Opinion & Analysis
The stats behind Phil Mickelson’s switch to Andrew Getson

It was big news in the golf instruction industry when Phil Mickelson decided to part ways with long-time coach Butch Harmon and hired Andrew Getson to take over. Mickelson was not exactly performing poorly by normal Tour standards, as he made 16 out of 19 cuts and finished 48th in Adjusted Scoring Average for the season. But Mickelson’s seasons are judged by victories and performance in the majors, and Phil may have felt that there was a need to change after two winless seasons.
As a golf statistician, I wanted to look at Phil’s performance from this past season along with his performance in his most recent “big” season, 2013, when he won the British Open, finished 12th in Adjusted Scoring Average and earned nearly $5.5 million. I would assume that performance in 2013 is something that Phil wants to get back to.
While the two most important metrics in the chart above are Par-4 Scoring Average and Bogey Rate, it’s always good to look at all of the metrics to help paint a more clear picture of what is going on with the golfer’s game. In Phil’s case, the drop-off in Par-4 Scoring Average and Bogey rate is dramatic and needs to be addressed.
For most of Phil’s career, he’s been a great iron player and a weak driver of the ball with fantastic ability to get up-and-down. So I would immediately wonder how his typical game is playing a factor in this decline in performance. The silver lining in all of this, however, is that he can still make a lot of birdies.
DRIVING DATA
The driving metrics are interesting because the only sub-category of metrics that Phil was better in this season was driving distance. He ended up 74th in Driving Effectiveness, however, the main reason being is that Mickelson ranked third in terms of driving difficulty schedule. I have found it easy for a Tour player to fall in the trap of thinking he is not performing well in a certain area of the game when the reality is that the difficulty has amplified. He can actually be doing well in terms of his performance versus the rest of the field.
For instance, TPC Summerlin is one of the most difficult courses to hit short-game shots (inside 30 yards) on the entire Tour schedule. Thus, I remind my clients to not get too down on themselves if they are not hitting their short-game shots close. The make percentage on the greens is higher, too, so they can save par anyway. This may have been a problem for Phil. He may have felt that his driving performance was not improving, but in reality the conditions and course designs were more difficult than they have been in the past.
APPROACH SHOT DATA
Iron play has usually been Phil’s greatest strength, and it was on display in the 2013 season. It is becoming a weakness now, however. The drop-off is larger from 100-150 yards, but the smart move would be to work on his performance from 175-225 yards, because that will have a bigger influence on lowering his scores.
And just so we can make sure that his drop in iron play is not due to missing more fairways, here is his performance from the fairway versus the rough.
Also, there was a new metric that I started to record this year: Scoring Average on Dogleg Left Holes versus Dogleg Right Holes versus Straight-Away Par-4’s (adjusted based on hole difficulty).
I find these metrics interesting. Phil’s overall driving has improved, but while he hits a ball that curves from right-to-left his performance on the DogLeg left Par-4’s is much worse.
While I am in the initial stages of studying the doglegs versus the straight-away par-4’s, the initial analysis shows that more of the very long Par-4’s (460+ yards) tend to be DogLeg left holes. With Phil’s performance from 150-225 yards regressing, that may explain why he has struggled on the dogleg left par-4’s this past season. And that regression on longer approach shots would help explain his struggles on the par-3’s, as par-3 play is one part iron play, one part short game and one part putting outside 20-feet.
SHORT GAME DATA
Phil’s Total Short Game performance has regressed mainly because he has regressed most from the most important distance, 10-20 yards. This would play a bigger factor in his struggles on the Par-3’s and his ability to avoid bogeys on the Par-4’s. Essentially, he is not hitting as many GIR because of his iron play, and cannot hit his short game shots close enough to put himself in good position to save par.
PUTTING DATA
Phil still putted well in 2015, so I don’t think that is a big issue. In fact, the history on Tour shows he was not likely to sustain his putting from outside 15-feet regardless of what he did after the 2013 season.
I expect Phil to continue to work on his driving, which is not necessarily a bad idea. However, he made nearly $5.5 million and won a major while driving the ball poorly in 2013. I think the better move is to focus on getting his iron play back, particularly from 150-225 yards, and see if they can regain his old short game form.
Opinion & Analysis
The 2 primary challenges golf equipment companies face

As the editor-in-chief of this website and an observer of the GolfWRX forums and other online golf equipment discourse for over a decade, I’m pretty well attuned to the grunts and grumbles of a significant portion of the golf equipment purchasing spectrum. And before you accuse me of lording above all in some digital ivory tower, I’d like to offer that I worked at golf courses (public and private) for years prior to picking up my pen, so I’m well-versed in the non-degenerate golf equipment consumers out there. I touched (green)grass (retail)!
