|
Sports » rec.sport.golf » Michelle
| Michelle [message #1066725] |
Di, 06 Juni 2006 05:15 |
|
I think Leadbetter needs to get together with Pelz and get her some serious
putting help. She could have qualified easily if she just made half the
putts inside of twelve feet.
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066737 ] |
Di, 06 Juni 2006 12:31 |
|
"Rick" <hchiava1 [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:rr6hg.2902$oa1.1716 [at] news02.roc.ny...
>I think Leadbetter needs to get together with Pelz and get her some serious
>putting help. She could have qualified easily if she just made half the
>putts inside of twelve feet.
>
Why? The first thing Pelz is gonna tell her is that the distance at which
professionals make 50% of their putts is 6 feet.
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066742 ] |
Di, 06 Juni 2006 13:07 |
|
I have seen her lead and fold, many times on the last few holes.
Tom
"Rick" <hchiava1 [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:rr6hg.2902$oa1.1716 [at] news02.roc.ny...
>I think Leadbetter needs to get together with Pelz and get her some serious
>putting help. She could have qualified easily if she just made half the
>putts inside of twelve feet.
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066743 ] |
Di, 06 Juni 2006 13:17 |
|
On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 03:15:35 +0000, Rick wrote:
> I think Leadbetter needs to get together with Pelz and get her some
> serious putting help. She could have qualified easily if she just made
> half the putts inside of twelve feet.
And I could have shot even par Sunday if I had done that. Instead, I shot
79. What's your point, exactly?
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066745 ] |
Di, 06 Juni 2006 13:43 |
|
Not when they are winning or playing well!!!!
"Frank Ketchum" <fketchum [at] earthlinknospam.net> wrote in message
news:dQchg.2232$lf4.581 [at] newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "Rick" <hchiava1 [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:rr6hg.2902$oa1.1716 [at] news02.roc.ny...
>>I think Leadbetter needs to get together with Pelz and get her some
>>serious putting help. She could have qualified easily if she just made
>>half the putts inside of twelve feet.
>>
>
> Why? The first thing Pelz is gonna tell her is that the distance at which
> professionals make 50% of their putts is 6 feet.
>
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066746 ] |
Di, 06 Juni 2006 13:45 |
|
That your putting is worse the MW's and you should think about seeing Pelz
also.
"Buford Ressup" <buford [at] home.invalid> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.06.06.11.17.33.187406 [at] home.invalid...
> On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 03:15:35 +0000, Rick wrote:
>
>> I think Leadbetter needs to get together with Pelz and get her some
>> serious putting help. She could have qualified easily if she just made
>> half the putts inside of twelve feet.
>
> And I could have shot even par Sunday if I had done that. Instead, I shot
> 79. What's your point, exactly?
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066747 ] |
Di, 06 Juni 2006 14:07 |
|
"Buford Ressup" <buford [at] home.invalid> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.06.06.11.17.33.187406 [at] home.invalid...
> On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 03:15:35 +0000, Rick wrote:
>
>> I think Leadbetter needs to get together with Pelz and get her some
>> serious putting help. She could have qualified easily if she just made
>> half the putts inside of twelve feet.
>
> And I could have shot even par Sunday if I had done that. Instead, I shot
> 79. What's your point, exactly?
That you need some putting practice too?
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066750 ] |
Di, 06 Juni 2006 14:17 |
|
Buford Ressup wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 03:15:35 +0000, Rick wrote:
>
> > I think Leadbetter needs to get together with Pelz and get her some
> > serious putting help. She could have qualified easily if she just made
> > half the putts inside of twelve feet.
>
> And I could have shot even par Sunday if I had done that. Instead, I shot
> 79. What's your point, exactly?
I think it's true that there is a tendency to to use the "if only
their putting
had been better" explanation with the pros. Pros tend to win and lose
on their putting. Vijay is probably the only guy who could
consistently
win with mediocre putting. So it is a safe comment about almost any
pro, save maybe some guy that's spraying them all over the place.
I will say though that in Wie's case it was the NATURE of the misses
that tends to make the case here. Putts on line but left short, that
kind of thing that seemed almost "preventable" or some such thing.
The paper today says that she eschewed the reads of her caddie because
"she needs to learn to read her own putts". Seems like in such an
important tournament, maybe she could leave the school books at home
and just play to win.
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066752 ] |
Di, 06 Juni 2006 14:24 |
|
yardage didn't seem to be the issue, tension was the culprit.
>mho
>v=83e
>drive 10% less, fill up when have empty at
>the lowest major station (help create a glut)
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066756 ] |
Di, 06 Juni 2006 15:15 |
|
I agree - there is a time and a place to learn and that was not one of them.
