Forums

% putts made from 25 - 50ft stats?

• DodgyPutter 4,690 Posts

  Thu, Dec 23 2021 4:00 PM

  SamSpayed:

  WGT is only including initial putts in the "% Putts Made from x Feet" stats, not 2nd and 3rd (and subsequent) putts.

  Sorry I'm being all muddled and the post above was meant to be a question. lol I tried to explain this years ago and ended up a similar mess.  Past my bedtime obviously, a brief go below and maybe I'll try again tomorrow, shopping permitting. 

  A couple of things, do you really think Mags makes less than half his putts of 0-5ft, 1 in 5 from 5-10ft etc.  Strange to end up with 1.26pph.

  Your % for 50-100ft is 0.02% have you had 5,000 (or 10,000) putts of over 50ft.  0.02% of your total successful putts would be 9 or 10 holed in that range, is that more realistic?

  Looking at my profile compared to Mags my percentage is lower in the 0-5 and 5-10 range and higher in the others not because I'm a better long putter, it's simply as I have more long putts (worse approaches).

  I think the %'s given are of the total putts (not the ones from that distance) and the amount off 100% is the missed ones.  I reckon my first post on this was fine (except perhaps only first putts counting-your question and answer). 

• HamdenPro 2,468 Posts

  Thu, Dec 23 2021 4:47 PM

  SamSpayed:

  WGT is only including initial putts in the "% Putts Made from x Feet" stats, not 2nd and 3rd (and subsequent) putts.

  DodgyPutter:

  I think the %'s given are of the total putts (not the ones from that distance) and the amount off 100% is the missed ones.  I reckon my first post on this was fine (except perhaps only first putts counting-your question and answer). 

  OK, that's it for me, when everyone starts sounding like an OPY riddle, my brain just starts showing Adam Sandler movies.

• SamSpayed 4,998 Posts

  Thu, Dec 23 2021 5:55 PM

  HamdenPro:

  If you attempt 100 putts, and make 70 then using Hamden Math

  U/T = 70/100 = .70 or 70% which is P for percentage

  you are using P=(U/T) * 100 which is 70 which if P is percentage that would mean 70

  Difference?

  Decimals vs. percents.  .70 is a decimal.  70% is a percent.

  Perhaps this will help you understand the difference:

  https://www.varsitytutors.com/hotmath/hotmath_help/topics/converting-fractions-to-percent

• HamdenPro 2,468 Posts

  Thu, Dec 23 2021 6:17 PM

  SamSpayed:

  Fractions vs. percents.  .70 is a fraction.  70% is a percent.

  That link has nothing to do with Hamden Math. My formula interextapulates percentage to fraction and contrary and likewise...

  so, .70 = 70% in terms of the equation I have presented...

  ugh..

  and THAT is why you are Mostly Right..and, yet, not entirely wrong.

   

  EDIT: Probably couldn't even find Scott.

• gonfission 2,241 Posts

  Thu, Dec 23 2021 7:13 PM

  I think Samuel Clemens would have had something to say about all that ^^^

   

• HamdenPro 2,468 Posts

  Thu, Dec 23 2021 8:22 PM

  gonfission:

  I think Samuel Clemens would have had something to say about all that ^^^

  If you be referring to" lies, damned lies and statistics"...

  Although attributed to Mr. Twain, it was said long before him....there is much debate as to where the expression first was penned....

  Obviously, it is the primary principal upon which all Hamden math is predicated upon.

  And yes, I did take alot of stats....ugh.....

• bobyero 23 Posts

  Thu, Dec 23 2021 8:22 PM

  DodgyPutter:

   The more relevant stat (not given by wgt) would be he holed 25% of his while you holed 8.33% of yours.

   

  Exactly. Why keep those stats in the first place. Totally useless. WGT duplicate stats that the PGA Tour keeps for everything else but not this. Pretty sure be easier to count the number of putts in each distance range and the number that go in. Also be more useful. 

   

• bobyero 23 Posts

  Fri, Dec 24 2021 3:43 AM

  I think I have worked this out using the stats of a new member in my CC who has played 63 holes.

  All of his % putts holed stats add up to 46.97%.

  His total putts is 132.

  46.97% of 132 is 62. (He had 1 chip in.)

  So the % numbers are the number of times the ball went in compared to the number of every putt.

  Each distance range is the % of putts that dropped out of all the putts hit including 2 or 3 or more putts.

  So it's basically a pointless stat that WGT possibly misinterpreted. 

• MioKontic 4,643 Posts

  Fri, Dec 24 2021 9:43 AM

  May I add my tuppence-worth here...

  Initially I was going to say that DodgyPutter had it the wrong way around and that I agreed with SamSpayed.  I think I still agree with Sam, although I no longer know if I agree with Dodgy's latest explanation or not.  But no matter, I have another predicament to throw into the equation.

  Take a look at the 0-5ft percentage.  Mine is at 45.21%.  Admittedly a lot of my putts are from outside that distance, but I find it hard to believe that I hole less than half of my 1st putts from 0-5ft.  And the same applies to both Dodgy and Sam too.  I also looked at a few of the better players, and not one had a 0-5ft percentage over 50% - everyone has a percentage in the 40's.  Now I understand that the stats have been taken from day 1, and initially the percentage may have been low, but over time that percentage should definitely have got over 50%.

  So, to conclude, I don't trust the stats  :)

• SamSpayed 4,998 Posts

  Fri, Dec 24 2021 11:25 AM

  MioKontic:

  Take a look at the 0-5ft percentage.  Mine is at 45.21%.  Admittedly a lot of my putts are from outside that distance, but I find it hard to believe that I hole less than half of my 1st putts from 0-5ft.  And the same applies to both Dodgy and Sam too.  I also looked at a few of the better players, and not one had a 0-5ft percentage over 50% - everyone has a percentage in the 40's.  Now I understand that the stats have been taken from day 1, and initially the percentage may have been low, but over time that percentage should definitely have got over 50%.

  So, to conclude, I don't trust the stats  :)

  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.