Complaints about the ills of and related to the OEMs usually follow some version of: Product cycles are too short for real innovation, tour equipment isn’t the same as retail (which is largely not true, by the way), too much is invested in marketing and not enough in R&D, top staffer X hasn’t even put the new driver in play, so it’s obviously not superior to the previous generation, prices are too high, and on and on.
Without digging into the merits of any of these claims, which I believe are mostly red herrings, I’d like to bring into view of our rangefinder what I believe to be the two primary difficulties golf equipment companies face.
One: As Terry Koehler, back when he was the CEO of Ben Hogan, told me at the time of the Ft Worth irons launch, if you can’t regularly hit the golf ball in a coin-sized area in the middle of the face, there’s not a ton that iron technology can do for you. Now, this is less true now with respect to irons than when he said it, and is less and less true by degrees as the clubs get larger (utilities, fairways, hybrids, drivers), but there remains a great deal of golf equipment truth in that statement. Think about it — which is to say, in TL;DR fashion, get lessons from a qualified instructor who will teach you about the fundamentals of repeatable impact and how the golf swing works, not just offer band-aid fixes. If you can’t repeatably deliver the golf club to the golf ball in something resembling the manner it was designed for, how can you expect to be getting the most out of the club — put another way, the maximum value from your investment?
Similarly, game improvement equipment can only improve your game if you game it. In other words, get fit for the clubs you ought to be playing rather than filling the bag with the ones you wish you could hit or used to be able to hit. Of course, don’t do this if you don’t care about performance and just want to hit a forged blade while playing off an 18 handicap. That’s absolutely fine. There were plenty of members in clubs back in the day playing Hogan Apex or Mizuno MP-32 irons who had no business doing so from a ballstriking standpoint, but they enjoyed their look, feel, and complementary qualities to their Gatsby hats and cashmere sweaters. Do what brings you a measure of joy in this maddening game.
Now, the second issue. This is not a plea for non-conforming equipment; rather, it is a statement of fact. USGA/R&A limits on every facet of golf equipment are detrimental to golf equipment manufacturers. Sure, you know this, but do you think about it as it applies to almost every element of equipment? A 500cc driver would be inherently more forgiving than a 460cc, as one with a COR measurement in excess of 0.83. 50-inch shafts. Box grooves. And on and on.
Would fewer regulations be objectively bad for the game? Would this erode its soul? Fortunately, that’s beside the point of this exercise, which is merely to point out the facts. The fact, in this case, is that equipment restrictions and regulations are the slaughterbench of an abundance of innovation in the golf equipment space. Is this for the best? Well, now I’ve asked the question twice and might as well give a partial response, I guess my answer to that would be, “It depends on what type of golf you’re playing and who you’re playing it with.”
For my part, I don’t mind embarrassing myself with vintage blades and persimmons chasing after the quasi-spiritual elevation of a well-struck shot, but that’s just me. Plenty of folks don’t give a damn if their grooves are conforming. Plenty of folks think the folks in Liberty Corner ought to add a prison to the museum for such offences. And those are just a few of the considerations for the amateur game — which doesn’t get inside the gallery ropes of the pro game…
Different strokes in the game of golf, in my humble opinion.
Anyway, I believe equipment company engineers are genuinely trying to build better equipment year over year. The marketing departments are trying to find ways to make this equipment appeal to the broadest segment of the golf market possible. All of this against (1) the backdrop of — at least for now — firm product cycles. And golfers who, with their ~15 average handicap (men), for the most part, are not striping the golf ball like Tiger in his prime and seem to have less and less time year over year to practice and improve. (2) Regulations that massively restrict what they’re able to do…
That’s the landscape as I see it and the real headwinds for golf equipment companies. No doubt, there’s more I haven’t considered, but I think the previous is a better — and better faith — point of departure when formulating any serious commentary on the golf equipment world than some of the more cynical and conspiratorial takes I hear.
Agree? Disagree? Think I’m worthy of an Adam Hadwin-esque security guard tackle? Let me know in the comments.