<snip>
> I will say though that in Wie's case it was the NATURE of the misses
> that tends to make the case here. Putts on line but left short, that
> kind of thing that seemed almost "preventable" or some such thing.
> The paper today says that she eschewed the reads of her caddie because
> "she needs to learn to read her own putts". Seems like in such an
> important tournament, maybe she could leave the school books at home
> and just play to win.
>
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066764 ] |
Di, 06 Juni 2006 15:48 |
|
"Rick" <hchiava1 [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:rr6hg.2902$oa1.1716 [at] news02.roc.ny...
> I think Leadbetter needs to get together with Pelz and get her some
serious
> putting help. She could have qualified easily if she just made half the
> putts inside of twelve feet.
>
>
How badly did Michelle really putt? As I vaguely recall the best putter on
the PGA tour misses half his putts from 9', so missing a goodly number of
12' and less putts hardly qualifies as bad putting, although missing a bunch
of 4 and 5 footers - a different story.
Any good summary stats out there?
Thanks.
dave
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066769 ] |
Di, 06 Juni 2006 16:00 |
|
Agreed, however those players that finish in the top 12% of a tournament
(which is what she had to do) I believe make a few more putts than average
and when they win, they make a lot more.
Think about TW, when he wins, he usually putts great. When his putter gets
a little balky, he doesn't.
"Dave Lee" <DaveLeeNC [at] ix.netcom.RemovE.com> wrote in message
news:dJfhg.2184$o4.969 [at] newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "Rick" <hchiava1 [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:rr6hg.2902$oa1.1716 [at] news02.roc.ny...
>> I think Leadbetter needs to get together with Pelz and get her some
> serious
>> putting help. She could have qualified easily if she just made half the
>> putts inside of twelve feet.
>>
>>
>
> How badly did Michelle really putt? As I vaguely recall the best putter on
> the PGA tour misses half his putts from 9', so missing a goodly number of
> 12' and less putts hardly qualifies as bad putting, although missing a
> bunch
> of 4 and 5 footers - a different story.
>
> Any good summary stats out there?
>
> Thanks.
>
> dave
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066772 ] |
Di, 06 Juni 2006 16:06 |
|
|
Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066789 ] |
Di, 06 Juni 2006 17:06 |
|
According to the hole by hole on golfweb - she missed an 18", 2 - 3', 2 -
8', 2 - 10', 1 - 11', 1 - 12'. That's 9 inside of 12'. She should have
made the 18" & 2 - 3' putts. Of the 6 left - she only needed to make 2 of
them to get into the playoff & 3 to definitely qualify.
> How badly did Michelle really putt? As I vaguely recall the best putter on
> the PGA tour misses half his putts from 9', so missing a goodly number of
> 12' and less putts hardly qualifies as bad putting, although missing a
> bunch
> of 4 and 5 footers - a different story.
>
> Any good summary stats out there?
>
> Thanks.
>
> dave
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066801 ] |
Di, 06 Juni 2006 18:27 |
|
Frank Ketchum wrote:
> "Rick" <hchiava1 [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:rr6hg.2902$oa1.1716 [at] news02.roc.ny...
> >I think Leadbetter needs to get together with Pelz and get her some serious
> >putting help. She could have qualified easily if she just made half the
> >putts inside of twelve feet.
> >
>
> Why? The first thing Pelz is gonna tell her is that the distance at which
> professionals make 50% of their putts is 6 feet.
True, but not the professionals that win.
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066851 ] |
Di, 06 Juni 2006 20:15 |
|
"Rick" <hchiava1 [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:rr6hg.2902$oa1.1716 [at] news02.roc.ny...
>I think Leadbetter needs to get together with Pelz and get her some serious
>putting help. She could have qualified easily if she just made half the
>putts inside of twelve feet.
>
>
I would suggest she see Rottela before Pelz. She has a history of melt down
once things get down to crunch time. 2005 Womens Open 80+ in the final
round after starting T1, 2005 JDC inside the cut line with something like 4
holes to play and making a double, the Asian event last year when she went
bogey, bogey on the last two holes to miss the cut by 1. Missing a playoff
by one in both of her LPGA starts this year when she had makable putts on 18
in both cases and of course the late bogey streak yesterday at the end of
round 2.
As far as putts, there was some stat that said the worst putter on the PGA
tour from 3 feet or less last year or maybe the year before was Fred Couples
and I do not remember what his percentage was but it was extremely high.
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066855 ] |
Di, 06 Juni 2006 20:21 |
|
"Rick" <hchiava1 [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:YTdhg.3033$Oh1.963 [at] news01.roc.ny...
