3.8 The Golden Rule
In Chapter 2, I explained how I compared ball-striking ability with money earn-ings and learned that how well a Tour pro strikes the ball with a full swing does not correlate in any statistically significant way with how much money he earns.
When I first saw this result, I was quite surprised.
Why? Because for many years I planned and tried to play the game profession-ally. I figured to do that I would have to hit the ball better, which would lead to better scoring, which would lead to my being able to play for a living. By the time
I was conducting my correlation studies, I'd given up any dreams of a pro career.
But I was still amazed that my data contradicted my long-held assumptions about ball-striking. I didn't understand how hitting the ball better could do anything ex-cept win more money. After examining this data in detail, I realized that what it showed wasn't that ball-striking is unimportant, but rather that if your full-swing PEI is between 5% and 9% (the extremes of all players on the PGA Tour), then how well you strike the ball within that range doesn't affect how much money you will make.
The reason for this is the "conversion curve." The conversion curve, shown on page 29, is the most important illustration in this book, and may be one of the most important concepts in the game of golf. Very simply, it tells you the chances
of converting a putt, on average, from any given distance.
Needless to say, from all the rounds I've charted and all the data I've obtained, I have recorded thousands upon thousands of putts. I know exactly how well PGA Tour pros putt from every distance. If you examine this curve carefully, you'll find that no one makes a high percentage of putts from outside of 10 feet, and almost everyone playing at the professional level makes most of their putts inside two feet (if not, they won't be playing on the Tour for long). So the most drastic differences in putting conversion rates occur between two and 10 feet-as mentioned earlier, the "Golden Eight" feet.
Let's bring this back to the real world. When Lee Trevino (a 5% ball-striker) hits a 5-iron from 180 yards to 5% accuracy, he still faces a 27-foot (nine-yard) putt. That's a fine 5-iron, better than the average Tour player by several feet. But most Tour players will two-putt from 40 feet, 30 feet, 20 feet, even 10 feet; so the fact that Trevino generally hits it closer to the pin doesn't give him a very mean-ingful advantage for one-putting more often. It does give him this small advantage every time he hits a power-swing shot onto a green in regulation, which occurs
around 10 times a round. So statistically, on average, for being the best ball-striker Lee receives a small advantage in putting conversion probability over the entire rest of the field about 10 times a round, if his putting skill is equal to theirs.
On the other hand, when Tom Kite (who improved from a 13% to a 5% short-game PEI) hits a wedge from 40 yards to six feet, and Trevino, who is a 15% wedge player from 40 yards, puts the ball three times as far from the hole, 18 feet, then Kite statistically gains almost half a shot (again assuming equal putting skills). It is an absolute cinch that Kite will hole more putts from six feet than Trevino will hole from 18 feet.
The advantages gained from hitting good short-game shots occur seven to 10 times a round (Tour players miss, on average, about five greens in regulation, and hit short-game shots to a high percentage of the four par-5 holes each round); that can add up to a difference of several shots. You can see why the short-game per-formance of all Tour players has a strong correlation with their money earnings. It is entirely reasonable-and proper-that the people who execute the finesse game the best tend to win the most money, have the lowest scoring averages, and are the most consistent winners on the Tour.
I also have taken data on the LPGA Tour, and the results are identical for the ladies.
So now you understand my "Golden Rule" of golf. Because of the conversion curve, and the fact that 60% to 65% of all shots in golf occur within 100 yards of the green, it is clear that "he who rules the short game collects the gold."
3.9 Pros I've Worked With
Over the years, I've been fortunate to work with many pros, both men and women, from the U.S., European, Canadian, and Asian tours, as well as amateurs from around the world. I've instructed the national teams from Germany and Italy, and made presentations for the PGA of America to club pros throughout the United States. Thirteen years ago, I began opening my Scoring Game School facil-ities, where I've taught Tour pros-from the PGA and LPGA Tours (Fig. 3.9.1 lists them)-plus some 15,000 amateurs, all of whom have paid to attend. Most of these amateurs are not low-handicappers, but they are serious golfers, and all of them, including the professionals, want to score better.
Every one of these golfers has the same problem. While some are poor chip-pers, others can't get out of the sand, and many can't pitch accurately in the 15- to 30-yard range, they all have the problem of the conversion curve. No one has ever complained to me about getting the ball consistently too close to the pin with
Figure 3.9.1: Professionals who have worked with Dave Pelz/Dave Pelz Scoring Game Schools
their short-game shots, and most golfers are certainly two-putting, or worse, most of the time. And their scores aren't as low as they want them to be.
Every one of my schools starts with testing to identify players' weaknesses so we can maximize their improvement. Through my research, I've learned that 80%
of a player's handicap is determined by his play within 100 yards of the green. But when I ask students how they spend their practice time, almost all say they spend 80% of their time practicing the full swing. Most students report spending less than 10% to 15% of their time on their putting, and almost no time practicing their short game.
In this light, it's interesting to note that the students with the greatest improve-ment are the ones who come back to work with us the most often over a long time period-like Tom Kite, who, after 18 years, still occasionally comes back to school.
The returning alumni also are the ones who practice the most and improve the most. Please take this as proof of the importance of the short game to lowering scores, because you just can't get too good at the short game.
The better you play it, the lower you will score.