WEBVTT - Jake Nichols 0:00:00.080 --> 0:00:02.840 I miss the green, for example, I'm already upset. When 0:00:02.880 --> 0:00:04.960 I find my ball in the bunker, I'm really upset. 0:00:05.040 --> 0:00:07.000 And when I find my ball in a brid Egg 0:00:07.240 --> 0:00:11.479 Friday Egg, the dreaded Frida Egg Friday, Frida Egg Bride 0:00:11.480 --> 0:00:14.120 Egg Lie, I'm about ready to run off the golf course. 0:00:39.720 --> 0:00:43.000 Ladies and gentlemen, welcome back to another edition of the 0:00:43.040 --> 0:00:47.040 Frida Egg Podcast. We have a second podcast this week 0:00:47.320 --> 0:00:51.600 and excited to bring on Jake Nichols. Jake is the 0:00:51.720 --> 0:00:54.920 head of Intelligence at the Fifteenth Club, which is a 0:00:55.240 --> 0:00:59.080 golf analytics company that helps players kind of analyze and 0:00:59.080 --> 0:01:03.000 look at their stats to play better. Some of their 0:01:03.000 --> 0:01:05.920 players they have a lot of European tour players are 0:01:06.400 --> 0:01:12.279 Danny Willett, Darren Clark, Lee Westwood, Matt Fitzpatrick, Juice Luton, 0:01:13.080 --> 0:01:17.720 Torborne Ollison and many more. Jake, thanks for coming on. 0:01:18.920 --> 0:01:20.520 Thanks a lot, and I appreciate you having me. 0:01:20.880 --> 0:01:24.080 Yeah. Yeah, I'm excited to kind of get into, you 0:01:24.120 --> 0:01:27.160 know what, what everybody needs to know about the saber 0:01:27.240 --> 0:01:30.000 metrics of golf. I you know, to kick things off. 0:01:30.000 --> 0:01:31.720 I'd love to hear a little bit about how you 0:01:31.760 --> 0:01:33.240 got into it in your background. 0:01:34.840 --> 0:01:38.160 Yeah, sure, so I was always a golf fan more 0:01:38.200 --> 0:01:40.759 than more than anything. I played a little bit when 0:01:40.760 --> 0:01:43.399 I was younger, but but I was always much more 0:01:43.400 --> 0:01:47.840 of a fan. And then in college really started to 0:01:47.880 --> 0:01:51.840 get into looking at sports in a statistical way. So 0:01:52.120 --> 0:01:55.760 baseball and basketball were the two big ones back then. 0:01:56.680 --> 0:01:59.120 And after a year or two of you know, reading 0:01:59.200 --> 0:02:02.880 blog posts and books and whatever was available in those sports, 0:02:03.400 --> 0:02:07.720 I started to wonder why golf didn't have very many 0:02:07.800 --> 0:02:12.320 people operating it. And this was before Mark Brody and 0:02:12.400 --> 0:02:15.760 strokes Gan got big, before his book came out, and 0:02:15.800 --> 0:02:17.720 so there were only a handful of people really in 0:02:17.760 --> 0:02:21.080 the corners of the Internet who were analyzing golf with 0:02:21.080 --> 0:02:23.280 with data. So I just picked it up as a 0:02:23.280 --> 0:02:27.679 side hobby in college and it's grown into full time 0:02:27.760 --> 0:02:29.720 job with Fifteenth Club for the last two years. 0:02:30.080 --> 0:02:32.760 That's cool. Did you do anything else before you got 0:02:32.760 --> 0:02:35.079 into that and in the working world. 0:02:35.840 --> 0:02:40.120 Nope, This was pretty much straight out of college after 0:02:40.120 --> 0:02:41.640 a little bit of loafing around the house. 0:02:42.000 --> 0:02:45.800 That's cool. So tell us a little bit about like 0:02:45.880 --> 0:02:48.160 what's a day in the life for you, Like what 0:02:48.240 --> 0:02:50.840 do you what do you do on a daily basis 0:02:50.880 --> 0:02:53.720 with like golf numbers, and how does it work. 0:02:55.280 --> 0:03:00.000 So it could be really anything. Right now, when we're 0:03:00.200 --> 0:03:03.560 on a report for one of our players, basically a 0:03:03.680 --> 0:03:06.600 check up for him, he's all for a few weeks now, 0:03:06.680 --> 0:03:09.560 so he's looking for a you know, a breakdown of 0:03:09.560 --> 0:03:11.760 his game. How's he trending over the first few months 0:03:11.760 --> 0:03:14.359 of the season. So it could be that it could 0:03:14.400 --> 0:03:17.600 be working on a consulting project for one of our clients. 0:03:19.000 --> 0:03:21.359 We've gotten involved in a lot in the last six 0:03:21.400 --> 0:03:24.760 months to twelve months, and just how can how can 0:03:24.800 --> 0:03:29.919 golf organizations use their data better? So it's analyzing data, 0:03:30.120 --> 0:03:35.880 it's working on software tools to help the players capture 0:03:35.880 --> 0:03:39.960 their data better, to help these organizations track their data better. 0:03:41.280 --> 0:03:44.280 So a lot of numbers, a lot of coding, a 0:03:44.280 --> 0:03:47.040 lot of data visualization which I which I really enjoy, 0:03:47.080 --> 0:03:49.880 and then you know, just figuring out how best to 0:03:49.880 --> 0:03:54.240 communicate insights to the players, caddies, other clients. 0:03:55.320 --> 0:03:59.080 So you know, we've seen like this sabermetrics boom and 0:03:59.200 --> 0:04:02.920 baseball and bat basketball, where you know, they've kind of 0:04:02.960 --> 0:04:07.240 completely revolutionized the sport. And you know, the philosophy is 0:04:07.320 --> 0:04:10.960 behind the sport. How you assemble teams, how you how 0:04:11.000 --> 0:04:14.680 you even you know draw plays in basketball. How far 0:04:14.880 --> 0:04:17.520 behind is is golf from that? 0:04:19.720 --> 0:04:23.880 So I would say when I think about using data 0:04:24.360 --> 0:04:26.960 in like the sports arena, I think there's kind of 0:04:27.000 --> 0:04:30.840 three phases. The first is someone decides to start tracking 0:04:30.839 --> 0:04:36.320 all this stuff. So the PGA Tour installed shot link 0:04:36.320 --> 0:04:39.440 cameras over a decade ago, so now they have all 0:04:39.440 --> 0:04:42.680 this data to play with. So the second stage is 0:04:42.920 --> 0:04:47.240 kind of convincing people that that data can be used 0:04:47.279 --> 0:04:50.720 to create insights, that we can learn from it, that 0:04:50.760 --> 0:04:53.360 it can help players play better, it can help the tour, 0:04:53.960 --> 0:04:56.840 you know, organize events better. It can you know, do 0:04:56.880 --> 0:04:59.880 all this, do all this stuff, uh, basically what we're 0:05:00.000 --> 0:05:00.720 doing right now. 0:05:02.120 --> 0:05:03.960 And then the final. 0:05:04.120 --> 0:05:08.640 Stage is it's fully accepted. And I think in baseball 0:05:09.480 --> 0:05:14.040 it's fully accepted. All the teams use it, everyone talks 0:05:14.080 --> 0:05:17.599 about it, it's on the broadcast, it's in the studio shows. 0:05:18.680 --> 0:05:20.560 I really think golf is still kind of in that 0:05:20.680 --> 0:05:26.960 second stage where we're still trying to convince some people 0:05:26.960 --> 0:05:30.359 out there, some stakeholders in the game, some players, you know, 0:05:30.560 --> 0:05:36.080 of of the of the validity of the results, how 0:05:36.080 --> 0:05:40.840 it can help them out and really get everyone comfortable 0:05:40.920 --> 0:05:44.520 with talking talking about data. So I really think it's 0:05:44.800 --> 0:05:49.520 you know, it's behind baseball for sure, but it's also 0:05:49.560 --> 0:05:53.080 a little bit easier than like applying analytics to basketball, 0:05:53.120 --> 0:05:56.159 where you have to track the ball and ten players, 0:05:56.200 --> 0:05:59.080 and in this court you can, you know, kind of 0:05:59.120 --> 0:06:02.360 only focus on where's the ball positioned at each time 0:06:02.480 --> 0:06:05.599 or one player swing. So it's a little bit easier 0:06:05.600 --> 0:06:09.159 of a problem than basketball or hockey or football. 0:06:09.279 --> 0:06:13.599 What would you say is the biggest pushback that you get, 0:06:13.760 --> 0:06:18.120 like what's the most regular kind of feedback against the 0:06:18.240 --> 0:06:22.080 analytics and using them to kind of try and you know, 0:06:22.160 --> 0:06:23.240 analyze performance. 0:06:25.480 --> 0:06:28.640 I would say there's a few things. The first is 0:06:28.960 --> 0:06:33.039 a lack of understanding of how this is, uh, this 0:06:33.200 --> 0:06:35.680 is different strokes gained. 0:06:35.960 --> 0:06:38.039 It takes a while to really. 0:06:37.800 --> 0:06:41.599 Understand it intuitively. I think you can't really understand it 0:06:41.600 --> 0:06:46.280 in totally. I mean, so I think there's a little disconnect. 0:06:47.360 --> 0:06:50.760 How can you know this is better than just looking 0:06:50.800 --> 0:06:52.880 at the stats that I've looked at for ten years 0:06:52.960 --> 0:06:56.160 or twenty years, or maybe don't look at all. And 0:06:56.200 --> 0:07:02.960 the second one is when it conflicts with what the 0:07:02.960 --> 0:07:05.039 player or the caddy or the coach is seeing with 0:07:05.080 --> 0:07:10.200 their eyes. Try telling a player who you think his 0:07:10.240 --> 0:07:14.480 iron game is merely average that and he might think 0:07:14.520 --> 0:07:17.920 it's you know, top twenty five in the world because 0:07:18.120 --> 0:07:21.600 maybe he's getting the consistent contact that he's looking for, 0:07:22.200 --> 0:07:24.840 you know, his swing feels great, but maybe the results 0:07:25.320 --> 0:07:28.640 just aren't there, or the strategy in the shots just 0:07:28.680 --> 0:07:32.440 aren't there. So there's it's it's difficult sometimes where there's 0:07:33.120 --> 0:07:35.120 some resistance to what the data is telling you. 0:07:36.800 --> 0:07:41.880 So with when you guys start working with players, you know, 0:07:41.920 --> 0:07:45.400 what kind of stuff do you does that encompass? Obviously 0:07:45.440 --> 0:07:48.680 it's you know, looking at their stats. You know, does 0:07:48.720 --> 0:07:51.600 it go into you know, you touched on strategy, does 0:07:51.640 --> 0:07:53.760 it go into how to play the course and in 0:07:53.920 --> 0:07:56.080 different tendencies and stuff like that. 0:07:58.080 --> 0:08:01.360 So the initial state that most of our clients come 0:08:01.400 --> 0:08:06.960 to us with is I just want to track my performance, 0:08:07.320 --> 0:08:09.880 track how I've been playing in all these different areas. 