@golfoncbs The infamous Adam Hadwin tackle ? #golf #fyp #canada #pgatour #adamhadwin ? Ghibli-style nostalgic waltz – MaSssuguMusic
Podcasts
Fore Love of Golf: Introducing a new club concept

Episode #16 brings us Cliff McKinney. Cliff is the founder of Old Charlie Golf Club, a new club, and concept, to be built in the Florida panhandle. The model is quite interesting and aims to make great, private golf more affordable. We hope you enjoy the show!
Opinion & Analysis
On Scottie Scheffler wondering ‘What’s the point of winning?’

Last week, I came across a reel from BBC Sport on Instagram featuring Scottie Scheffler speaking to the media ahead of The Open at Royal Portrush. In it, he shared that he often wonders what the point is of wanting to win tournaments so badly — especially when he knows, deep down, that it doesn’t lead to a truly fulfilling life.
View this post on Instagram
“Is it great to be able to win tournaments and to accomplish the things I have in the game of golf? Yeah, it brings tears to my eyes just to think about it because I’ve literally worked my entire life to be good at this sport,” Scheffler said. “To have that kind of sense of accomplishment, I think, is a pretty cool feeling. To get to live out your dreams is very special, but at the end of the day, I’m not out here to inspire the next generation of golfers. I’m not out here to inspire someone to be the best player in the world, because what’s the point?”
Ironically — or perhaps perfectly — he went on to win the claret jug.
That question — what’s the point of winning? — cuts straight to the heart of the human journey.
As someone who’s spent over two decades in the trenches of professional golf, and in deep study of the mental, emotional, and spiritual dimensions of the game, I see Scottie’s inner conflict as a sign of soul evolution in motion.
I came to golf late. I wasn’t a junior standout or college All-American. At 27, I left a steady corporate job to see if I could be on the PGA Tour starting as a 14-handicap, average-length hitter. Over the years, my journey has been defined less by trophies and more by the relentless effort to navigate the deeply inequitable and gated system of professional golf — an effort that ultimately turned inward and helped me evolve as both a golfer and a person.
One perspective that helped me make sense of this inner dissonance around competition and our culture’s tendency to overvalue winning is the idea of soul evolution.
The University of Virginia’s Division of Perceptual Studies has done extensive research on reincarnation, and Netflix’s Surviving Death (Episode 6) explores the topic, too. Whether you take it literally or metaphorically, the idea that we’re on a long arc of growth — from beginner to sage elder — offers a profound perspective.
If you accept the premise literally, then terms like “young soul” and “old soul” start to hold meaning. However, even if we set the word “soul” aside, it’s easy to see that different levels of life experience produce different worldviews.
Newer souls — or people in earlier stages of their development — may be curious and kind but still lack discernment or depth. There is a naivety, and they don’t yet question as deeply, tending to see things in black and white, partly because certainty feels safer than confronting the unknown.
As we gain more experience, we begin to experiment. We test limits. We chase extreme external goals — sometimes at the expense of health, relationships, or inner peace — still operating from hunger, ambition, and the fragility of the ego.
It’s a necessary stage, but often a turbulent and unfulfilling one.
David Duval fell off the map after reaching World No. 1. Bubba Watson had his own “Is this it?” moment with his caddie, Ted Scott, after winning the Masters.
In Aaron Rodgers: Enigma, reflecting on his 2011 Super Bowl win, Rodgers said:
“Now I’ve accomplished the only thing that I really, really wanted to do in my life. Now what? I was like, ‘Did I aim at the wrong thing? Did I spend too much time thinking about stuff that ultimately doesn’t give you true happiness?’”
Jim Carrey once said, “I think everybody should get rich and famous and do everything they ever dreamed of so they can see that it’s not the answer.”
Eventually, though, something shifts.
We begin to see in shades of gray. Winning, dominating, accumulating—these pursuits lose their shine. The rewards feel more fleeting. Living in a constant state of fight-or-flight makes us feel alive, yes, but not happy and joyful.
Compassion begins to replace ambition. Love, presence, and gratitude become more fulfilling than status, profits, or trophies. We crave balance over burnout. Collaboration over competition. Meaning over metrics.
Interestingly, if we zoom out, we can apply this same model to nations and cultures. Countries, like people, have a collective “soul stage” made up of the individuals within them.
Take the United States, for example. I’d place it as a mid-level soul: highly competitive and deeply driven, but still learning emotional maturity. Still uncomfortable with nuance. Still believing that more is always better. Despite its global wins, the U.S. currently ranks just 23rd in happiness (as of 2025). You might liken it to a gifted teenager—bold, eager, and ambitious, but angsty and still figuring out how to live well and in balance. As much as a parent wants to protect their child, sometimes the child has to make their own mistakes to truly grow.