> Not when they are winning or playing well!!!!
>
Exactly. Do you make the same number of putts from inside 12 feet each round
you play? I believe I can answer that for you ... "no". You seem to think
that pros don't have on and off days just like anybody else.
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066895 ] |
Di, 06 Juni 2006 21:48 |
|
What about the word "when" don't you understand? And when there not playing
well -----.
She needs to learn how to handle the flat stick when under any situation.
"Rude Dog" <never [at] mind.com> wrote in message
news:128bhu2j05vjo79 [at] corp.supernews.com...
> "Rick" <hchiava1 [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:YTdhg.3033$Oh1.963 [at] news01.roc.ny...
>> Not when they are winning or playing well!!!!
>>
>
> Exactly. Do you make the same number of putts from inside 12 feet each
> round you play? I believe I can answer that for you ... "no". You seem to
> think that pros don't have on and off days just like anybody else.
>
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066921 ] |
Mi, 07 Juni 2006 00:59 |
|
"R.V. Kint" <rvkint [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
news:barhd2yqsyz.fsf [at] server007.serverquality.com...
> "Dave Lee" <DaveLeeNC [at] ix.netcom.RemovE.com> writes:
>
> > "Rick" <hchiava1 [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:rr6hg.2902$oa1.1716 [at] news02.roc.ny...
> > > I think Leadbetter needs to get together with Pelz and get her some
> > serious
> > > putting help. She could have qualified easily if she just made half
the
> > > putts inside of twelve feet.
> > >
> > >
> >
> > How badly did Michelle really putt? As I vaguely recall the best putter
on
> > the PGA tour misses half his putts from 9', so missing a goodly number
of
> > 12' and less putts hardly qualifies as bad putting, although missing a
bunch
> > of 4 and 5 footers - a different story.
> >
> > Any good summary stats out there?
>
> No. But you get a shot-by-shot description here:
> http://www.golfweb.com/tournaments/usopen/story/9480303
>
> --
>
> -------------------------------------------
> Roger Kint
> -------------------------------------------
I have a table that defines what I think is good (for me), but achievable,
putting. It defines the number of strokes that I 'should' average to hole
out from every distance from 1' (exactly 1.0 strokes) to 99' (2.5 strokes on
average). Over the past couple years I have averaged a bit more than 1.0
strokes higher than this table over 18 holes.
In a few of the holes in the referenced link I had to guess at the first
putt distance, but I took my best shot at applying my table to Michele's
putting over the final 18 holes at Canoe Brook. It was roughly 0.5 strokes
worse than predicted by the table (so roughly a half stroke better than my
average putting).
So not only can Michelle outdrive me and looks better in those skin tight
black pants she was wearing during the practice rounds, she putts better
than me as well. Damn.
dave
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066925 ] |
Mi, 07 Juni 2006 01:31 |
|
On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 15:06:46 +0000, Rick wrote:
>
> According to the hole by hole on golfweb - she missed an 18", 2 - 3', 2 -
> 8', 2 - 10', 1 - 11', 1 - 12'. That's 9 inside of 12'. She should have
> made the 18" & 2 - 3' putts. Of the 6 left - she only needed to make 2 of
> them to get into the playoff & 3 to definitely qualify.
I think nearly everybody in this newsgroup has an inflated opinion of the
putting skills of professional golfers. Yes, they're much better than we
are, but let's look at one of the putting stats kept by pgatour.com.
One of the stats kept for tour pros is Average Distance of Putts Made.
They count the 1-inch tap ins all the way up through those incredible
95-foot miracle putts. Average Distance of Putts Made. Think about it
for a minute. Make a guess to yourself as to what the highest average on
the PGA Tour is. Then scroll down for the surprising answer:
Chris Smith is the number one putter in terms of Average Distance of Putts
Made. His average is 4'9". The guy averages less than 5 feet, and he
has the highest average on tour! They track 190 golfers there, so the
middle of the pack is #85. That guy's average is 4'1". 49 inches. The
worst average on tour belongs to Mark Brooks. He averages 3'5" on putts
made.
Now, given this information, is it reasonable to expect Michelle Wie to
have made enough of those putts under 12' to have made the cut? Let's
look at it, based on the quoted distances:
18" -- all but a gimme; she should have made it.
2 3-footers -- she should have made at least one of those, and probably
both.
2 8-footers -- now we're into much more difficult territory. It's not
unreasonable to think she might make one or even both of these, but no
one should be surprised by 2 misses.
2 10-footers -- same as 8, really. And the same goes for the 11-footer
and 12-footer she missed.