0:08:11.080 --> 0:08:13.720 So we have a tool, a software tool that they 0:08:13.720 --> 0:08:18.040 can enter their data into. It tracks their data over time. 0:08:18.120 --> 0:08:20.960 They can you know, slice and dice it. However they 0:08:21.080 --> 0:08:23.600 like to look at it, and that kind of data 0:08:23.640 --> 0:08:27.000 is really used to influence everything else we do with 0:08:27.040 --> 0:08:30.920 them in terms of reports and strategy and you know, 0:08:31.040 --> 0:08:34.320 everything else. So that's kind of the initial thing is 0:08:34.520 --> 0:08:37.360 someone will come to us and say, you know, I'm 0:08:37.440 --> 0:08:41.640 just looking to improve, looking to get better. How can 0:08:41.679 --> 0:08:45.800 you help me track my performance and you know, and 0:08:45.920 --> 0:08:47.920 figure out what's the one or two things that I 0:08:47.960 --> 0:08:50.960 need to work on to you know, become a top 0:08:51.000 --> 0:08:54.040 fifty player, top twenty five player, top ten player eventually. 0:08:55.000 --> 0:08:59.080 And then once once we have that sort of data, 0:08:59.200 --> 0:09:02.800 once they're in degraded into that sort of software tool, 0:09:03.440 --> 0:09:07.040 then some of them are more interested than others in 0:09:07.040 --> 0:09:10.160 in things like one course strategy. So we have a 0:09:10.200 --> 0:09:13.240 few guys who we help prepare for some of the 0:09:13.280 --> 0:09:15.480 big events and some guys who are interested in it 0:09:15.800 --> 0:09:18.800 week to week just what can you tell me about 0:09:18.840 --> 0:09:21.560 the course? What can you tell me about you know, 0:09:21.960 --> 0:09:23.880 what should I be working on in the last three 0:09:23.920 --> 0:09:27.760 weeks of practice before the Masters? What sort of shots 0:09:27.760 --> 0:09:30.640 am I going to face at the at the tournament 0:09:31.480 --> 0:09:35.080 that I should be preparing for. And then at the 0:09:35.160 --> 0:09:38.320 end of the year, there's some clients who are interested 0:09:38.360 --> 0:09:41.199 in scheduling, you know, what's the one or two courses 0:09:41.240 --> 0:09:43.360 that I should play this year that I don't normally 0:09:43.400 --> 0:09:47.320 play that that whether it's something about the field or 0:09:47.320 --> 0:09:51.280 something about the course fitting my game that I can 0:09:51.320 --> 0:09:54.400 really get an edge and maybe outperform my normal level 0:09:54.440 --> 0:09:55.440 of play at that course. 0:09:56.760 --> 0:10:02.600 Interesting. So with the you know, the specific courses, is 0:10:02.640 --> 0:10:06.800 there you know, how much is like the horses for courses, 0:10:07.080 --> 0:10:10.560 is it you know, overplayed or how real is it? 0:10:12.480 --> 0:10:16.840 Uh, it's definitely a factor for sure. I've seen some 0:10:16.880 --> 0:10:21.480 people dismiss it because if you look at just the 0:10:21.520 --> 0:10:24.559 thing is, if you look at just results of players 0:10:24.600 --> 0:10:29.680 at a course, So this guy's going to Sawgrass his 0:10:29.800 --> 0:10:33.800 last five times and he's had four top tens, it's 0:10:33.840 --> 0:10:37.200 not really telling you that much because it might be 0:10:37.360 --> 0:10:39.640 that that player is just really good. You know, if 0:10:39.679 --> 0:10:42.280 that's Henrik Stenson and he's top ten four times out 0:10:42.280 --> 0:10:44.640 of five, well maybe that's pretty close to what you'd 0:10:44.679 --> 0:10:51.840 expect there. So the actual it's it's difficult to tease 0:10:52.480 --> 0:10:55.120 horses for courses out of the data. I don't think 0:10:55.160 --> 0:10:57.520 you can just look at a you know, look at 0:10:57.559 --> 0:11:00.000 a sheet that gives you his results for the last 0:11:00.080 --> 0:11:03.640 ten years and there's more to it. It's more about how, 0:11:03.960 --> 0:11:06.200 you know, how does that player's game fit with the 0:11:06.240 --> 0:11:09.520 course statistically and if we and if we can figure 0:11:09.520 --> 0:11:12.360 that out. Then we can go to tell Matt fitz 0:11:12.720 --> 0:11:15.839 Fitzpatrick or Danny Willett, who have never played a lot 0:11:15.840 --> 0:11:18.640 of the PGA Tour courses, and we can say, well, 0:11:18.679 --> 0:11:21.720 our numbers say your game fits well at Colonial, or 0:11:21.760 --> 0:11:25.439 your game fits well at at the Travelers, et cetera. 0:11:26.600 --> 0:11:30.800 That's it. It's interesting. So with regards to kind of 0:11:31.280 --> 0:11:34.120 you know, how how you guys wait things, And obviously 0:11:34.280 --> 0:11:40.240 with Mark Brody's kind of strokes gained book, he you know, 0:11:40.280 --> 0:11:43.840 he put a big discount on kind of putting, and 0:11:44.000 --> 0:11:47.199 you know, just preaching about how you know, tee to 0:11:47.280 --> 0:11:50.320 green was so much more important, and anything inside of 0:11:50.440 --> 0:11:55.160 fifty yards was relatively you know, everybody's the same. What 0:11:55.200 --> 0:12:01.200 would you say is the biggest difference between say you're, 0:12:01.800 --> 0:12:06.439 you know, top fifty player and number like two fifty 0:12:06.720 --> 0:12:09.040 in the world range, Like, you know, somebody that's kind 0:12:09.040 --> 0:12:12.200 of like a fringe tour guy, whether it's European Tour 0:12:12.440 --> 0:12:15.160 or PGA Tour, kind of bouncing between the web dot 0:12:15.200 --> 0:12:17.679 Com or the Challenge Tour and the and the Big Tour. 0:12:19.920 --> 0:12:23.760 I still would think it's sort of ball striking stats 0:12:24.200 --> 0:12:29.319 for sure. I would say probably a combination of long 0:12:29.360 --> 0:12:37.880 game and also driving ability. So I imagine there's a 0:12:37.880 --> 0:12:41.000 lot more guys in that sort of churn area between 0:12:41.000 --> 0:12:44.480 the Web and the and the big tour who can 0:12:44.559 --> 0:12:48.760 hit it a mile but can't control it. And there's 0:12:48.800 --> 0:12:51.280 a lot of guys in that top fifty in the 0:12:51.280 --> 0:12:55.280 world range who who maybe don't hit it as far 0:12:55.320 --> 0:12:58.920 as those big hitters, but they're really controlling it, they're 0:12:58.920 --> 0:13:02.440 putting it in play, and that kind of above average 0:13:02.440 --> 0:13:08.440 distance plus you know, average accuracy is really really what 0:13:08.559 --> 0:13:12.640 sets players apart. So yeah, definitely, definitely long game is 0:13:12.720 --> 0:13:15.439 kind of still the separator at that level. 0:13:15.920 --> 0:13:19.280 And I'm curious, you know, something I look at is 0:13:19.320 --> 0:13:22.160 I kind of think that the world rankings and the 0:13:22.160 --> 0:13:24.800 PGA Tour is a byproduct of the golf course as 0:13:24.800 --> 0:13:28.679 they play. You know, a couple of weeks ago at Harbortown, 0:13:28.720 --> 0:13:32.800 you see like a distinctly different leader board than you 0:13:32.880 --> 0:13:35.839 do week over week of the PGA Tour, And I 0:13:35.880 --> 0:13:38.640 think there's a few courses that kind of fit that mold. 0:13:39.120 --> 0:13:43.760 Do you think that, you know, the golf courses that 0:13:43.840 --> 0:13:47.720 the PGA Tour plays, the tPCS, the you know, the 0:13:47.760 --> 0:13:50.440 courses that really value you know, kind of do you 0:13:50.440 --> 0:13:54.400 think the courses diminish what a player's skill inside one 0:13:54.480 --> 0:13:57.440 hundred yards as much and then promote the long game, 0:13:57.880 --> 0:14:00.680 or do you think it's in terms of your every 0:14:00.760 --> 0:14:03.400 day golf that long game is more important. 0:14:06.840 --> 0:14:11.680 See I think I think there's definitely rewards based on 0:14:11.920 --> 0:14:14.120 the change in the game over the last fifteen years, 0:14:15.240 --> 0:14:20.000 the ball change and the distance change. There's rewards to 0:14:20.080 --> 0:14:25.720 making the courses fit that sort of elite PGA tour player. 0:14:29.200 --> 0:14:37.080 But I don't really think that they diminish talent inside 0:14:37.120 --> 0:14:42.280 one hundred yards sort of short game. Right now on 0:14:42.360 --> 0:14:46.200 tour the average course you hit driver about ten times 0:14:46.240 --> 0:14:49.800 around or so, which I think is a pretty reasonable 0:14:50.680 --> 0:14:54.520 middle ground. It doesn't give the best hit like best 0:14:54.600 --> 0:14:57.120 drivers in the world, the ability to hit driver on 0:14:57.160 --> 0:15:00.160 every single hole, and it also doesn't really take get 0:15:00.200 --> 0:15:08.840 out of their hands for ten holes around. Yeah, I 0:15:08.880 --> 0:15:14.080 think the rough is definitely more playable than maybe is 0:15:14.200 --> 0:15:19.800 fair towards really to promote letting those big hitters out 0:15:19.800 --> 0:15:24.680 of jail when they when they rip off a loose one. 0:15:23.400 --> 0:15:29.280 Okay, so because I think a lot of it. You know, obviously, 0:15:29.400 --> 0:15:33.800 conditioning to firm and fast conditions, how do you guys. See, 0:15:33.920 --> 0:15:36.600 you know, like conditions play a play a factor, like 0:15:36.880 --> 0:15:40.200 whether a course gets rain soaked and it's soft versus 0:15:40.360 --> 0:15:41.280 you know, firm and fast. 0:15:41.360 --> 0:15:41.680 Is it it? 0:15:41.800 --> 0:15:45.880 Does it? Do you see? You know, differences within the 0:15:45.920 --> 0:15:48.600 same golf course, say like a Riviera where it was 0:15:48.680 --> 0:15:51.440 soaked this year versus you know when it's played firm 0:15:51.480 --> 0:15:52.920 and fast in the past. 0:15:53.760 --> 0:15:56.280 I've never actually looked at it, but you can, I 0:15:56.560 --> 0:15:58.760 imagine if you look at the scoring, you can definitely 0:15:58.800 --> 0:16:01.720 see see it come out in the scoring and see 0:16:01.760 --> 0:16:03.840 it come out and really all the other stats. 