| |
Main
Date: 02 Oct 2006 03:12:33
From: Tim
Subject: Lies, damned lies, and ...
|
Statistics.
Some have bemoaned Tiger's disinterest in securing the Vardon trophy,
but I think this is a statistic that ought to be ignored, if not
abandoned entirely. The difficulty of golf courses varies so much from
course to course, and even from day to day, that a simple scoring
average is all but meaningless.
A much more meaningful statistic could be calculated as a percentage of
the average score for that day. If the average score for all players
is 73, and the player shoots 70, then he scores 95.9% for that day.
(70/73) This would scarcely be more difficult to calculate than the
average of a player's raw score, and would give a much better overall
measure of his scoring ability.
Even this would favor the player who chooses to play in tournaments
with softer fields, but it would be more accurate than the current
Vardon trophy. Maybe some math genius could devise a way to equalize
the strength of the field, as well as the difficulty of the course.
Putts per GIR is also a misleading statistic. A great iron player might
have fewer putts per GIR than a poor iron player who is actually a
great putter. (Sand saves is a similar situation.) There are other
statistics that are equally flawed, such as driving distance. In fact,
the only measure I can think of that is perfectly accurate is money
earned, because that is the object of the game.
Tim
|
|
| |
Date: 02 Oct 2006 05:14:58
From: multi
Subject: Re: Lies, damned lies, and ...
|
On 2 Oct 2006 03:12:33 -0700, "Tim" <delaney.timothy@comcast.net >
wrote:
>There are other
>statistics that are equally flawed, such as driving distance. In fact,
>the only measure I can think of that is perfectly accurate is money
>earned, because that is the object of the game.
Couldn't agree more. And that's why Charles Howell III is more than
twice as good as Jack Nicklaus.
|
| |
Date: 02 Oct 2006 05:09:26
From: multi
Subject: Re: Lies, damned lies, and ...
|
On 2 Oct 2006 03:12:33 -0700, "Tim" <delaney.timothy@comcast.net >
wrote:
>Some have bemoaned Tiger's disinterest in securing the Vardon trophy,
>but I think this is a statistic that ought to be ignored, if not
>abandoned entirely. The difficulty of golf courses varies so much from
>course to course, and even from day to day, that a simple scoring
>average is all but meaningless.
>
>A much more meaningful statistic could be calculated as a percentage of
>the average score for that day. If the average score for all players
>is 73, and the player shoots 70, then he scores 95.9% for that day.
>(70/73) This would scarcely be more difficult to calculate than the
>average of a player's raw score, and would give a much better overall
>measure of his scoring ability.
So you're saying they should award the Vardon based on an *adjusted*
scoring average? That's the craziest idea I've ever heard. Hmmm,
maybe it's just crazy enough to work!
|
|