The average distance of these missed putts is 7'5". That is way, way, WAY
higher than the highest average on tour, so it is obviously ridiculous
to list all of these as putts she should have made. She missed getting
in a playoff by 5 strokes, so let's say she made the 18" putt and the two
3-foot putts. She still needs to make two more putts out of the remaining
six listed above. Just to give her the lowest average possible, let's say
she made the two 8-footers. That gives her the 5 strokes she needed to
get in the playoff for the last spot.
2 8-footers
2 3-footers
1 1.5-footer
Average distance for the 5 shortest putts listed: 4'8". If she had made
those 5 putts, that average would have been good enough for #3 on the PGA
Tour list.
So, is it reasonable to have expected her to make them? Not really. But
it's only 5 putts, so it wouldn't have been shocking if she had made them.
We (and Michelle, herself) would have called it an outstanding putting
day, and history might have been made (if she had won the playoff).
But there is a coulda, woulda, shoulda, in every round everybody plays.
Look up your favorite golfers here:
http://www.pgatour.com/stats/leaders/r/2006/438
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066927 ] |
Mi, 07 Juni 2006 01:45 |
|
On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 12:07:03 +0000, jeffc wrote:
>
> "Buford Ressup" <buford [at] home.invalid> wrote in message
> news:pan.2006.06.06.11.17.33.187406 [at] home.invalid...
>> On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 03:15:35 +0000, Rick wrote:
>>
>>> I think Leadbetter needs to get together with Pelz and get her some
>>> serious putting help. She could have qualified easily if she just made
>>> half the putts inside of twelve feet.
>>
>> And I could have shot even par Sunday if I had done that. Instead, I
>> shot 79. What's your point, exactly?
>
> That you need some putting practice too?
Actually, I'm a pretty good putter and I had it working Sunday.
The Average Distance of Putts Made for the #1 guy on tour in that
statistic is 4'9". 57 inches. I think almost everyone on here has a
highly inaccurate opinion of the putting skills of pros. They're way
better than us, yes, but just because we SEE them making 10 footers all
the time doesn't mean they DO make them all the time. Actually, they miss
most of them, just like we do. We just miss a much higher percentage than
they do.
It really isn't reasonable to expect Michelle to make all those 8, 10, and
12 footers she missed. How many did she *make*? What was her
overall average? I'll bet it wasn't that bad at all.
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066930 ] |
Mi, 07 Juni 2006 01:59 |
|
"Buford Ressup" <buford [at] home.invalid> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.06.06.23.31.00.448738 [at] home.invalid...
> On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 15:06:46 +0000, Rick wrote:
>
> >
> > According to the hole by hole on golfweb - she missed an 18", 2 - 3',
2 -
> > 8', 2 - 10', 1 - 11', 1 - 12'. That's 9 inside of 12'. She should have
> > made the 18" & 2 - 3' putts. Of the 6 left - she only needed to make 2
of
> > them to get into the playoff & 3 to definitely qualify.
>
> I think nearly everybody in this newsgroup has an inflated opinion of the
> putting skills of professional golfers. Yes, they're much better than we
> are, but let's look at one of the putting stats kept by pgatour.com.
>
> One of the stats kept for tour pros is Average Distance of Putts Made.
> They count the 1-inch tap ins all the way up through those incredible
> 95-foot miracle putts. Average Distance of Putts Made. Think about it
> for a minute. Make a guess to yourself as to what the highest average on
> the PGA Tour is. Then scroll down for the surprising answer:
>
> snip
>
>
>
> Chris Smith is the number one putter in terms of Average Distance of Putts
> Made. His average is 4'9". The guy averages less than 5 feet, and he
> has the highest average on tour! They track 190 golfers there, so the
> middle of the pack is #85. That guy's average is 4'1". 49 inches. The
> worst average on tour belongs to Mark Brooks. He averages 3'5" on putts
> made.
>
> Now, given this information, is it reasonable to expect Michelle Wie to
> have made enough of those putts under 12' to have made the cut? Let's
> look at it, based on the quoted distances:
>
> 18" -- all but a gimme; she should have made it.
> 2 3-footers -- she should have made at least one of those, and probably
> both.
> 2 8-footers -- now we're into much more difficult territory. It's not
> unreasonable to think she might make one or even both of these, but no
> one should be surprised by 2 misses.
>
> 2 10-footers -- same as 8, really. And the same goes for the 11-footer
> and 12-footer she missed.
>
> The average distance of these missed putts is 7'5". That is way, way, WAY
> higher than the highest average on tour, so it is obviously ridiculous
> to list all of these as putts she should have made. She missed getting
> in a playoff by 5 strokes, so let's say she made the 18" putt and the two
> 3-foot putts. She still needs to make two more putts out of the remaining
> six listed above. Just to give her the lowest average possible, let's say
> she made the two 8-footers. That gives her the 5 strokes she needed to
> get in the playoff for the last spot.