0:16:05.160 --> 0:16:07.160 We saw it at the match. 0:16:06.920 --> 0:16:10.480 Play this year where the faraways were basically concrete and 0:16:10.560 --> 0:16:14.880 the balls were just running out three seventy five. And 0:16:14.960 --> 0:16:18.480 also when the when the greens slowed down. You definitely 0:16:18.480 --> 0:16:23.440 can can notice it in the in the punting stats. 0:16:23.520 --> 0:16:25.960 I think it was at Innisbrook a few years ago 0:16:26.680 --> 0:16:30.080 where they had reseated the greens or changed something with 0:16:30.120 --> 0:16:34.240 the green surface and everyone was leaving the putt short 0:16:34.600 --> 0:16:38.040 and it was we we like to look at this 0:16:38.160 --> 0:16:40.480 stat like how how often did you get it to 0:16:40.520 --> 0:16:42.560 the hole or just past the hole with your putts? 0:16:43.160 --> 0:16:47.640 And that that course was like breaking our scale. That 0:16:47.640 --> 0:16:51.360 that year just because the players weren't just weren't used 0:16:51.360 --> 0:16:54.360 to putting on the surface. So conditioning can be a 0:16:54.440 --> 0:16:57.040 huge factor with putting for sure. 0:16:57.600 --> 0:17:00.840 I remember that it is their brand new g and 0:17:00.960 --> 0:17:04.160 yeah everybody left it short. So with that stat getting 0:17:04.200 --> 0:17:06.399 into the hole, like, what are some other stats that 0:17:06.480 --> 0:17:09.040 you guys look at that you know, aren't you know? 0:17:09.119 --> 0:17:12.119 On PGA tour dot com. 0:17:12.760 --> 0:17:15.840 A few of the core specific ones that I like 0:17:15.880 --> 0:17:18.919 to look at week to week is what kind of 0:17:19.760 --> 0:17:22.639 trouble can you get into off the tee? So if 0:17:22.680 --> 0:17:28.119 we compare how a player scores from the rough or 0:17:28.160 --> 0:17:32.040 the fairway bunker to how they score from the fairway 0:17:33.960 --> 0:17:36.280 and then just average that for all the different players 0:17:36.320 --> 0:17:40.080 at each hole, you can get a Basically, you can 0:17:40.119 --> 0:17:43.280 get the value of how much it costs you if 0:17:43.320 --> 0:17:48.240 you don't hit the fairway, and that can range at Salgrass, 0:17:48.600 --> 0:17:52.800 East Lake, I think Mierfield Village they're near about half 0:17:52.840 --> 0:17:56.680 a stroke penalty average is somewhere around point three or 0:17:56.720 --> 0:17:59.040 point three and a half, and then on the low 0:17:59.160 --> 0:18:03.560 end you get your Augusta Nationals or Riviera. I think 0:18:03.680 --> 0:18:07.720 this week's TVC Louisiana is low somewhere down point two, 0:18:08.600 --> 0:18:10.959 So that kind of gives you an indication of you know, 0:18:11.000 --> 0:18:14.000 how much how much does it pay to be a 0:18:14.040 --> 0:18:16.920 straight hitter this week versus versus another week. 0:18:17.920 --> 0:18:20.520 So you know, there's always a lot of debate with 0:18:20.840 --> 0:18:24.720 Augusta and like, you know, does putting matter, like what 0:18:25.160 --> 0:18:28.879 does a right to left ball flight matter? Like in 0:18:29.320 --> 0:18:32.399 your estimation? What are the most important stats there? 0:18:34.840 --> 0:18:40.399 So definitely distance since the course got lengthened, that's most 0:18:40.480 --> 0:18:44.600 years that stands out as something that really predicts scoring. 0:18:47.160 --> 0:18:50.440 And that's there's a few reasons for that. Number one 0:18:50.560 --> 0:18:52.760 is it gives you the ability to attack some of 0:18:52.760 --> 0:18:58.080 those holes like thirteen and fifteen. Number two, if you 0:18:58.080 --> 0:19:03.800 can get it around the corner, number ten. And the 0:19:03.840 --> 0:19:07.920 second one is most big hitters also are a little 0:19:07.960 --> 0:19:13.400 wild off the tee. So at Augusta, if you miss 0:19:13.560 --> 0:19:16.520 if you miss the fair way, either you're in the 0:19:16.560 --> 0:19:19.840 second cut, which is basically nothing, or you're in the 0:19:19.880 --> 0:19:22.320 trees and you can normally play a shot out towards 0:19:22.400 --> 0:19:26.960 the green. There's very little penalty for being wild. So 0:19:27.000 --> 0:19:29.359 if you're a big hitter who hits it twenty yards 0:19:29.400 --> 0:19:33.680 past the field and maybe uncorks, really one poor shot 0:19:33.720 --> 0:19:36.919 around at Augusta, that one poor shot isn't really costing 0:19:36.960 --> 0:19:39.840 you like it is elsewhere. So I would say those 0:19:39.880 --> 0:19:42.880 are the big things, and that kind of played out 0:19:42.880 --> 0:19:46.080 this year. Sergio is a big hitter. Justin Rose is 0:19:46.080 --> 0:19:46.600 a big hitter. 0:19:47.680 --> 0:19:50.399 It seemed like Sergio was hitting it further than he 0:19:50.720 --> 0:19:53.480 usually does. I don't know just from the naked eye, 0:19:53.640 --> 0:19:57.639 was he, like, I mean, was that an extraordinarily long 0:19:57.760 --> 0:19:59.600 performance for him? 0:20:00.080 --> 0:20:02.679 It's definitely above average. Sergio is one of those guys 0:20:02.720 --> 0:20:05.800 who I kind of have the same reaction to you. 0:20:06.080 --> 0:20:10.080 He's he's sneaky long in some of these events where 0:20:10.119 --> 0:20:13.080 he's hitting it. You don't really think of him as 0:20:13.080 --> 0:20:15.960 somebody who's a big hitter, but he definitely was at Augusta. 0:20:16.040 --> 0:20:17.120 He was right up there with. 0:20:18.600 --> 0:20:21.199 Not maybe not quite Rory, but with hanging with the 0:20:21.240 --> 0:20:22.040 next tier guys. 0:20:24.320 --> 0:20:27.600 So with you know, kind of the world golf rankings, 0:20:27.640 --> 0:20:30.440 like what how do you view the world golf rankings? 0:20:30.520 --> 0:20:33.880 And if you're if you're kind of opposed to them, 0:20:34.119 --> 0:20:38.000 how would you change the rankings to better really gauge 0:20:38.000 --> 0:20:39.880 who's the best player in the world at a time. 0:20:42.080 --> 0:20:44.840 Okay, so there's there's two things. One is. 0:20:47.240 --> 0:20:50.719 Numerous people have found they're a little biased against PGA 0:20:50.840 --> 0:20:55.280 Tour players favoring players from other tours, which is which 0:20:55.320 --> 0:20:56.240 is definitely valid. 0:20:57.600 --> 0:20:58.560 It's easier for. 0:21:00.520 --> 0:21:04.320 Because the official World Golf Ranking has something called a 0:21:04.400 --> 0:21:09.760 minimum points, So these really weak events on the European Tour, 0:21:10.119 --> 0:21:14.840 the Japanese Tour, the Asian Tour are fixed that they 0:21:14.880 --> 0:21:17.360 have to award at least a certain number of points. 0:21:18.119 --> 0:21:22.000 And what happens is these events have quite weak fields 0:21:22.000 --> 0:21:25.600 compared to PGA Tour events, but they're still awarding the 0:21:25.600 --> 0:21:28.479 minimum number of points. That makes them look stronger than 0:21:28.520 --> 0:21:31.680 they really are. So there's a few players every year 0:21:32.320 --> 0:21:36.560 who are benefiting from from going perhaps to the Hero 0:21:36.720 --> 0:21:40.720 Indian Open and winning an event that maybe it should 0:21:40.760 --> 0:21:46.919 award twelve points, but it awards twenty four. And the 0:21:47.040 --> 0:21:51.800 second thing is the World Golf Rankings really award or 0:21:51.920 --> 0:21:56.920 reward accomplishment, So finishing number one is always better than 0:21:56.920 --> 0:22:02.320 finishing number two in a comparable event, and that I 0:22:02.359 --> 0:22:07.240 mean it makes sense as something that they're really designed 0:22:07.320 --> 0:22:11.560 to decide who gets into these big events, and accomplishment 0:22:12.440 --> 0:22:16.240 the golf world has decided is the best way to to, 0:22:16.960 --> 0:22:19.080 you know, figure out who gets to be in these events. 