Opinion & Analysis
Statistics on how short hitters can conquer Par-5’s
One of the least surprising parts of analytics in golf is that there is a strong statistical correlation on the PGA Tour between Driving Distance and Par-5 performance. Driving Distance and Par-4 performance does not have nearly the same correlation, which makes it obvious how important power is to performing on the Par-5’s.
I wanted to look at the exceptions to the rule, however: short hitters who performed well on Par-5’s. Conversely, I wanted to examine long hitters who did not perform well on Par-5’s. Then I wanted to see what these groups of players had in common with their game in hopes of explaining why they overachieved or underachieved on Par-5’s.
I decided to take the top-15 Overachievers (nearly the top 10 percent) and the top-15 Underachievers and examine their metrics.
First, I wanted to see how these groups of golfers performed on approach shots, not only the range from which they are likely to hit a fairway wood (225-275 yards), but also on short approach shots where they end up if they decide to lay up on Par-5’s.
What’s interesting is that the Overachievers have a much better ranking in each of the categories except one: shots from 250-275 yards. That area is where the 3-wood is almost exclusively used by Tour players, and yet the Overachievers were significantly worse performers than the Underachievers.
This is one of the key points in the difference between the Overachievers and the Underachievers. Obviously, performing better from 75-150 yards is helpful to performing better on the Par-5’s. But despite the Overachievers being worse with the 3-wood and better from 75-150 yards than the Underachievers, they were significantly more aggressive on the par-5’s.
Par-5 aggressiveness is a proprietary formula that I use to determine how “aggressive” a player is in going for par-5’s in two shots based on their percentage of Par-5 “Go For It’s,” their distance off the tee, their club speed and the percentage of “Go For It’s” for the field on the par-5’s they have played.
For example, Mark Hubbard ranked 114th in actual Par-5 “Go For It” percentage. But he was 165th in Driving distance, which means he has a less likely chance to go for Par-5’s in two shots. Hubbard did it anyway, and therefore was very aggressive on the Par-5’s.
The difference in Overachievers being much more aggressive on the Par-5’s, despite being inferior 3-wood players and superior from 75-150 yards, indicates that it is far more beneficial to be aggressive than conservative on the Par-5’s.
Next, let’s look at Short Game shots around the green data for both groups.
Once again, this is not all that revelatory in general, but the details are a bit more informative. The Overachievers had better short games than the Underachievers. However, the data shows that the larger discrepancy is on shots from 20-30 yards. On Par-4’s, it is far more important to perform well from 10-20 yards and from less than 10 yards than it is to perform well from 20-30 yards. But on par-5 shots, 20-30 yards is a more important distance range.
Here’s how the two groups fared on the greens.
This was a bit more surprising for the most part, as he Overachievers did not putt significantly better than the Underachievers. This indicates that getting the ball close to the green in the first two shots is more important than actual putting performance on the green for Tour players.
Lastly, I wanted to compare the two groups with some driving metrics.
Tee Shot Aggressiveness is a proprietary measurement I use to determine the amount of times a player is laying-up off the tee. Players like Mark Hubbard and Roberto Castro rarely lay up off the tee, while Martin Laird and Lee Westwood were frequently laying up off the tee.
While there is a huge discrepancy in the Tee Shot Aggressiveness rankings for the Overachievers versus the Underachievers and the Overachievers were more effective off the tee in general, the more telling metrics are the ones that indicate a player’s accuracy and precision off the tee.
Despite the Overachievers being much more aggressive off the tee, they were still far more accurate (hit fairway percentage) and much more precise off the tee (Distance to Edge of Fairway, Hit Fairway Bunker Percentage and Missed Fairway – Other Percentage). This goes back to one of the major strategic keys that I stress to all golfers:
If you’re likely to have a long club in your hand (5-iron or longer) on your 2nd shot, it is best to focus on making good contact and finding the fairway rather than swinging for the fences in hopes of gaining an extra 20-30 yards off the tee.
That includes Par-5’s and Par-4’s. For Tour players, the variance in scores on shots from the fairway versus the rough rise dramatically once the second shot is from 175 yards or more. For amateurs who play shorter courses, I recommend looking at it from the club you are using. The general rule of thumb is a 5 iron or longer. I still recommend hitting driver off the tee. As the Overachievers show, they are not laying up off the tee that often. But, it is better to take your “stock swing” and focus on making good contact and finding the fairway than to swing harder in hopes of gaining more yards at the risk of finding the rough.