>
> 2 8-footers
> 2 3-footers
> 1 1.5-footer
>
> Average distance for the 5 shortest putts listed: 4'8". If she had made
> those 5 putts, that average would have been good enough for #3 on the PGA
> Tour list.
>
> So, is it reasonable to have expected her to make them? Not really. But
> it's only 5 putts, so it wouldn't have been shocking if she had made them.
> We (and Michelle, herself) would have called it an outstanding putting
> day, and history might have been made (if she had won the playoff).
>
> But there is a coulda, woulda, shoulda, in every round everybody plays.
>
> Look up your favorite golfers here:
> http://www.pgatour.com/stats/leaders/r/2006/438
IMHO, this just isn't a useful statistic (average length of made putts). The
greatest lag putter in the history of the world is at a huge disadvantage
against 'the field' (too many itty-bitty putts).
dave
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066933 ] |
Mi, 07 Juni 2006 02:06 |
|
On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 23:59:59 GMT, "Dave Lee"
<DaveLeeNC [at] ix.netcom.RemovE.com> wrote:
>
>"Buford Ressup" <buford [at] home.invalid> wrote in message
>news:pan.2006.06.06.23.31.00.448738 [at] home.invalid...
>> On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 15:06:46 +0000, Rick wrote:
<clip>
>> One of the stats kept for tour pros is Average Distance of Putts Made.
>> They count the 1-inch tap ins all the way up through those incredible
>> 95-foot miracle putts. Average Distance of Putts Made. Think about it
>> for a minute. Make a guess to yourself as to what the highest average on
>> the PGA Tour is. Then scroll down for the surprising answer:
>>
>> snip
<clip>
>IMHO, this just isn't a useful statistic (average length of made putts). The
>greatest lag putter in the history of the world is at a huge disadvantage
>against 'the field' (too many itty-bitty putts).
>
>dave
>
I agree. The average distance doesn't take into account that 13
footer that HAS to be made to win, or even make the cut. Also, as
Dave points out, if someone only needs two putts to win a tournament
you can bet that the first one won't be really bold, and that skews
the average.
___,
\o
|
/ \
.
"Someone likes every shot"!
bk
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066940 ] |
Mi, 07 Juni 2006 02:49 |
|
"Buford Ressup" <buford [at] home.invalid> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.06.06.23.31.00.448738 [at] home.invalid...
> On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 15:06:46 +0000, Rick wrote:
>
>>
>> According to the hole by hole on golfweb - she missed an 18", 2 - 3', 2 -
>> 8', 2 - 10', 1 - 11', 1 - 12'. That's 9 inside of 12'. She should have
>> made the 18" & 2 - 3' putts. Of the 6 left - she only needed to make 2
>> of
>> them to get into the playoff & 3 to definitely qualify.
> Now, given this information, is it reasonable to expect Michelle Wie to
> have made enough of those putts under 12' to have made the cut? Let's
> look at it, based on the quoted distances:
>
> 18" -- all but a gimme; she should have made it.
> 2 3-footers -- she should have made at least one of those, and probably
> both.
> 2 8-footers -- now we're into much more difficult territory. It's not
> unreasonable to think she might make one or even both of these, but no
> one should be surprised by 2 misses.
>
> 2 10-footers -- same as 8, really. And the same goes for the 11-footer
> and 12-footer she missed.
>
> The average distance of these missed putts is 7'5". That is way, way, WAY
> higher than the highest average on tour, so it is obviously ridiculous
> to list all of these as putts she should have made. She missed getting
> in a playoff by 5 strokes, so let's say she made the 18" putt and the two
> 3-foot putts. She still needs to make two more putts out of the remaining
> six listed above. Just to give her the lowest average possible, let's say
> she made the two 8-footers. That gives her the 5 strokes she needed to
> get in the playoff for the last spot.
>
> 2 8-footers
> 2 3-footers
> 1 1.5-footer
>
> Average distance for the 5 shortest putts listed: 4'8". If she had made
> those 5 putts, that average would have been good enough for #3 on the PGA
> Tour list.
>
> So, is it reasonable to have expected her to make them? Not really. But
> it's only 5 putts, so it wouldn't have been shocking if she had made them.
> We (and Michelle, herself) would have called it an outstanding putting
> day, and history might have been made (if she had won the playoff).
>
How about averaging all the putts she made for the tournament - not just
these few?
Your trying to make the stats fit your discussion.