0:22:19.960 --> 0:22:24.240 It's completely different if you're trying to judge who's performing better, 0:22:24.320 --> 0:22:27.679 who's playing better, who the better player is. You know, 0:22:27.720 --> 0:22:30.240 if you put them out on the course for eighteen 0:22:30.280 --> 0:22:35.479 holes and that you look at that numerous cases throughout 0:22:35.480 --> 0:22:39.200 the year where someone wins a tournament, maybe they only 0:22:39.240 --> 0:22:43.600 beat the field by twelve shots the field average over 0:22:43.640 --> 0:22:47.040 the week, which is comparatively small. And then you have 0:22:47.080 --> 0:22:50.400 another you know, the extreme example of this is Stenson 0:22:50.480 --> 0:22:55.000 and Phil at the Open Championship last year. Phil Mickelson 0:22:55.080 --> 0:22:59.639 had probably the second best performance in a tournament in 0:22:59.680 --> 0:23:04.160 the last fifteen or twenty years. Yeah, and he only 0:23:04.200 --> 0:23:07.359 got fifty world ranking points or sixty World ranking points, 0:23:09.160 --> 0:23:12.919 whereas in any other event if he had produced that performance, 0:23:12.920 --> 0:23:14.840 he would have, you know, he would have won. 0:23:15.440 --> 0:23:19.520 And then you know, so if I understand what you're saying, 0:23:19.720 --> 0:23:22.560 like a guy that you know, like just as like 0:23:22.640 --> 0:23:25.600 a top twenty machine is kind of hurt by it, 0:23:26.160 --> 0:23:31.120 you know, because they aren't awarded as many points as say, well, 0:23:31.359 --> 0:23:35.119 I think Kevin Chappel's kind of a good example. You know, 0:23:35.200 --> 0:23:37.359 this year he hasn't been playing very well, but he 0:23:37.520 --> 0:23:39.439 just started kind of found something I feel like the 0:23:39.480 --> 0:23:42.520 last couple of weeks, and you know, then he wins, 0:23:42.880 --> 0:23:45.000 you know, probably not by that big of a margin, 0:23:45.280 --> 0:23:49.000 but he jumps twenty points in the world rankings. 0:23:49.200 --> 0:23:53.520 Yeah, just for winning, just for winning one tournament. So yeah, 0:23:53.560 --> 0:23:56.880 I definitely agree if you the fact is, if you've 0:23:56.920 --> 0:24:00.920 finished in twentieth place, I'd love to be able to 0:24:00.960 --> 0:24:03.160 quickly run the numbers for you, but but I can't. 0:24:03.640 --> 0:24:06.160 If you finished in twentieth place every week on tour, 0:24:06.920 --> 0:24:09.919 you'd be one of the best players out there. But 0:24:10.000 --> 0:24:12.600 your world ranking, I don't think it would be very good. 0:24:13.640 --> 0:24:16.639 You might be in the in the hundreds, maybe just 0:24:16.680 --> 0:24:21.800 because you wouldn't have like the My intuition is that 0:24:21.840 --> 0:24:25.920 you wouldn't have enough points to challenge challenge at the top. 0:24:26.960 --> 0:24:29.919 That's interesting. But then it also comes down to like 0:24:30.240 --> 0:24:34.359 definition of what the best players? Is it consistency or 0:24:34.440 --> 0:24:36.879 is it wins? You know, like, you know, how do 0:24:37.080 --> 0:24:40.640 how how would you go about valuing you know, say 0:24:40.800 --> 0:24:42.720 a player, like when you start to look at you know, 0:24:42.840 --> 0:24:45.560 greatest players of all time and and their scope of 0:24:45.600 --> 0:24:49.360 their career, you know, how do you weigh you know, 0:24:49.520 --> 0:24:54.000 dominance and wins versus a guy a consistency factor. 0:24:56.000 --> 0:25:00.320 I think I rely a lot more on results like 0:25:00.400 --> 0:25:03.800 wins major championships as the time. 0:25:03.640 --> 0:25:04.920 Skill gets longer. 0:25:05.520 --> 0:25:09.359 So if I'm judging a player's full career, maybe like 0:25:09.480 --> 0:25:12.679 Tiger versus Jack, then yet I think it's fair to 0:25:12.720 --> 0:25:17.000 look at you know, majors and events one and those 0:25:17.040 --> 0:25:19.560 sort of things over a year. I think if you're 0:25:19.640 --> 0:25:23.960 judging who's the best player by who has five wins 0:25:24.000 --> 0:25:27.000 and who has three, then I think that will not 0:25:27.359 --> 0:25:30.439 lead you to the best player as often as looking 0:25:30.480 --> 0:25:33.520 at you know, more performance based metrics. 0:25:34.480 --> 0:25:36.840 So it would be more like in the Strokes game 0:25:36.960 --> 0:25:41.920 department and everything like and kind of those stats, less 0:25:41.960 --> 0:25:43.440 so on wins. 0:25:43.880 --> 0:25:47.560 Yeah, exactly. Like at fifteenth Club we have a stat 0:25:47.840 --> 0:25:51.920 called Performance Index, which basically rates every player in the 0:25:52.000 --> 0:25:55.840 world against each other based on you know, adjusts for 0:25:55.960 --> 0:25:57.720 the strength of the fields that they play and the 0:25:57.720 --> 0:26:02.320 difficulty of the courses, and and weighs recent play more 0:26:02.400 --> 0:26:06.800 all those things. And I think this week Rory is 0:26:06.840 --> 0:26:12.360 the number one player over anyone else. And I'm not 0:26:12.400 --> 0:26:14.919 so sure anyone right now would say Rory is the 0:26:14.920 --> 0:26:18.879 best player in golf. People would probably say DJ. But 0:26:19.000 --> 0:26:22.440 even before DJ fell down, the Stairs a few weeks ago. 0:26:23.480 --> 0:26:28.320 Rory was very close to DJ in our numbers, enough 0:26:28.359 --> 0:26:31.880 that one week could have changed things if DJ didn't 0:26:31.920 --> 0:26:35.320 play that well at the Masters. And I think anyone 0:26:35.760 --> 0:26:38.760 in their right mind right before the Masters would have said, 0:26:38.840 --> 0:26:40.360 you know, DJ is the best player in the world, 0:26:40.400 --> 0:26:44.760 and it's not really close because he had accomplished so 0:26:44.880 --> 0:26:50.080 much in his last really I guess nine months. But Rory, 0:26:50.320 --> 0:26:53.119 you see him week to week is just's He's in 0:26:53.160 --> 0:26:55.800 the top ten every single week and he's often in 0:26:55.840 --> 0:26:59.080 contention and really right there with with DJ. 0:27:00.280 --> 0:27:04.560 Who would he on that list on your guys's rankings? Like, 0:27:04.600 --> 0:27:09.040 who are some surprises? I'm assuming obviously you've got you know, 0:27:09.160 --> 0:27:12.320 Speace up there, and Ram is probably up there really 0:27:12.400 --> 0:27:15.240 highly based off of his recent success, But you know, 0:27:15.280 --> 0:27:18.040 who are some kind of I guess, like I'm just 0:27:18.160 --> 0:27:18.880 kind of curious. 0:27:18.960 --> 0:27:19.160 Now. 0:27:21.000 --> 0:27:25.440 Yeah, so until Rom won, I think we had Rom 0:27:25.480 --> 0:27:28.480 when he won in San Diego. He was rated in 0:27:28.560 --> 0:27:32.840 the teens in Performance Index before he won, and I 0:27:32.840 --> 0:27:36.680 think he was where was he in the world ranking, maybe. 0:27:36.840 --> 0:27:38.840 Fiftieth or fortieth or something like that. 0:27:38.880 --> 0:27:42.560 Yeah, okay, he was, he was outside the top hundred 0:27:42.600 --> 0:27:45.119 before he won and then he was forty sixth after 0:27:45.200 --> 0:27:48.600 he won. So that's a good example of where the 0:27:48.640 --> 0:27:51.760 world rankings kind of screws a guy like him who's 0:27:51.840 --> 0:27:55.120 just absolutely dominant for his first twenty events on tour, 0:27:56.480 --> 0:28:02.480 but it kind of pushes him back Malinori as a 0:28:02.480 --> 0:28:05.840 guy who's who we have as a top twenty player 0:28:05.920 --> 0:28:10.399 right now. Again, he's extremely consistent. He's always, you know, 0:28:10.640 --> 0:28:16.000 just outside the mix. He's rarely missing cuts. Rapha Coberabeo 0:28:16.200 --> 0:28:17.280 was like that for most. 0:28:17.119 --> 0:28:17.800 Of last year. 0:28:18.200 --> 0:28:21.359 Yeah, he kind of took it maybe into the Ryder 0:28:21.359 --> 0:28:23.879 Cup and maybe still isn't kind of popping up on 0:28:23.920 --> 0:28:27.239 people's radar, but he was. He was rating as a 0:28:27.359 --> 0:28:30.520 very very good player last year. And it's again because 0:28:30.920 --> 0:28:33.640 you know, week to week he was playing so consistently well. 0:28:34.960 --> 0:28:37.719 So if you were gonna say, like, you know, this 0:28:37.800 --> 0:28:40.920 is a guy that's going to break out, that maybe 0:28:40.960 --> 0:28:43.760 not a name that's not on everybody's radar, like who 0:28:43.760 --> 0:28:48.800 could be the next you know, Thomas Peters type breakout player, 0:28:48.840 --> 0:28:52.640 who would it be? Based off of numbers? 0:28:53.320 --> 0:28:56.040 That's stuff I'll have to give me. 0:28:56.080 --> 0:28:57.600 Give me about ten minutes and I can come back 0:28:57.600 --> 0:29:01.040 to you with an answer, I'll do some searching on 0:29:01.080 --> 0:29:03.960 the sidelines while we talked, so. 0:29:04.440 --> 0:29:08.520 In terms of in terms of the you know, kind 0:29:08.520 --> 0:29:11.400 of players that you're working with now, is it's very European, 0:29:11.440 --> 0:29:14.520 too ur heavy, you know, Is there any guys that 0:29:14.560 --> 0:29:18.160 you look at and think like, I'd really like to 0:29:18.200 --> 0:29:20.840 work with this guy because I know we could make him, 0:29:21.040 --> 0:29:24.880 you know, a better player, Like if so, Like who 0:29:24.960 --> 0:29:27.040 would be some names that you'd love to kind of 0:29:27.080 --> 0:29:29.680 work with and and talk about, you know where there 0:29:29.760 --> 0:29:32.160 might be some you know, deficiencies that could you know, 0:29:32.360 --> 0:29:33.480 greatly improve play. 0:29:35.000 --> 0:29:35.200 Well. 0:29:35.240 --> 0:29:39.520 I'd love to work with Bryson just to experience what 0:29:39.560 --> 0:29:43.080 that would be like for a week, just to get 0:29:43.080 --> 0:29:46.880 inside of his head and see see what crazy theories 0:29:46.920 --> 0:29:48.600 he's he's come up with on his own. 0:29:49.840 --> 0:29:50.560 So that's one. 0:29:51.880 --> 0:29:55.240 An interesting one who is way off the radar is 0:29:55.920 --> 0:29:56.840 jj A Henry. 0:29:58.040 --> 0:30:00.480 A lot of our stats, a lot of the stats. 