So when Scottie Scheffler wonders what the point of winning is, I don’t see someone losing strength.
I see someone evolving.
He’s beginning to look beyond the leaderboard. Beyond metrics of success that carry a lower vibration. And yet, in a poetic twist, Scheffler did go on to win The Open. But that only reinforces the point: even at the pinnacle, the question remains. And if more of us in the golf and sports world — and in U.S. culture at large — started asking similar questions, we might discover that the more meaningful trophy isn’t about accumulating or beating others at all costs.
It’s about awakening and evolving to something more than winning could ever promise.
Steve Allison
Dec 4, 2015 at 10:45 am
Phil needs to get shed of that old timey putter, Please Phil go to Scotty!!
Steve Allison
Dec 4, 2015 at 10:40 am
The best thing Phil needs to do is to get rid of the old timey putter and go to Scotty Cameron and let Scotty make a putter that is right for him.
Jack
Dec 3, 2015 at 9:23 am
Great article. Another good read from Rich! Really interested to see the findings on dog legs. I’m thinking that you may see better scoring with players that shape the ball against the shape of the hole. Ie misses will more likely be on the ‘far side’ of the dog leg!
Pingback: Back Nine News – The Best Golf Stories & Videos of the Week | Golf Science
I'm Ron Burgundy??
Dec 2, 2015 at 2:18 pm
I enjoyed the analysis! It is very interesting to see stuff like this and number do not lie. I wonder how much is rheumatoid arthritis has played into his ability to be able to practice and play as often as he would like? I would assume that someone with his condition has good and bad days.
Richard
Dec 2, 2015 at 5:52 am
Very interesting but with one error which I wish all columnists at Golfwrx would get right. It is The Open NOT The British Open.
Richard
Dec 3, 2015 at 4:06 am
HI Bubba. With respect, please check out the PGA Tour Schedule for 2015/16… http://www.pgatour.com/news/2015/07/30/schedule-release.html
You will see that the PGA tour even call it “The Open Championship”. Calling it the British Open would be like calling The Masters The American Masters as there are various Masters tournements around the world. I know I’m being a golf pedant. 🙂
Bob
Dec 6, 2015 at 2:17 am
Isn’t calling it the British Open more analogous to calling the men’s open tournament run by the USGA the “U.S. Open”?
Bobalu
Dec 1, 2015 at 6:19 pm
RH- Well done. Interesting analysis. Let us know if Phil sees this and gives you any feedback.
Greg V
Dec 1, 2015 at 12:30 pm
Phil won $5.5 million in 2013 based largely on wins at the Scottish Open, Open Championship and a second place finish in the US Open. The keys to his fine play in those three tournaments were Phil’s use of the mini driver off the tee, and fantastic wedge play.
The mini driver and excellent wedge play are really all you need to know about the keys to Phil’s ability to win another major.
Richie Hunt
Dec 1, 2015 at 2:18 pm
Greg V –
I don’t have the data for those specific events because 2 are majors and the other is the Scottish Open which does not count towards those $5.5 million in earnings (PGA Tour only). You will generally find that in the Majors, shots from 175-250 yards matter most if you want to segment them. Driving is typically more important at the US Open than at the British Open. But, wedge play rarely makes a substantial impact. I think from 2013 we can see how elite Phil’s iron play was and I would imagine that it carried over to the British, Scottish and US Opens. In Phil’s years using the mini-driver, his driving still wasn’t very effective.
cgasucks
Dec 1, 2015 at 11:28 am
While I understand why Phil had to change instructors, he has to accept the fact that he’s not the young gun as he once was in the late 90s and early 2000s (Jordan, Rory, Jason and Dustin have that torch now) and his career is on the downswing. He’ll have to accept 10 ten finishes at best while he is old enough for the Champions tour.
HG Wells
Dec 1, 2015 at 11:25 am
I do think we’ve all been waiting for the other shoe to drop with the RA and it’s effect on his game. And of course his age can’t be overlooked, although based on his driving distance he’s still plenty competitive athletically. Really though, looking at those stats, doesn’t just look like someone who hasn’t been playing as much golf? It really all looks like just an overall decline in sharpness due to fewer reps in the practice area. It’s always seemed to me that his golf game kept his interest much longer than most of the top money winners in the era of instant-millionaire golf, but it’s only natural to slow down a bit when life is frankly pretty damn good by all appearances. And with that much money on the table, the young guys are now grinding harder than ever to get there.