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066965 ] |
Mi, 07 Juni 2006 05:45 |
|
She's not even out of puberty. How old was Tiger, anyway, when he qualified
for the US Open for the first time?
"twfsa" <twfuksa [at] qwest.net> wrote in message
news:8mdhg.85602$IZ2.2032 [at] dukeread07...
>I have seen her lead and fold, many times on the last few holes.
> Tom
>
>
> "Rick" <hchiava1 [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:rr6hg.2902$oa1.1716 [at] news02.roc.ny...
>>I think Leadbetter needs to get together with Pelz and get her some
>>serious putting help. She could have qualified easily if she just made
>>half the putts inside of twelve feet.
>>
>>
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066978 ] |
Mi, 07 Juni 2006 11:44 |
|
On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 18:31:00 -0500, Buford Ressup
<buford [at] home.invalid> wrote:
>On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 15:06:46 +0000, Rick wrote:
>
>>
>> According to the hole by hole on golfweb - she missed an 18", 2 - 3', 2 -
>> 8', 2 - 10', 1 - 11', 1 - 12'. That's 9 inside of 12'. She should have
>> made the 18" & 2 - 3' putts. Of the 6 left - she only needed to make 2 of
>> them to get into the playoff & 3 to definitely qualify.
>
>I think nearly everybody in this newsgroup has an inflated opinion of the
>putting skills of professional golfers. Yes, they're much better than we
>are, but let's look at one of the putting stats kept by pgatour.com.
>
>One of the stats kept for tour pros is Average Distance of Putts Made.
>They count the 1-inch tap ins all the way up through those incredible
>95-foot miracle putts. Average Distance of Putts Made. Think about it
>for a minute. Make a guess to yourself as to what the highest average on
>the PGA Tour is. Then scroll down for the surprising answer:
You totally underestimate the putting skills of the pros. They make
many more putts than you give them credit for. If they don't make
putts, they don't win. It is that simple. Did you miss Lumpy making
putts from everywhere to hold on and win a few weeks ago? Did not hit
the ball worth a lick--actually drove the ball worse than many golfers
in RSG. The next week, while still driving the ball worse than many
golfers here, he was in contention--until his putting went south.
Also, when you look at how the leaders and winners putt on a a given
weekend, typically you see a stat that shows that they are making more
than 80% of putts within 10 feet. The pros putt so much better than
you do. I actually had a chance to play with a couple of pros who
played the european tour some years ago and the difference was night
and day--and I was considered to be one of the best putters at the
club, consistently winning a lot of money in our unofficial putting
contests. One of the pros played in the final group with Woosname at
the Irish Open that year--damn he could hit a golf ball.
Wie is not really a very good putter. That problem needs to be
addressed. She is still young and I predict that in another year her
putting will have greatly improved.
David
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1066985 ] |
Mi, 07 Juni 2006 13:03 |
|
On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 23:59:59 +0000, Dave Lee wrote:
> IMHO, this just isn't a useful statistic (average length of made putts).
> The greatest lag putter in the history of the world is at a huge
> disadvantage against 'the field' (too many itty-bitty putts).
This is a good point, but there are still many 8 and 10 foot putts in
every tournament that could bring their average back up...if they make
them. If they barely miss that 8-footer and leave a 2-inch putt, that
pushes their average down. Over the course of a season, or even a few
tournaments, this actually is a pretty useful statistic. It doesn't tell
the whole putting story, obviously, but it's still useful. The greatest
lag putter in the history of the world will still have plenty of 10 foot
chances. Every one he misses, leaving himself with a tap-in, drives down
his average. Every 15-footer he makes brings it right back up.
I'm thinking that this statistic is a fairly good indicator of who the
best mid-range putters are. The guys who make a lot of their 8-12 foot
putts keep their averages high. The guys who aren't taking good advantage
of those makeable putts end up with 3-inch tap-ins that kill their
average.
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1067002 ] |
Mi, 07 Juni 2006 15:20 |
|
Dave Lee wrote:
[snip]
> IMHO, this just isn't a useful statistic (average length of made putts). The
> greatest lag putter in the history of the world is at a huge disadvantage
> against 'the field' (too many itty-bitty putts).
Putting statistics are tough for a variety of reasons, not the least
of
which is that they can be as dependent upon the short game as
anything else. "The greatest lag putter in history" only has too
many "itty-bitty putts" if he finds himself having to lag alot, which
probably shows a need for short game improvement more than
anything. They guy that has a putting average of 7 foot may have
alot of opportunities between 5 and 10 feet. Lefty may have
a lousy average because he gives himself so many short
putt opportunities with great chips. The stat that may make
more sense is the average length of the LAST TWO strokes
regardless of whether they are putts. But even that is a bit
deceiving because the guy that misses the green may have a
great average compared to the guy that doesn't.