0:30:00.480 --> 0:30:02.800 When I look at him, he pops up as someone 0:30:02.800 --> 0:30:07.440 who plays very conservative golf. He lays up off the 0:30:07.480 --> 0:30:11.800 tea a lot. When we measure aggressiveness in terms of 0:30:11.880 --> 0:30:15.200 hitting the shots into the green, he always comes up 0:30:15.240 --> 0:30:19.880 as very conservative. I think if putting numbers are conservative 0:30:19.960 --> 0:30:23.600 in terms of he's not really giving himself the chance 0:30:23.680 --> 0:30:26.680 to make putts sometimes, why not getting into the hole. 0:30:27.960 --> 0:30:30.040 So I think if we could could sit down with 0:30:30.160 --> 0:30:33.400 him and have him buy in and maybe play a 0:30:33.440 --> 0:30:37.520 little more aggressive golf, then he could, you know, maybe 0:30:37.560 --> 0:30:40.480 he could improve. So that's kind of one off the 0:30:40.560 --> 0:30:41.600 off the radar. 0:30:41.520 --> 0:30:43.960 Kind of amazing that that's like, you know, one of 0:30:44.040 --> 0:30:47.840 Trone's like whipping boys, and. 0:30:47.800 --> 0:30:50.640 You can absolutely see why it's his whipping boy because 0:30:50.640 --> 0:30:54.520 he does I would say he babi's the ball around 0:30:54.520 --> 0:30:57.960 the course so that he can you know, make a 0:30:58.000 --> 0:31:00.520 cut and cash a check for fifty place. 0:31:01.360 --> 0:31:06.000 Who today is the most miscast, you know, whipping boy 0:31:06.040 --> 0:31:06.760 of tron. 0:31:09.080 --> 0:31:12.440 Oh, I think it has to be Brendan Steel. Brendan 0:31:12.520 --> 0:31:17.000 Steele is a big numbers a big guy that numbers love. 0:31:17.920 --> 0:31:20.880 I'm not sure how into numbers he is, but but 0:31:20.960 --> 0:31:23.800 the numbers really like the changes he's made to his game. 0:31:24.160 --> 0:31:27.880 He's really improved how he drives the ball in the 0:31:27.920 --> 0:31:33.320 last few years and and he went from being completely 0:31:33.320 --> 0:31:36.800 ineffective off the tea, not long and not straight to 0:31:37.320 --> 0:31:40.960 being a pretty big hitter who can really control his 0:31:41.080 --> 0:31:44.400 ball and and really really gains strokes in the long 0:31:44.440 --> 0:31:48.480 game now, so just in terms of golf ability that 0:31:48.480 --> 0:31:51.280 that gets unnecessary abuse from Tron, I would say, I 0:31:51.320 --> 0:31:52.600 would say it's Brendan Steel. 0:31:53.120 --> 0:31:55.560 I've always wondered that too, because he does like he 0:31:55.720 --> 0:31:59.440 rips it and he plays pretty aggressive. But you know, 0:31:59.520 --> 0:32:01.880 you get on the wrong side of Tron. I mean, 0:32:01.920 --> 0:32:04.560 I'm shocked that you brought up JJ Henry. 0:32:06.600 --> 0:32:10.720 He's He's someone who has always always stood out in 0:32:10.760 --> 0:32:15.720 that sort of aggressiveness data that we whether we've looked at. 0:32:16.760 --> 0:32:21.600 So anytime I anytime I run a new stat, JJ 0:32:21.680 --> 0:32:23.400 Henry is one of the first people I check where 0:32:23.400 --> 0:32:26.160 he isn't it? And normally he's sticking out in some 0:32:26.240 --> 0:32:26.959 different direction. 0:32:27.480 --> 0:32:31.680 Unbelievable. So do you do? You say, like, I'm a 0:32:31.680 --> 0:32:34.320 web dot Com tour player and I have you know, 0:32:34.400 --> 0:32:37.320 they don't really have like the shot link data and everything. 0:32:37.760 --> 0:32:40.440 How how would I work with the fifteenth club and 0:32:40.560 --> 0:32:42.760 you guys like, how how would you guys go about that? 0:32:42.800 --> 0:32:45.000 Would it be manual stats? They'd have to keep. 0:32:46.480 --> 0:32:46.680 Yes. 0:32:46.840 --> 0:32:49.200 So so right now, most of our clients on the 0:32:49.200 --> 0:32:53.720 European Tour will have their caddy track the data during 0:32:53.720 --> 0:32:57.080 the round. Since the caddy already pretty much knows the 0:32:57.160 --> 0:33:00.200 length and lie of each shot. Just write that information 0:33:00.360 --> 0:33:04.040 down and input it into our app at the end 0:33:04.080 --> 0:33:04.520 of the round. 0:33:05.160 --> 0:33:06.280 It's it's really simple. 0:33:06.320 --> 0:33:10.040 It takes ten minutes and you can immediately get feedback 0:33:10.080 --> 0:33:12.240 on how you played that day if you're interested in it. 0:33:13.240 --> 0:33:16.720 But yeah, it's manually tracked, and that is because the 0:33:16.800 --> 0:33:23.160 European Tour doesn't have a shot link esque system. Neither 0:33:23.240 --> 0:33:26.280 do any of the other tours. So that's really designed 0:33:26.320 --> 0:33:31.240 to be a solution for LPGA players, Web dot Com players, 0:33:31.280 --> 0:33:35.120 European Tour players, you know, anyone who doesn't have someone 0:33:35.160 --> 0:33:36.440 tracking that for them already. 0:33:36.680 --> 0:33:39.240 It could be you know, even amateurs like me. 0:33:39.600 --> 0:33:44.800 Huh, yeah, absolutely, it's it's in discussion for an amateur product, 0:33:44.920 --> 0:33:47.959 there's a lot more competition in that space. 0:33:48.080 --> 0:33:51.280 But yeah, I think about it because I play in 0:33:51.520 --> 0:33:55.880 you know, am stuff and mid am stuff, and I'm 0:33:55.880 --> 0:33:59.440 always curious about my game, and I kind of like, 0:33:59.600 --> 0:34:03.400 I'm probably the exact person that you hate because I'm like, well, 0:34:03.440 --> 0:34:05.960 I think I hit my wedge as well, but it 0:34:06.000 --> 0:34:08.719 could have been you know, terrible wedges. What would you 0:34:08.760 --> 0:34:12.279 say to like the you know, every day gofer like, 0:34:12.560 --> 0:34:16.040 say I wanted to get into thinking more analytically, what 0:34:16.120 --> 0:34:16.719 should I do? 0:34:18.880 --> 0:34:23.440 I would say, first, start collecting data, no matter whether 0:34:23.520 --> 0:34:28.560 you use you know, a product or a spreadsheet of 0:34:28.600 --> 0:34:34.360 your own. I would say, start tracking objectively tracking data 0:34:34.440 --> 0:34:37.479 on your game. Uh, maybe if it's even one part. 0:34:37.600 --> 0:34:40.200 If you if you think, say you think you're putting 0:34:40.280 --> 0:34:45.920 is very poor, take detailed notes of the thirty rounds 0:34:46.000 --> 0:34:47.200 you play this summer. 0:34:47.040 --> 0:34:49.960 And how you put and and. 0:34:49.840 --> 0:34:53.920 That really, I mean, really we're I say this to 0:34:54.040 --> 0:34:55.880 a lot of our clients all the time, is we 0:34:56.000 --> 0:34:58.960 really need data to help you out. You know, we're 0:34:59.000 --> 0:35:01.640 not a we're not a but we're not using our eyes, 0:35:02.280 --> 0:35:05.879 we're not using feel we're we're judging based off data. 0:35:06.080 --> 0:35:09.120 And if you're an amateur, who's you know, who's looking 0:35:09.160 --> 0:35:16.399 to improve, rigorously track your data, however you can and 0:35:16.560 --> 0:35:20.560 really judge where you are. And then maybe you maybe 0:35:20.560 --> 0:35:22.319 you spend all summer tracking and you're putting and you're 0:35:22.320 --> 0:35:25.080 actually not that bad, and you can move on to 0:35:25.160 --> 0:35:28.680 something else. But maybe it reveals that you're you know, 0:35:28.719 --> 0:35:31.760 that you're really poorer outside of forty feet with your putting, 0:35:32.400 --> 0:35:34.600 or really poor inside of ten feet with your putting, 0:35:34.640 --> 0:35:37.359 and that's something that you can then you know, whether 0:35:37.400 --> 0:35:40.399 it's taking a lesson or looking for instruction, you can 0:35:41.239 --> 0:35:42.240 you know, look to improve. 0:35:42.520 --> 0:35:46.839 So if I wanted to go all in, I'm diving in. 0:35:47.000 --> 0:35:49.200 I'm going to collect the data, like how deep do 0:35:49.239 --> 0:35:51.720 you go? Do you say I hit a t shot? 0:35:51.840 --> 0:35:54.799 I hit it two d and eighty five yards to 0:35:54.920 --> 0:35:57.520 the right center? That is it? Is it to like 0:35:57.600 --> 0:36:01.520 the specific side, say I missed a fairway? Like how 0:36:01.600 --> 0:36:02.600 detailed would you go? 0:36:04.160 --> 0:36:08.560 In our basic in our basic app that tracks player data, 0:36:08.800 --> 0:36:11.439 it's it's a simple amount of data just to get 0:36:11.480 --> 0:36:17.239 the to get their strokes gained, calculation out. You need 0:36:17.239 --> 0:36:20.880 the lie of the ball, you need the distance it 0:36:21.000 --> 0:36:25.240 is from the pin. Tell me if it's a impeded shot. 0:36:25.400 --> 0:36:27.799 Are you behind a tree? Because that changes things? Are 0:36:27.800 --> 0:36:32.239 you behind the loop of a bunker? And what's the 0:36:32.440 --> 0:36:35.920 what's the club you used? And where did you miss 0:36:35.960 --> 0:36:37.040 relative to your target? 0:36:37.560 --> 0:36:39.960 Excuse me? So, if you're aiming. 0:36:41.320 --> 0:36:44.440 Ten feet right of the pin and you put it 0:36:44.480 --> 0:36:46.600 sixty feet right of the pin, then that's a miss 0:36:46.640 --> 0:36:50.200 to the right. And just that's the basic level of 0:36:50.560 --> 0:36:52.160 tracking data. 0:36:52.200 --> 0:36:55.720 Interesting, So I imagine that one of the biggest things people 0:36:55.800 --> 0:36:58.200 mess up is how many feet away they are when 0:36:58.200 --> 0:37:02.439 they're putting, because I always feel like people underestimate how 0:37:02.480 --> 0:37:04.480 far away they are. They'll be like, oh, I missed 0:37:05.200 --> 0:37:08.239 a five footer, but they were really like eight feet away. 0:37:10.280 --> 0:37:12.279 Or if they make that five footer, it turns into 0:37:12.320 --> 0:37:13.920 an eight footer. 