To summarize, here’s what amateurs can learn from the pros.
- Hit driver off the tee, but focus on good contact and finding the fairway instead of swinging harder in hopes of hitting it farther.
- Three wood performance is not as critical to par-5 performance as one may think. However, it’s still important to try and get the ball as close as you can to the hole when feasible rather than playing for your “money yardage.”
- Short Game performance is fairly important, but it’s more about long-range short game shots (20-30 yards) than shorter range Short Game shots (<15 yards).
- Par-5 performance is more about the first two shots than it is about performance with the putter.
Opinion & Analysis
Brandel Chamblee PGA Championship Q&A: Rose’s huge McLaren risk, distracted LIV pros and why Aronimink suits the bombers
PGA Championship week is here, and Brandel Chamblee did not hold back in our latest discussion ahead of the season’s second major.
In our 2026 PGA Championship Q&A, golf’s leading analyst made the case that PIF pulling LIV’s funding has left its players competing in a state of confusion, called Justin Rose’s mid-season equipment switch a huge risk at 45, and explained why Aronimink will be a bombers’ delight this week.
Check out the full Q&A below.
Gianni: With the PIF confirming that they’re pulling funding from LIV at the end of the season, what impact do you expect that to have on the LIV players competing at the PGA Championship?
Brandel: I would imagine that they have all been thrown into a state of confusion, and will be distracted, not knowing where they are going to play next year and not knowing exactly their road back to either the DP World Tour or the PGA Tour. Or in Rahm’s case, being tied to a sinking ship for the next few years, likely playing for pennies on the dollar in events that no one cares about or watches.
I doubt this would put him in the best frame of mind to compete at his highest level. Keeping in mind, however, that majors are the only time that LIV disciples get to play in events that matter, so never disregard the motivation they have to prove to the world they are still relevant.
Gianni: Justin Rose switched to McLaren Golf equipment mid-season while playing some of the best golf of his career. What do you make of the change?
Brandel: I don’t really know what to make of Rose switching equipment. It seems a huge risk on his part, even though it is likely, in my opinion, that the clubs he’s playing are similar, if not the exact grinds, to what he was playing previously, with a McLaren stamp on them.
Having said that, at best, it is a distraction when he seemed to be as dialed in with his game as any 45-year-old could be and trending in the majors to perhaps do something that would definitely put him in the Hall of Fame. At worst, given the possibility that these clubs aren’t just duplicates of his old set stamped with McLaren on them, he’s made an equipment change that would take time, and 45-year-old athletes don’t have the time to do such things.
Gianni: Aronimink has only hosted a handful of professional events since it hosted the 1962 PGA Championship. What kind of test does it present, and does a course with less recent major championship history tend to level the playing field?
Brandel: Even though Aronimink has only hosted a handful of meaningful professional events, it has been fairly discerning in who can win there. When Keegan Bradley won the BMW Championship on the Donald Ross masterpiece in 2018, he was the 2nd best iron player on tour coming into that week. When Nick Watney won the AT&T at Aronimink in 2011, he was 2nd in strokes gained total coming into the week.
In 2020, Aronimink hosted the KPMG Championship, and Sei Young Kim won. On the LPGA that year, she was first in greens in regulation, putts per green in regulation, and scoring average on the way to being the LPGA player of the year. And then there is the 1962 PGA Championship won by Gary Player, who eventually became just one of a few players to win the career grand slam on the way to winning 9 majors. It is a formidable test, and if it’s not softened by rain, it will bring out the best in the upper echelons of the game.
Gianni: Is there a specific hole at Aronimink that you think will do the most to decide the winner?
Brandel: The hardest hole at Aronimink in each of the three tour events that have been played there since 2010 has been the long par-3 8th hole, with the par-4 10th being the second hardest, so most of the carnage will happen around the turn, but with the par-5 16th offering opportunities for bold plays and the tough closing holes at 17 and 18, the finish is likely to be frenetic.
Gianni: The PGA Championship has always sat in the shadow of the other majors. What does the ideal PGA Championship look like in your eyes, and what would it take for it to carve out its own identity?
Brandel: The PGA Championship, to whatever degree it suffers from the comparison to the other three majors, is still counted just as much when adding them up at the end of one’s career. Almost 1/3 of Nicklaus’ major wins were the five PGA Championships he won. Walter Hagen won 11 majors, five of which were PGA Championships.
