it perfectly clear:

    zagraniczniak:
    the percentage given for each distance is the percentage of total putts that were successful putts from that distance.  If you add up all the percentages given that will give you your total percentage of successful putts. You have no information about the length of the putts you missed.

    and the follow-up

    LeonDelBosque:
    Right. The way it was explained to me is: 45% 0-5 feet, for example, means that 45% of ALL putts are SUCCESSFUL putts from 0-5 feet.

    Both of those explanations also align with what AnaNikolaj said on page 2 of this thread.

    Thank you for providing that link, Hamden 🍾  I hope that settles the discussion.  I will readily admit that my earlier theories (about the %'s being based only on initial putts, and about the %'s being wrong due to faulty WGT programming) were both wrong.  

  • HamdenPro
    2,468 Posts
    Fri, Dec 24 2021 3:44 PM

    It always seemed to me that the percentages given for each respective distance was the probability that you make the putt, in one putt from that distance. Therefore, each distance category, stands alone.

    If you take 10 putts from 5' and make 5, then it would be 50%

    same at 15" 5/10  50%

    same at 20' 5/10 50%

    etcs, so not adding all percentages up.

    IMO

RSS