0:37:14.760 --> 0:37:18.640 That's true, it's it's a and then you know, like 0:37:18.680 --> 0:37:23.799 a it's It's really interesting because I talked to USC's 0:37:23.920 --> 0:37:26.560 coach and they and they started to do strokes gained, 0:37:27.200 --> 0:37:30.120 and something he said to me that I found like 0:37:30.239 --> 0:37:35.759 really interesting was that they have above tour average ball strikers, 0:37:36.239 --> 0:37:40.080 but none of their players are above tour average putters. 0:37:41.280 --> 0:37:43.600 And that's the number one team program in the in 0:37:43.640 --> 0:37:46.440 the country. So like this is where my kind of 0:37:46.840 --> 0:37:50.560 bias where I say, like putting really does matter because 0:37:50.640 --> 0:37:53.120 these guys are or is it that all these guys 0:37:53.160 --> 0:37:55.759 are so good at putting that it's diminished. 0:37:57.520 --> 0:37:58.040 Yeah. 0:37:58.080 --> 0:38:01.719 So, so I think one of the things that's come 0:38:01.760 --> 0:38:06.000 out of Mark Brodie's work is is how important the 0:38:06.040 --> 0:38:11.080 long game is, and people have kind of stuck with 0:38:11.160 --> 0:38:15.319 that as the message, and that message is that it's 0:38:15.360 --> 0:38:19.520 the most important, not the only thing. That matters, and 0:38:19.560 --> 0:38:23.440 I think that kind of gets lost sometimes. But definitely 0:38:23.440 --> 0:38:27.319 if you look at at the spread between what the 0:38:27.320 --> 0:38:30.560 best and the worst putters are doing, it's smaller than 0:38:30.760 --> 0:38:33.239 the spread between what the best and the worst drivers 0:38:33.239 --> 0:38:35.759 and best of the worst approach out players are doing. 0:38:37.000 --> 0:38:39.239 So really that that is it on the on the 0:38:39.280 --> 0:38:44.040 pro tour, I have no idea how the USC results 0:38:44.040 --> 0:38:46.920 are coming out like they are. If they do really 0:38:46.960 --> 0:38:51.960 have tour level ball strikers in that program, that's incredible. 0:38:52.880 --> 0:38:56.520 Yeah, you know, I found it pretty interesting that like 0:38:56.680 --> 0:39:01.240 not even their best putter was in a plus strokes 0:39:01.280 --> 0:39:04.799 gained player. But you know, I mean they do have, like, 0:39:04.920 --> 0:39:07.440 you know, some of the best players in the country. 0:39:07.480 --> 0:39:10.000 You know, I think they've got to Walker Cuppers and 0:39:10.080 --> 0:39:12.920 they've got that, They've got that kid that played in 0:39:12.920 --> 0:39:15.839 the Masters like last year, who's a freshman who from 0:39:16.239 --> 0:39:19.319 China change in. So I mean they have elite you 0:39:19.320 --> 0:39:23.200 know kids. But that's so that's a good question. What 0:39:23.360 --> 0:39:26.880 would you say, is you know, kind of the the 0:39:26.920 --> 0:39:30.080 barrier for you know, like young kids when they come up, 0:39:30.200 --> 0:39:33.920 like is there a common skill that they usually lack, 0:39:34.160 --> 0:39:36.239 you know, when they're young and on tour. 0:39:38.600 --> 0:39:41.960 Yeah, I would say without having study that that closely 0:39:42.440 --> 0:39:49.000 short game would would be one course, management would be another. 0:39:50.160 --> 0:39:52.200 Maybe you maybe you step on the tour and you 0:39:52.239 --> 0:39:55.560 can hit it long and you your ball striking is okay, 0:39:55.600 --> 0:39:59.200 but you know, you're really inconsistent with a wedge. You 0:39:59.200 --> 0:40:02.400 don't chip that girl right, you can put well inside 0:40:02.400 --> 0:40:05.960 ten feet, but maybe when you lag it, you're you're awful. 0:40:06.760 --> 0:40:09.919 And those are just sort of the kind of things 0:40:09.960 --> 0:40:12.879 that you can solve by putting yourself into better places 0:40:14.280 --> 0:40:17.160 around the green. Maybe you don't play so aggressively in 0:40:17.560 --> 0:40:20.520 certain danger spots. So I would say those are the 0:40:20.560 --> 0:40:23.840 things that kind of separate I feel like the best players. 0:40:24.040 --> 0:40:29.400 It's so much reps too, you know, because oh absolutely yeah, 0:40:29.440 --> 0:40:31.600 And like the mental side of it, Like I think 0:40:31.640 --> 0:40:35.960 about myself like you know, in amateur tournaments when I 0:40:36.000 --> 0:40:39.239 was twenty four versus now when I'm thirty one, and 0:40:39.440 --> 0:40:43.160 I think completely different, I play completely different I play, so, 0:40:43.360 --> 0:40:46.640 you know, like I'm just smarter, And I imagine that's 0:40:46.760 --> 0:40:49.880 a lot of like the maturation. Like I think Dustin 0:40:49.960 --> 0:40:52.600 Johnson's a good example with this wedge thing. It's like 0:40:52.800 --> 0:40:55.760 it's not that he just started practicing he might have learned, 0:40:56.080 --> 0:40:58.880 you know, stuff in along the way. It's not like 0:40:58.920 --> 0:41:01.439 he just started practicing wedges, right. 0:41:02.840 --> 0:41:05.120 Yeah, No, absolutely, I think you're spot on with that. 0:41:05.920 --> 0:41:09.480 You just learn, you learn how to be a better player, 0:41:11.200 --> 0:41:14.560 You learn how to attack different courses because you've seen 0:41:14.600 --> 0:41:18.360 them before. I think that's a big thing. I was 0:41:18.360 --> 0:41:21.960 listening to to No Laying Ups podcasts with Harold Varner, 0:41:23.040 --> 0:41:25.960 and Harold Varner said that, you know, he doesn't think 0:41:26.000 --> 0:41:28.759 Tiger even practices that much at the course because he's 0:41:28.800 --> 0:41:31.840 seen everything. And that's true. He's seen everything for twenty years. 0:41:32.440 --> 0:41:34.320 You know, he doesn't need to be out there grinding, 0:41:34.840 --> 0:41:38.200 whereas you know, maybe Harold Varner, a rookie or a 0:41:38.239 --> 0:41:41.040 second year player, you know, they do need to be 0:41:41.080 --> 0:41:43.440 out there grinding and learning these courses. 0:41:43.680 --> 0:41:46.200 I was kind of surprised when he said he shows 0:41:46.280 --> 0:41:49.640 up to tournaments on Wednesdays. 0:41:50.040 --> 0:41:53.440 Yeah, I mean that's a it works for him. I 0:41:53.440 --> 0:41:55.880 don't know how it works for him right now, but 0:41:55.880 --> 0:41:59.160 but if that's if he likes to fly home every week, 0:41:59.160 --> 0:41:59.920 that's what you gotta do. 0:42:00.440 --> 0:42:03.960 Yeah, how what would you say, is like the disadvantage 0:42:04.000 --> 0:42:07.120 of a rookie. I mean, obviously they already have the 0:42:07.200 --> 0:42:10.600 chips stacked against them with regards to like the schedule 0:42:10.800 --> 0:42:14.200 and and the ranking system, but playing these courses for 0:42:14.239 --> 0:42:17.080 the first time versus the veterans like they have seen 0:42:17.160 --> 0:42:19.920 them for years. Like what what would you say is like, 0:42:20.360 --> 0:42:23.439 you know, first time course, Like disadvantage is it half 0:42:23.440 --> 0:42:24.680 a shot around. 0:42:24.440 --> 0:42:27.960 Or I don't think it's that big. I don't think 0:42:27.960 --> 0:42:31.400 it's that big at all. I think the disadvantage is 0:42:31.440 --> 0:42:33.879 really that a rookie is not going to be as 0:42:33.880 --> 0:42:36.560 good of a player. If you put a if you 0:42:36.920 --> 0:42:39.840 put put the tour players in two different groups, rookies 0:42:39.840 --> 0:42:43.600 and non rookies, the rookies are going to be just 0:42:43.680 --> 0:42:46.839 worse players, just just because it makes sense. You know, 0:42:47.640 --> 0:42:51.480 these veterans have been on tour for for longer, they're 0:42:51.600 --> 0:42:55.600 normally more skilled players. So I think that's that really 0:42:55.680 --> 0:42:58.600 drives much of the disadvantage rookies face, as they just 0:42:58.680 --> 0:42:59.319 aren't as good. 0:43:00.320 --> 0:43:03.520 So like, how good is Jon Rahm from? Like from 0:43:03.560 --> 0:43:08.320 a strictly numbers standpoint, Like where what are you saying? 0:43:08.680 --> 0:43:11.040 Like I've I've said for a long time, he's he's 0:43:11.040 --> 0:43:13.680 got number one written all over him. And you know, 0:43:14.360 --> 0:43:17.560 I think now everybody's saying that, but like, is he 0:43:18.080 --> 0:43:19.600 a generational player? 0:43:21.640 --> 0:43:24.680 I think he could be right now. 0:43:24.760 --> 0:43:28.560 I think he's he's already in that that like second 0:43:28.640 --> 0:43:34.280 tier of players in terms of you know, for fifth, sixth, seventh, 0:43:34.320 --> 0:43:39.240 best in the world. And just because his his skills 0:43:39.280 --> 0:43:42.719 so far seemed to be he drives them all extremely 0:43:42.760 --> 0:43:43.840 well and he hits his irons. 0:43:43.880 --> 0:43:44.080 Well. 0:43:44.600 --> 0:43:48.080 That's the kind of that's the kind of template that 0:43:48.239 --> 0:43:52.239 Rory and DJ have really written to the top of 0:43:52.280 --> 0:43:56.280 the game, you know, as they've fixed slowly fixed flaws 0:43:56.280 --> 0:43:59.280 in their game and gained a tenth of a stroke 0:43:59.320 --> 0:44:02.640 here in a quote of a stroke there. Uh, he's exactly. 0:44:02.760 --> 0:44:04.680 John Ram is the exactly the kind of guy I 0:44:04.680 --> 0:44:07.680 can see tweaking a few things and and being, you know, 0:44:07.719 --> 0:44:09.680 the next new number one player in the world. 0:44:10.760 --> 0:44:13.879 We're you know, like, who would you say is kind 0:44:13.920 --> 0:44:16.400 of like the outlier of stats? Is there anybody that 0:44:16.560 --> 0:44:19.640 just like, you know, based off of your numbers and 0:44:19.680 --> 0:44:22.640 then but the performance is like the complete opposite of 0:44:22.680 --> 0:44:23.960 what your numbers would suggest. 