It might be interesting to compare lengths of putt for particular
scorses. Average length of putt for par, for birdie, for bogey, that
kind of thing.
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1067010 ] |
Mi, 07 Juni 2006 15:57 |
|
I wonder how good the Tour pros would be if their greens were as slow
as average non-tour greens.
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1067011 ] |
Mi, 07 Juni 2006 15:58 |
|
On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 19:06:39 -0500, Bobby Knight <bknight [at] conramp.net>
wrote:
>I agree. The average distance doesn't take into account that 13
>footer that HAS to be made to win, or even make the cut. Also, as
>Dave points out, if someone only needs two putts to win a tournament
>you can bet that the first one won't be really bold, and that skews
>the average.
What would work better is the distance where half of the putts are
missed.
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1067012 ] |
Mi, 07 Juni 2006 16:05 |
|
On Wed, 07 Jun 2006 11:44:16 +0200, David <dgold1958 [at] yahoo.de> wrote:
> You totally underestimate the putting skills of the pros. They make
>many more putts than you give them credit for. If they don't make
>putts, they don't win.
Since they play against each other, such a measure (they win) is
relative.
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1067042 ] |
Mi, 07 Juni 2006 17:18 |
|
Frank Ketchum wrote:
> "Rick" <hchiava1 [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:rr6hg.2902$oa1.1716 [at] news02.roc.ny...
> >I think Leadbetter needs to get together with Pelz and get her some serious
> >putting help. She could have qualified easily if she just made half the
> >putts inside of twelve feet.
> >
>
> Why? The first thing Pelz is gonna tell her is that the distance at which
> professionals make 50% of their putts is 6 feet.
Frank, LOL :) That means she'll have to add 7 extra wedges to get
within the golden 8 more often.
Caddie, I believe this requires the 76* wedge...
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1067120 ] |
Mi, 07 Juni 2006 20:11 |
|
"Buford Ressup" <buford [at] home.invalid> wrote in message
news:pan.2006.06.07.11.03.47.448868 [at] home.invalid...
> On Tue, 06 Jun 2006 23:59:59 +0000, Dave Lee wrote:
>
>
> > IMHO, this just isn't a useful statistic (average length of made putts).
> > The greatest lag putter in the history of the world is at a huge
> > disadvantage against 'the field' (too many itty-bitty putts).
>
> This is a good point, but there are still many 8 and 10 foot putts in
> every tournament that could bring their average back up...if they make
> them. If they barely miss that 8-footer and leave a 2-inch putt, that
> pushes their average down. Over the course of a season, or even a few
> tournaments, this actually is a pretty useful statistic. It doesn't tell
> the whole putting story, obviously, but it's still useful. The greatest
> lag putter in the history of the world will still have plenty of 10 foot
> chances. Every one he misses, leaving himself with a tap-in, drives down
> his average. Every 15-footer he makes brings it right back up.
>
> I'm thinking that this statistic is a fairly good indicator of who the
> best mid-range putters are. The guys who make a lot of their 8-12 foot
> putts keep their averages high. The guys who aren't taking good advantage
> of those makeable putts end up with 3-inch tap-ins that kill their
> average.
>
What would help that stat a bunch would be to take some 'low cutoff value'
like 3' for the pros. Every putt of 3' or less is the same number - probably
3'.
dave
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1067184 ] |
Mi, 07 Juni 2006 23:30 |
|
I believe number was 97.1 percent for Fred Couples inside 3 feet. I could
be wrong.
"Steve" <stevenospamplease [at] comcast.com> wrote in message
news:gY6dnTGZnLykWxjZnZ2dnUVZ_tydnZ2d [at] speakeasy.net...
>
> "Rick" <hchiava1 [at] gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:rr6hg.2902$oa1.1716 [at] news02.roc.ny...
>>I think Leadbetter needs to get together with Pelz and get her some
>>serious putting help. She could have qualified easily if she just made
>>half the putts inside of twelve feet.
>>
>>
> I would suggest she see Rottela before Pelz. She has a history of melt
> down once things get down to crunch time. 2005 Womens Open 80+ in the
> final round after starting T1, 2005 JDC inside the cut line with something
> like 4 holes to play and making a double, the Asian event last year when
> she went bogey, bogey on the last two holes to miss the cut by 1. Missing
> a playoff by one in both of her LPGA starts this year when she had makable
> putts on 18 in both cases and of course the late bogey streak yesterday at
> the end of round 2.