Tiger Woods twice in his career won back-to-back PGA Championships, and those four majors count just as much as the other 11 he won. The PGA may not have the prestige of the other three, but it carries the same weight. Having said that, I preferred the identity that it had as the last major of the year.
Gianni: You nailed your Masters picks. Rory won, Scottie finished solo second, and Morikawa surged to a tie for seventh. Who are your top 3 picks for the PGA Championship and why?
Brandel: I am not a huge fan of majors played on golf courses that have been shorn of most of the trees, although I understand some of the agronomic reasons for doing so and of course the ease with which it allows members to play after errant drives. However, at the highest level, it all but eliminates any strategy off the tee and turns professional golf into an even bigger slugfest. That means that it will likely be a bomber’s delight this week, but fortunately, Scottie Scheffler is long enough to play that game and straight enough to play it better than anyone else.
The major championships give us very few surprises anymore, going back to the beginning of 2012, so the last 57 majors played, the average world rank of the winners has been better than 15th in the world. So look at the highest ranked and longest drivers who are on form coming into the PGA Championship who also have great short games as the surrounds at Aronimink are very challenging. That’s Scottie Scheffler by a mile and then McIlroy and Cameron Young with a far bigger nod towards DeChambeau than I gave him at the Masters.
Club Junkie
A putter that I love and hate – Club Junkie Podcast
In this episode of the Club Junkie Podcast, we dive into one of the most interesting flatstick releases of the year with a full review of the new TaylorMade SYSTM 2 putters. After spending time on the greens, I break down what makes this design stand out, where it performs, and why it has me completely torn between loving it and fighting it. If you are into feel, alignment, and consistency, this is one you will want to hear about.
We also take a look at some of the putters in play on the PGA Tour last week. From familiar favorites to a few surprising setups, there is always something to learn from what the best players in the world are rolling with under pressure.
To wrap things up, I walk through the process of building a set of JP Golf Prime irons paired with Baddazz Gold Series shafts. From component selection to performance goals, this is a deep dive into what goes into creating a unique custom set and why this combo has been so intriguing.
Opinion & Analysis
From 14 handicap to pro: 4 things I’d tell golfers at 50
This year my 50th birthday. Gosh, where has the time gone?
As a teenager in rural Missouri, some of my junior high and high school years felt interminable. Graduation seemed light years away. But the older I get, the faster life seems to fly by.
I’m also increasingly aware of my mortality. My dad died recently. Earlier this year, a friend and fellow PGA of America professional and I were texting about our next catch-up. The next message I received was news of his unexpected passing at 48. Shortly after, a woman I dated in college succumbed to cancer at 51.
Certainly, one can share perspective at any age. Seniors help freshmen, veterans guide rookies. But reaching this milestone feels like as good a time as any to do one of those “what would I tell my younger self?” articles.
I’ve had a uniquely varied career in golf. I started as a 27-year-old, average-length-hitting, 14-handicap computer engineer and somehow managed to turn pro before running out of money, constantly bootstrapping my way forward. I’ve won qualifiers and set venue records in the World Long Drive Championships, finished fifth at the Speedgolf World Championships, coached all skill levels as a PGA of America professional, built industry-leading swing speed training programs for Swing Man Golf, helped advance the single-length iron market with Sterling Irons®, caddied on the PGA TOUR and PGA TOUR Champions, and played about 300 courses across 32 countries.
It’s been a ride, and I’ve gone both deep and wide.
So while I can consult and advise from a lot of angles, let me keep it to a few things I’d tell the average golfer who wants to improve.
1. Think About What You Want
Everyone has their own reason for picking up a golf club.
Oddly, as a professional athlete, I’m not internally driven by competition. That can be challenging, as the industry currently prioritizes and incentivizes competition over the love of the game.
For me, I love walking and being outdoors. Nature helps balance my energy. I prefer courses that are integrated into the natural beauty of their surroundings. I’m comfortable practicing alone. I’m a deep thinker, and I genuinely enjoy investigating the game, using data and intuition to unearth unique, often innovative insights. I’m fortunate to be strong and athletic, so I appreciate the chance to engage with my abilities. Traveling feels adventurous. I could go on.
You don’t have to overthink it like I do. For you, it might be as simple as hitting balls to escape work, hanging out with friends, and playing loosely with the rules and the score.
The point is to give yourself permission to play for your own reasons, and let that be enough.