0:44:26.000 --> 0:44:30.319 There's a handful of guys who are are quite inconsistent 0:44:30.360 --> 0:44:35.520 with how they play. They'll have weeks where they look 0:44:35.800 --> 0:44:39.440 like look outstanding and they'll contend in tournaments or win, 0:44:40.160 --> 0:44:43.160 and then they'll have a lot of weeks where where 0:44:43.600 --> 0:44:48.960 they where they're missing cuts and missing cuts badly. I 0:44:48.960 --> 0:44:51.279 think Thomas Peters was a guy like that for for 0:44:51.320 --> 0:44:57.640 a long time, basically up until like last fall, and 0:44:57.680 --> 0:45:01.440 now he's you know, whatever that Lee was in those weeks, 0:45:02.080 --> 0:45:04.799 he's kind of fixed that and he's so much better 0:45:04.840 --> 0:45:09.959 for a player. So yeah, a lot of those young, 0:45:10.560 --> 0:45:13.719 mostly young and inconsistent players are really the ones where 0:45:14.280 --> 0:45:18.279 where stats don't tell as accurate of a story because 0:45:18.280 --> 0:45:22.480 it's measuring their average week, which isn't very good, instead 0:45:22.480 --> 0:45:25.040 of their best weeks when they're contending and winning. 0:45:25.880 --> 0:45:30.120 Yeah. I think that's and so much of that could 0:45:30.280 --> 0:45:33.160 be just adjusting to you know, life as a PGA 0:45:33.239 --> 0:45:37.040 tour player, traveling, being on your own, all that stuff. 0:45:38.520 --> 0:45:41.280 Absolutely, Yeah, all that sort of stuff that we discussed 0:45:41.280 --> 0:45:43.720 about ten minutes ago, the adjustment to the tour life. 0:45:44.560 --> 0:45:46.640 You know, you go from being in a college campus 0:45:46.760 --> 0:45:49.840 or in a you know, your national team's training facility 0:45:51.320 --> 0:45:53.520 for most of your time and practicing with the same 0:45:53.560 --> 0:45:58.080 people and now you're you're spread around twenty countries around 0:45:58.080 --> 0:46:00.319 the world or all over the United States and you're 0:46:00.560 --> 0:46:03.839 expected to perform or you lose your card. Yeah, that's 0:46:03.880 --> 0:46:05.840 a tough life. 0:46:06.280 --> 0:46:09.040 So, you know, with this week being a new format, 0:46:09.120 --> 0:46:11.880 and I'm kind of interested to hear how you would 0:46:12.440 --> 0:46:15.239 do this, Like how if you were playing and you 0:46:15.280 --> 0:46:17.360 know or say, you have a player that you know 0:46:18.080 --> 0:46:21.040 is in this event, how would you advise them about 0:46:21.080 --> 0:46:23.600 going to pick their partner? Because you always hear, oh, 0:46:23.640 --> 0:46:26.680 they'll be a great. Their games compliment themselves at each 0:46:26.719 --> 0:46:29.360 other so much like they'll be a great, Like what 0:46:29.360 --> 0:46:32.560 what would be your formula? And how cliched is the 0:46:32.640 --> 0:46:33.160 current one? 0:46:35.719 --> 0:46:39.920 Well, the current one, I don't think it's fully thought 0:46:40.000 --> 0:46:43.880 through in our In our Ryder Cup work, we delved 0:46:43.920 --> 0:46:47.640 into sort of what makes a good foursomes pairing, and 0:46:47.680 --> 0:46:51.279 what it really is about is player A and player 0:46:51.400 --> 0:46:53.440 B both have things they do well and both have 0:46:53.520 --> 0:46:56.320 things they don't do well. And it's kind of about 0:46:56.320 --> 0:47:00.759 putting player A in situations where they're not going to 0:47:00.760 --> 0:47:03.880 be causing player B to hit one of their bad shots. 0:47:05.160 --> 0:47:07.640 So if you have someone who struggles with their short game, 0:47:08.239 --> 0:47:12.960 pair them with someone who's just hitting greens relentlessly so 0:47:13.000 --> 0:47:15.960 they're not so they're hitting a forty foot pot instead 0:47:16.000 --> 0:47:19.600 of a twenty yard chip that they might that they 0:47:19.680 --> 0:47:20.359 might screw up. 0:47:20.480 --> 0:47:23.160 So Graham to Let, you'd pair with like the best 0:47:23.160 --> 0:47:24.640 ball striker in the world. 0:47:25.239 --> 0:47:27.200 Yeah, I'd put pair of gram to Let with with 0:47:27.320 --> 0:47:31.080 Graham to Let. So we'll see how that works this week. 0:47:31.120 --> 0:47:33.880 Without grand Let hitting his approach shots into the green. 0:47:33.880 --> 0:47:36.279 Oh man, I didn't even think about that. I wish 0:47:36.360 --> 0:47:40.880 I would have thought about that before. What So what 0:47:40.960 --> 0:47:42.680 else do you what else do you look at? 0:47:43.440 --> 0:47:47.400 Okay, So I took a look at this this morning. Unfortunately, 0:47:47.480 --> 0:47:50.000 I was disappointed that we didn't have any players choosing 0:47:50.040 --> 0:47:52.799 to play this week, because I do think it's an 0:47:52.800 --> 0:47:58.800 interesting intellectual exercise. So we kind of identify key shots 0:47:58.920 --> 0:48:04.120 throughout the course, and these are shots where the difference 0:48:04.400 --> 0:48:08.480 between how players perform on them is really wide, so 0:48:08.520 --> 0:48:10.759 that they can either hit a good shot that gets 0:48:10.760 --> 0:48:13.360 really rewarded or they can hit a poor shot that 0:48:13.400 --> 0:48:16.719 gets really punished. And a good example of that type 0:48:16.760 --> 0:48:20.000 of hole is like seventeen at Sawgrass. It's only a 0:48:20.040 --> 0:48:22.279 short wedge. If you hit a good shot, you're gonna 0:48:22.280 --> 0:48:25.760 make birdie. If you hit a poor shot, you're dead. 0:48:25.760 --> 0:48:30.080 And you're in for double bogie. So we can do 0:48:30.200 --> 0:48:34.120 that for all holes on tour, and we can break 0:48:34.120 --> 0:48:35.880 it down even to look at key shots. 0:48:36.120 --> 0:48:37.400 So maybe on. 0:48:39.000 --> 0:48:42.400 Eighteen at Sawgrass, the drives a real key drive because 0:48:42.440 --> 0:48:45.720 you can get wet very easily, but maybe the approach 0:48:45.800 --> 0:48:51.439 isn't as important. So when we look at Zurich, there's 0:48:51.440 --> 0:48:54.680 a few holes that stick out, and it's like the 0:48:54.719 --> 0:48:59.000 closing stretch. The key holes all set up for one 0:49:00.360 --> 0:49:03.680 one type of player to play one of them. If 0:49:03.680 --> 0:49:06.640 they play the odd tees, it sets up nicely for 0:49:06.719 --> 0:49:09.279 one group, and the guys playing the even and teas 0:49:09.320 --> 0:49:12.719 it sets up nicely for another. So basically it's like, 0:49:13.480 --> 0:49:15.959 if you have a really good ball striker on your team, 0:49:16.840 --> 0:49:19.040 have them play one set, and then if you have 0:49:19.120 --> 0:49:23.400 somebody who's you know, an accurate driver, good short game putts, 0:49:23.440 --> 0:49:26.440 well then they're better at playing the other holes. 0:49:26.480 --> 0:49:30.040 Interesting, so you're just gonna like watch tomorrow and laugh 0:49:30.080 --> 0:49:31.799 at all the teams that mess this up. 0:49:32.400 --> 0:49:34.680 Oh, if you don't think I'm going to criticize people, 0:49:35.120 --> 0:49:38.239 I might keep it off Twitter, but they will be 0:49:38.320 --> 0:49:42.799 silent judgment for sure. Sean Sean Martin at PGA Tour 0:49:42.880 --> 0:49:45.480 had had a good article where he touched on some 0:49:45.560 --> 0:49:49.520 of the strategy guys are using. He mentioned that there's 0:49:49.800 --> 0:49:53.719 you know, three par threes that are that one set 0:49:53.760 --> 0:49:56.080 of players will have the tee off one and the 0:49:56.120 --> 0:49:58.920 par threes here are really long. A couple of them 0:49:58.960 --> 0:50:02.040 are similar holes you know with water to the left 0:50:02.160 --> 0:50:05.080 that they do set up for for one guy. If 0:50:05.120 --> 0:50:08.000 you're a great ball striker, Lake Graham to let you 0:50:08.040 --> 0:50:12.760 know the awful those and and you get an advantage 0:50:12.760 --> 0:50:13.399 of that that way. 0:50:14.080 --> 0:50:17.560 So if you were going to pick one team, who 0:50:17.680 --> 0:50:20.000 would you be going with this week? In a in 0:50:20.080 --> 0:50:21.719 a one and done, like you know, you had to 0:50:21.760 --> 0:50:22.239 pick one. 0:50:25.560 --> 0:50:25.840 See. 0:50:25.880 --> 0:50:29.080 I think Stenson and Rose are pretty generically solid in 0:50:29.200 --> 0:50:32.720 terms of how their games match up, both being elite 0:50:32.719 --> 0:50:38.160 ball strikers. I kind of do like how how Spieth 0:50:38.239 --> 0:50:43.319 and and Ryan Palmer set up. Ryan Palmer is a 0:50:43.360 --> 0:50:46.840 pretty effective driver, he has a decent long game. Jordan 0:50:46.880 --> 0:50:52.480 Spieces is also you know, he's very solid around the 0:50:52.480 --> 0:50:55.480 board in terms of his his skill sets, So I 0:50:55.480 --> 0:50:58.319 think they can fit well together. Palmer's are really poor 0:50:58.520 --> 0:51:03.080 putter and have a great short game sometimes, so that's 0:51:03.120 --> 0:51:04.440 not really that much for a sleeper. 0:51:04.480 --> 0:51:07.319 But yeah, he didn't really give me give me any 0:51:07.440 --> 0:51:08.399 any sleepers. 0:51:09.239 --> 0:51:13.320 Yeah, I haven't really haven't really dug into the player matchup. 0:51:14.120 --> 0:51:17.080 That's fine. I'm kind of curious since you guys advised 0:51:17.200 --> 0:51:20.800 Lee Westwood and then you're probably really familiar with Terrell Hatton. 