Great post! With the flood of “new” data (LM, SG from every conceivable facet, etc) it’s a challenge to find what’s ACTIONABLE.
My current rabbit hole is an Arccos screen that shows score, fairway%, GIR%, #putts, etc for each hole on a given course. Funny, but many moons ago (“what’s a PC?” era) I wrote a program to do the exact same thing. After I compiled several rounds, I was shocked to find out I was hemorrhaging strokes on the same holes. Ok, maybe I shouldn’t have been surprised, but I’ll bet more than one reader out there does as well.
I remember thinking endlessly about my strategy on those holes and eventually working out a functional approach.
Years passed and lately I got mired in the “new” data, weeding thru “interesting” stuff until I read your post. “Actionable” is exactly the trigger I was missing! Oh, sure I could (and have!) spend hundreds of hours focusing on GIRs from 125-175 or whatever but to what result? Might shave a few tenths per round? By focusing on my “nemesis” holes I lowered my score 5 shots per!
Recently I decided to revisit the low-hanging fruit by studying my stats on my home course, looking for low GIRs%, high average hole scores, low fairway%, etc. I then ask “what am I attempting to accomplish with each shot? Where does it go wrong, ie where can I reduce risk? What are my alternatives? Why am I having trouble with this hole?”
My thinking is to:
- improve performance on my home course
- recognize the features of the hole that make it problematic for me
- learn to recognize similar features on holes on new courses
For example: #3 has a tiny elevated green with a steep hill in front (a ball spinning off the green can roll back 60y) and junk behind. My GIRs% was horrible. When I missed short, I faced an uphill pitch; when I flushed one I’m in the junk facing a nasty chip to a downhill green. Upon reflection, my strategy was to hit a high spinner to hold the green. I recently collected some data on rollout on this elevated green. Based on this, I found a better strategy is to club to just clear the front of the green (rather than center) and allow for the rollout due to the elevation. Counter-intuitively, taking spin off allows even misses short to trundle on and flushes (which typically spin more) landing near center to hold the back.
These are lessons that will help me perform better on my home course as well as (hopefully) transfer to other courses with similar hole features.
Additionally, this hole-by-hole analysis doesn’t interfere with range or sim sessions driven by “new” data; if anything it provides further incentive to work the shots I know I’ll need. Sure, I still work on my 125-175 dispersion and whatnot but I’m thinking all nemesis holes are actionable if only we knew how. It’s the marriage of solid strategy with concomitant execution.
Jury’s still out whether this is a rabbit hole or rathole, I’ll keep you posted.