But if improvement is your goal, thinking about your destination—and when you want to get there—is important, because it dictates the steps you need to take. When I set out to go from a 14-handicap to the PGA TOUR as quickly as possible, the steps I needed were very different from those of a working golfer trying to break 90 in six months. That’s also different from someone who just wants a few peaceful hours outside each week, away from work or family.
None of these goals are better than the others, but each requires a different plan that you can work backward from.
2. There Are Lots of Things That Can Work
One of the challenges of golf is that, although there are rules for playing, there aren’t clear, industry-wide standards for how to best play the game. There’s a lot of gray area.
You might hear a top coach or trainer insist that a certain move is the best way to swing or train. Then you dig a bit deeper and, much to your confusion and frustration, another respected coach or trainer says something completely different. I don’t think anyone is trying to confuse you—at least I hope not. It’s just where the industry is right now.
You have to be careful with advice from tournament pros, too. They might be great at scoring, but they’re also human and sometimes just as susceptible as amateurs to believing things that don’t really move the needle. Tour players might describe what they feel, but that’s not always what they’re actually doing when assessed with technology.
I recently ran a test on my YouTube channel (which connects to my GolfWRX article “How to use your hands in the golf swing for power and accuracy”), and, interestingly, two of the most commonly taught hand actions produced the worst results in the test.
Coaches can certainly help. If you find someone you connect with to help navigate, that’s great. But there are many ways to get the ball in the hole. In the current landscape, you may need to seek multiple opinions, think critically, and use your own intuition to discern what seems true and whose advice resonates with you.
I’d recommend seeking someone who is open-minded and always learning, because things constantly change. Absolutes like “correct” or “proper” should raise a red flag. AI can be useful, but it tends to confidently repeat popular advice, so proceed with caution.
3. Get Custom Fit
If you’re serious about becoming a better player, getting custom fit is hugely important. There’s no sense fighting your equipment if you don’t have to. Most better players get fit these days and, if they don’t, they’re usually skilled enough to work around clubs that aren’t ideal.
If you plan to play for a long time, it’s worth spending a little more upfront to get something that truly fits you and your game, rather than continually buying and discarding equipment.
Equipment rules haven’t really changed significantly since the early 2000s. To stay in business, manufacturers keep pushing those limits. If you pull a bunch of clubs and balls off the rack and test them, you’ll find differences. I’ve tested two new drivers and seen a 30-yard total distance gap. Usually, the issue isn’t bad equipment; it’s that the combination of components simply isn’t the best fit.
It’s like wearing a new pair of floppy clown shoes. Sure, they’re shoes—but you won’t sprint your best in them compared to track shoes that fit perfectly.
Be wary of what’s called custom fitting, too. Sometimes the term is used as a marketing strategy rather than an actual fitting. In some retail settings, fitters may be incentivized to steer you toward higher-priced components. That doesn’t automatically mean it’s not the best fit, but you should be aware of potential biases.
I learned a version of this lesson outside of golf. Years ago, I bought a tennis racquet at a big box store from a seemingly knowledgeable employee who thought it would suit me best. The racquet gave me tennis elbow, and I spent months recovering with rest and acupuncture. The next season, I invested more time and money to find what actually fit me, and I walked away with something amazing that I still play with years later.
So if you’re going to get fit, be smart about it.
Find someone you believe has deep knowledge—possibly with certifications, but not necessarily. Make sure there’s a wide inventory across many brands. Check recent reviews for the individual fitter if possible. Make sure you trust that the fitter has your best interests at heart. If they’re wearing a hat or shirt with a specific brand’s logo, proceed with caution. Unless you specifically want a certain brand or look, be wary of upsells, especially if two options perform nearly the same.
Also, while golf is called a sport of integrity, there’s a thread of manipulation in the industry. I once drafted an equipment article for an industry magazine, structured just like one of their previous popular stories, with matching word count and great photos. The assistant editor loved it; it was useful to readers and required little work on his part. But the editor-in-chief nixed the story. When I asked why, I was told it was because I wasn’t an advertiser. It turned out the article I’d modeled mine after was a paid ad cleverly disguised as editorial content.
I really dislike games, clickbait, and fear-based manipulation. I hope this changes, but golfers deserve to know it exists.
4. Distance and Strategy Matter
There’s a real relationship between how far you hit the ball and your scoring average, even at the PGA TOUR level.
I experienced this early in my pro career. I started as a power hitter, swinging in the high 120s and breaking 200 mph ball speed with a stock driver.