>
> As far as putts, there was some stat that said the worst putter on the PGA
> tour from 3 feet or less last year or maybe the year before was Fred
> Couples and I do not remember what his percentage was but it was extremely
> high.
>
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1067277 ] |
Do, 08 Juni 2006 09:37 |
|
On Wed, 07 Jun 2006 08:05:31 -0600, Howard Brazee <howard [at] brazee.net>
wrote:
>On Wed, 07 Jun 2006 11:44:16 +0200, David <dgold1958 [at] yahoo.de> wrote:
>
>> You totally underestimate the putting skills of the pros. They make
>>many more putts than you give them credit for. If they don't make
>>putts, they don't win.
>
>Since they play against each other, such a measure (they win) is
>relative.
Sorry, Howard, not quite sure what this is supposed to mean.
>
> Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
>----------------------------------------------------------
> ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
>----------------------------------------------------------
> http://www.usenet.com
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1067280 ] |
Do, 08 Juni 2006 12:15 |
|
> Look up your favorite golfers here:
> http://www.pgatour.com/stats/leaders/r/2006/438
How did you find this? None of the links on the left side seem to lead
here. I'd like to see a chart of % made at various distances like 3, 4,
5, 6, 7, and 8 feet. I imagine it would be upper 90's for 3 feet, then
decrease. What distance would the average be 50%?
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1067282 ] |
Do, 08 Juni 2006 12:35 |
|
On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 03:15:24 -0700, zumafan wrote:
>> Look up your favorite golfers here:
>> http://www.pgatour.com/stats/leaders/r/2006/438
>
> How did you find this? None of the links on the left side seem to lead
> here.
If you click on a golfer's name, it takes you to their personal stats
page. You can click on any of the stats to get a sorted list for that
statistic.
> I'd like to see a chart of % made at various distances like 3, 4, 5,
> 6, 7, and 8 feet. I imagine it would be upper 90's for 3 feet, then
> decrease.
I'd like to see that, too. They keep a few putting statistics, but as
several RSGers have pointed out, none of them really tells the whole
putting tale.
> What distance would the average be 50%?
*That* one would be fascinating. Just sitting here trying to think about
it and trying to be brutally honest with myself, I think my own 50% mark
would be somewhere between 5 and 7 feet. But then, I don't have to
contend with the greens those guys putt on. It might be more like 3 or 4
feet on those courses. Or worse.
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1067284 ] |
Do, 08 Juni 2006 13:07 |
|
On Wed, 07 Jun 2006 00:49:51 +0000, Rick wrote:
>
> How about averaging all the putts she made for the tournament - not just
> these few?
Too much work, but I'd like to see that statistic, too.
> Your trying to make the stats fit your discussion.
Very possible, but I'm not aware of it and I'm really trying not to. I'm
only using the statistics others have posted.
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1067293 ] |
Do, 08 Juni 2006 15:03 |
|
Buford Ressup wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 03:15:24 -0700, zumafan wrote:
>
> >> Look up your favorite golfers here:
> >> http://www.pgatour.com/stats/leaders/r/2006/438
> >
> > How did you find this? None of the links on the left side seem to lead
> > here.
>
> If you click on a golfer's name, it takes you to their personal stats
> page. You can click on any of the stats to get a sorted list for that
> statistic.
BRILLIANT! Thanks for that. Here's a cool putting stat:
Deadly with the flat stick
During his win at the Memorial Tournament, Carl Pettersson made 95% of
his putts from 10 feet or less (59-of-62).
Errr...that's pretty good.
This stat is pretty cool too: Proximity from fairway. The top 5
(Mickelson, Woods, Sindelar, Verplank and DiMarco) are all 25 to 26
feet. Maybe my expectations of hitting it close are too high if the the
best tour players have that much dispersion.
http://www.pgatour.com/stats/leaders/r/2006/431
|
|
|
| Re: Michelle [message #1067316 ] |
Do, 08 Juni 2006 16:25 |
|
On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 09:37:23 +0200, David <dgold1958 [at] yahoo.de> wrote:
>>
>>> You totally underestimate the putting skills of the pros. They make
>>>many more putts than you give them credit for. If they don't make
>>>putts, they don't win.
>>
>>Since they play against each other, such a measure (they win) is
>>relative.
>
> Sorry, Howard, not quite sure what this is supposed to mean.
Some win, some lose. The winners usually putt better than the
losers.
The percentage of pro players who win in a 100 person tournament is
less than the percentage of Men's Club players who win in a 30 person
tournament, so this isn't a meaningful measurement to determine how
well they are putting.
|
|
|
Gehe zu:
aktuelle Zeit: Sa Jul 31 02:39:05 CEST 2010
Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,06746 Sekunden |