Back then, some instructors advised swinging at 80%, so I tried slowing down for more accuracy. That worked fine on shorter, tighter courses. But on longer setups, I was coming into greens with too much club, and par 5s stopped being
-
Equipment2 weeks agoJustin Rose WITB 2026 (April): Full WITB breakdown with new McLaren irons
-
Equipment1 week agoWhat’s the story behind Webb Simpson’s custom-stamped irons?
-
Equipment2 weeks agoCadillac Championship Tour Report: Spieth’s sizable changes, McLaren Golf launches, and more
-
Whats in the Bag3 days agoKristoffer Reitan’s winning WITB: 2026 Truist Championship
-
Whats in the Bag1 week agoCameron Young’s winning WITB: 2026 Cadillac Championship
-
Whats in the Bag3 weeks agoNelly Korda WITB 2026 (April)
-
Equipment2 weeks agoJustin Rose on the switch to McLaren Golf, learnings from previous equipment moves
-
Tour Photo Galleries2 weeks agoPhotos from the 2026 Cadillac Championship






Ron
Mar 7, 2016 at 1:50 pm
Great article. Love the statistical analysis and how that plays into strategy.
At 75 (with an index of about 4), I legitimately qualify as a short hitter (although probably fairly long for my age group). I can rarely reach par-5s in two – only on short ones probably playing from the ‘whites’. So my approach to par-5s is to think of them as par-3s in the sense that with a decent in-play drive, and a decent in-play second shot, most par-5s I play then just become a short iron or wedge to the green. (And with a wedge in my hands, I will always think “no worse than three more shots”, although it doesn’t always work out that way.) So par-5s are scoring holes even when they are not usually eagle opportunities. My strategy? Make that third shot as short as possible – unless getting into that position involves some risk like carrying a hazard or flirting with a bunker complex. But the key for me is putting the driver in play – doesn’t have to be long, but I want a doable second shot. The second shot strategy is then dictated by the lie and the risk – a fairway wood gets me as close to the green as possible without taking on undo risk, a hybrid or other ‘lay-up’ might be a safer shot and result in a longer third, but that’s okay. My scoring average on par-5s last year – in 140 rounds on 17 different courses? 5.0 (a little under that on my home course).
I played a recent on-course practice by dropping a ball 50-100 yards from each green and playing in. Great fun, by the way – and a great way to hone par-5 scoring skills.
Davo
Feb 25, 2016 at 3:43 pm
Zac Johnson won his masters jacket by laying up on every par 5 each day a few years back.
Rich Hunt
Feb 26, 2016 at 10:59 am
Yes, it was record freezing temperatures with high winds. Everybody was having to lay-up because it wasn’t feasible to get over the water in two shots. That left Zach in a wedge competition against the rest of the field which played to his strengths. Since then, Zach has not played all that well in the Masters outside of last season and goes for the par-5’s at Augusta whenever he can.
Gob
Feb 25, 2016 at 12:07 am
What are the driving distance numbers in the first chart?
Richie Hunt
Feb 25, 2016 at 8:19 am
All of the numbers in each of the charts are the rankings. So instead of saying a player ranked 165th, I just put down he ranked 165.
Mark
Feb 24, 2016 at 9:25 am
I’m not sure if the stats for tour players apply the same to the games of amateurs. The big difference I see is in the partial swing shots to get on the green. Pros spend endless hours dialing in their distances for these types of shots; amateurs, not so much. So I believe it IS actually better for the amateur to layup to their “money shot” because it’s a distance that they know and have practiced. Getting it as close as possible and leaving yourself a shot that requires a partial swing just doesn’t play out as well for amateurs as it does for pros.
aJerry
Feb 24, 2016 at 2:02 pm
!00% correct short game of 100 yards and in yields great results BUT very few amateurs with limited income have any where they can spend a hour or two hitting from a hundred yards and in to a playable green and get real descent results. What your talking about is Country Club level amateurs that have the money to belong to a course with quality practice facilities…..you get very little value out of practicing 100 yard shots off beat up old mats hitting in to dirt or near dirt driving range practice areas…and least anyone forget pros are hitting into real greens for practice with balls, like proV1’s they use in tournaments…. Every time we pay $48 bucks for a dozen ball a chunk of that change goes to supply tournament pros with endless supplies of that ball to play and practice with……..
Richie Hunt
Feb 25, 2016 at 8:24 am
The general concepts apply, but things are scaled down for the amateurs because they hit it shorter and play shorter courses. Most amateurs can’t hit their 3-wood 250-275 yards, so that is why I discussed the actual club more than the actual yardage. With the studies we’ve done on amateurs on par-5’s, the principles are almost identical to what we saw in the numbers for the pros. The only real exception is that some amateurs are far worse with the 3-wood off the deck than any other club in their bag. However, I believe one can draw the reasonable conclusion that if you’re an amateur that really struggles with the 3-wood, par-5’s are going to be an issue for you until you figure out how to hit a 3-wood with some level of competence.
Steve
Feb 24, 2016 at 12:39 am
Driving distances of PGA pros and LPGA pros is amazing but the second shots are the unbelievable shots….PGA guys hitting 3 irons 240 yards and stopping them on the green and LPGA gals hitting hybrids 230 yards and stopping on the greens. Insane…
Jack
Feb 25, 2016 at 1:47 am
Yup. The more you look at those performances, the more you realize the immense gap between top amateurs and pros. Not only are they more accurate, the distance they are covering is much greater too.
Magnus
Feb 23, 2016 at 10:15 pm
I actually have a very good shortgame, and my putting is alright, but I break 80 only when I find the fairway consistently from the tee, thats always the key to a good round. But anyway a lot of people talk about how you win tournaments because of your putter or your good shortgame. “you drive for show and putt for dough” is not true, and never has been.
Bob Jones
Feb 24, 2016 at 1:19 pm
Lee Trevino said, “They say you drive for show and putt for dough, but if you can’t drive, you won’t be putting for very much dough.”
Peter
Feb 24, 2016 at 2:23 pm
The “drive for show” is referring to the longest drive, it’s nothing to do with hitting or missing fairways. You can’t compete at any decent level if you can’t putt!
Mat
Feb 23, 2016 at 4:48 pm
This deserves one more step…
“Overachievers” are doing what the “Every Shot Counts” stat book says… essentially, you’re going to score better at a pro level from 40 yards out in the rough than you are 90 in the fairway.
You can essentially stack these stats backwards; overachievers are the guys playing to the stats. Gain the most distance within reason and within your ability every shot, as the lie allows.
Bump Fuzz
Feb 23, 2016 at 1:55 pm
I remember hearing on a golf telecast that Webb Simpson will try to get it as close to the hole as possible when hitting his 2nd shot on par 5s instead of laying up to a favorite wedge yardage.
Rich Hunt
Feb 24, 2016 at 9:38 am
Funny you mention Webb. When I analyze players and their strategy, Webb is one of the very best strategists on Tour. Not only on par-5’s, but on tee shots where there are players laying up or going for it. Whatever is the best play statistically, Webb is usually making that play.
Fahgdat
Feb 23, 2016 at 12:13 pm
Wow. Thanks for putting that together. Great article.
Goes to show you smart course management and timely scoring is what it’s all about.
You can play to your strengths and still do well.
Scott
Feb 23, 2016 at 11:42 am
Are you suggesting that the longer hitters are not being aggressive enough off the tee? I have often thought that there was way too much laying up on tour.
Richie Hunt
Feb 25, 2016 at 8:29 am
I wasn’t really suggesting that in this particular article. But often times that is the case. One of the things I preach to Tour players I work with is that I do not treat every player the same and fit them into 1 way of doing things. Bubba Watson shouldn’t try to play like Tim Clark and vice versa. Much of that has to do with how far they hit the ball. But, I see a lot of long hitters on Tour that try to play more like the shorter hitters. They concentrate on finding fairways at the expense of their length off the tee by laying up and focus too much on their wedge games. Instead, they have prodigious length off the tee….use it to your advantage. If you have the ability to be a power player…be a power player.
davemac
Feb 23, 2016 at 11:37 am
I really like this type of analysis, am I correct in assuming the value in each column is the player’s positional ranking for that given skill?
Psychology has to play a major impact on the result, Lee Westwood is poor from the ‘important’ target short game areas, but is this a poor short game or excessive shot pressure due to putting weakness?
The other possibility is perhaps under achievers are in the habit of short siding their approach miss, making the short game shot more difficult.
Bobby Pingstein
Feb 23, 2016 at 11:01 am
Just hit the gym and take testosterone
JLukik@taylormade.com
Feb 23, 2016 at 4:35 pm
Do you even lift, Bro?