0:51:20.840 --> 0:51:23.799 I keep whenever I watch him play Hatton play, I 0:51:23.800 --> 0:51:27.640 think I feel like he's very similar to Lee Westwood 0:51:27.760 --> 0:51:32.600 when he was younger. Is that a good comp for him? 0:51:32.719 --> 0:51:36.320 I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm still not sure 0:51:36.480 --> 0:51:42.200 exactly what Tyrrell Hatton does great out there. I'm not 0:51:42.320 --> 0:51:46.600 terribly familiar with his game in general. I know he's 0:51:46.640 --> 0:51:48.200 been putting out of his mind recently. 0:51:48.760 --> 0:51:50.480 Yeah that's one. 0:51:50.360 --> 0:51:55.879 Thing, crazy ascension in the last eighteen months. But yeah, 0:51:56.080 --> 0:52:00.960 he I I just think it might be his build 0:52:01.040 --> 0:52:03.840 and a swing that that always makes me think of Westwood. 0:52:04.200 --> 0:52:09.239 But you know, it's interesting with Lee Westwood. Do you 0:52:09.280 --> 0:52:11.520 still think he can win a major? I mean, I 0:52:11.600 --> 0:52:16.040 might be crossing some client here privilege, but I still do. 0:52:16.440 --> 0:52:20.080 I've got like an ongoing bat with DJ Paiowski about it. 0:52:20.880 --> 0:52:24.719 Yeah, I absolutely think he can. You see him put 0:52:24.760 --> 0:52:29.640 himself in the position often enough. The main challenge for 0:52:29.719 --> 0:52:35.480 him is just his ability is deteriorating slowly, just age 0:52:35.520 --> 0:52:39.880 related to decline. So he's gonna run out of opportunities 0:52:40.239 --> 0:52:42.240 where he's you know, firing. 0:52:41.880 --> 0:52:42.719 On all cylinders. 0:52:43.360 --> 0:52:45.560 But in terms of do I think if he puts 0:52:45.640 --> 0:52:47.640 himself in the position he can get it done. I 0:52:47.719 --> 0:52:51.520 absolutely do, especially since so many of the major courses 0:52:52.440 --> 0:52:55.879 fit his game. So many of the major courses fit 0:52:56.000 --> 0:52:59.880 that sort of ball striking oriented drives it well, hit 0:53:00.080 --> 0:53:02.920 his irons well sort of games. 0:53:02.960 --> 0:53:06.160 That's a formula that works pretty much everywhere. 0:53:07.440 --> 0:53:09.360 Yeah, absolutely, for sure. 0:53:10.120 --> 0:53:13.600 It's but uh, I forgot what what you were researching? 0:53:13.680 --> 0:53:16.080 What was that? What? What do we what did we 0:53:16.160 --> 0:53:16.879 ask the. 0:53:18.520 --> 0:53:21.160 I can't remember the breakout player? 0:53:21.440 --> 0:53:24.440 Yeah? Yeah, who's your who's your breakout player? If you know, 0:53:24.560 --> 0:53:27.359 they could be outside the top fifty or I don't 0:53:27.400 --> 0:53:29.080 know where where you would term it. 0:53:30.840 --> 0:53:33.560 See, I didn't do my homework. I just too engrossed 0:53:33.560 --> 0:53:34.320 in the conversation. 0:53:34.920 --> 0:53:38.280 It's okay, No, it's fine, it's as so here let's 0:53:38.280 --> 0:53:41.319 talk about a breakout player. Then let's like, have you 0:53:41.360 --> 0:53:44.080 looked in in depth and Adam had win it all? 0:53:45.760 --> 0:53:46.040 I have? 0:53:46.160 --> 0:53:50.719 I've looked at his game great putter ball striking is 0:53:50.719 --> 0:53:54.719 better this year. And that's one of those things that 0:53:55.520 --> 0:53:57.960 for some guys it comes and goes season this season, 0:53:58.760 --> 0:54:00.840 you'll see a lot of guys I had a nice 0:54:01.560 --> 0:54:06.200 breakout with the Irons one season and then you know, 0:54:06.239 --> 0:54:08.840 whatever change the next year and they they kind of 0:54:08.880 --> 0:54:12.080 lose it. But he's a candidate where the rest of 0:54:12.120 --> 0:54:14.960 his game is good enough if he can, you know, 0:54:15.520 --> 0:54:19.880 if that skill proves a little sticky and stays around. 0:54:20.160 --> 0:54:22.239 You know, I put him on a list that I 0:54:22.280 --> 0:54:24.480 did at the beginning of the year of breakout players, 0:54:24.480 --> 0:54:26.960 and I put him on there just like strictly because 0:54:27.000 --> 0:54:29.919 like I saw him in contention like twice last year, 0:54:30.040 --> 0:54:33.080 and like, how you know, is that a pretty good indicator, 0:54:33.239 --> 0:54:36.600 Like for a guy that gets into contention, you know, 0:54:36.800 --> 0:54:40.560 the younger guys that get into contention relatively depending it 0:54:40.560 --> 0:54:43.160 doesn't matter really how they play on Sunday, But like 0:54:43.560 --> 0:54:46.200 just getting into contention, is that a good indicator? 0:54:48.239 --> 0:54:50.120 I mean, anytime you're at the top of the leaderboard 0:54:50.160 --> 0:54:52.560 on a Sunday or near the top, you're playing great golf. 0:54:52.600 --> 0:54:56.160 So yeah, if someone's popping up in seventh place or 0:54:56.280 --> 0:55:01.479 ninth place, a couple of times over the summer. Then yeah, wow, 0:55:01.560 --> 0:55:02.600 that's always a good sign. 0:55:02.960 --> 0:55:06.000 Yeah, so I want to dive into some Twitter questions. 0:55:06.000 --> 0:55:12.080 We got some good ones here. Sean Reehorn wanted to 0:55:12.120 --> 0:55:16.239 know with all the data accumulated, like what surprised you 0:55:16.320 --> 0:55:17.200 the most? 0:55:20.719 --> 0:55:25.640 Ooh, what always amazes me is the narrow margins shot 0:55:25.680 --> 0:55:32.080 by shot between players. How if your average proximity to 0:55:32.120 --> 0:55:35.680 the green is thirty two feet versus thirty six feet, 0:55:35.840 --> 0:55:38.520 you're one of the best ball strikers in the world, 0:55:39.000 --> 0:55:42.640 and thirty six your average. You know that that kind 0:55:42.640 --> 0:55:47.120 of thing. All of these advantages magnified over hundreds and 0:55:47.200 --> 0:55:51.600 hundreds of shots produced the Tiger Woods. I've always found 0:55:51.600 --> 0:55:52.280 that incredible. 0:55:52.640 --> 0:55:55.960 See. That's something though that like is astounding to think 0:55:56.080 --> 0:55:59.600 is like thirty two feet average proximity and like because 0:55:59.640 --> 0:56:02.040 like I this is like what we talked about with 0:56:02.160 --> 0:56:04.239 like learning how to play the game more is like 0:56:04.920 --> 0:56:07.600 understanding when you have a five iron in like twenty 0:56:07.640 --> 0:56:10.520 feet left is like a really good shot and not 0:56:10.920 --> 0:56:14.399 you know, necessarily firing at the pen. And like when 0:56:14.400 --> 0:56:18.359 the average proximity is like thirty six feet, that's you know, 0:56:18.880 --> 0:56:21.160 most golfers would probably think it's like twenty. 0:56:22.719 --> 0:56:26.640 Yeah, absolutely, because the all they're shown on TV is 0:56:26.640 --> 0:56:30.279 somebody sticking a wedge in from one hundred yards, uh 0:56:30.480 --> 0:56:32.560 with to get an eight footer for Birdie. 0:56:33.239 --> 0:56:36.160 How do you when you go to a tournament in person? 0:56:36.320 --> 0:56:39.760 What do you do? I'm kind of curious. 0:56:39.840 --> 0:56:42.640 If I'm going as a fan, I'll normally just follow 0:56:42.640 --> 0:56:45.520 a group, follow a player, you know, if there's one 0:56:45.600 --> 0:56:48.040 or two guys I'm interested in, I'll follow them around 0:56:49.080 --> 0:56:50.960 and just if I've never been to the course before, 0:56:51.280 --> 0:56:53.920 try to walk eighteen holes and get a lay of 0:56:53.920 --> 0:56:57.360 the land. If I'm going there with a client, you know, 0:56:57.520 --> 0:56:59.960 to work with clients, you know, you'll go on a 0:57:00.280 --> 0:57:04.560 practice days mostly and and be in meetings and on 0:57:04.600 --> 0:57:06.560 the range and not really get to see much of 0:57:06.600 --> 0:57:06.960 the course. 0:57:07.320 --> 0:57:10.560 Yeah, I kind of prescribed by the same theory you 0:57:10.600 --> 0:57:13.120 do when you're going as a fan. Is like I 0:57:13.160 --> 0:57:16.760 always tell people, pick you know, a group, don't pick 0:57:16.960 --> 0:57:19.480 you know, like pick an off the Beaten Path group 0:57:19.560 --> 0:57:21.880 that like still has like really good players in it, 0:57:22.000 --> 0:57:25.000 like you know, like and just watch them play all 0:57:25.040 --> 0:57:27.880 eighteen holes because they'll have less fans. It's easier to 0:57:27.880 --> 0:57:30.040 get around and you get to see, like how they 0:57:30.040 --> 0:57:31.000 play a golf course. 0:57:32.360 --> 0:57:35.320 Yeah, absolutely, I like to go to the Travelers in 0:57:35.320 --> 0:57:39.720 Connecticut and that one there's normally some high profile players 0:57:39.720 --> 0:57:44.760 who play there, and but the other groups, if the 0:57:44.840 --> 0:57:48.040 high profile groups are on the back nine, the front 0:57:48.120 --> 0:57:51.040 nine is desolate. You know, you can follow a group 0:57:51.080 --> 0:57:52.920 and be one of five people who are walking with 0:57:52.960 --> 0:57:56.000 them and you just get to see every shot they 0:57:56.080 --> 0:57:57.080 hit throughout the round. 0:57:58.760 --> 0:58:00.680 You know, I'm kind of curious he brought up the 0:58:00.720 --> 0:58:04.560 Travelers and it spurred my memory to Patrick Cantley, and 0:58:04.600 --> 0:58:07.000 I wanted to get your kind of take. I know 0:58:07.040 --> 0:58:09.720 this limited stats, but like, what do you see from 0:58:09.760 --> 0:58:13.520 Patrick Cantley? And you know, obviously everybody I think hopes 0:58:13.560 --> 0:58:16.400 he stays healthy, but what what kind of in his 0:58:16.520 --> 0:58:19.120 game is you know popped? And why he's played so 0:58:19.200 --> 0:58:21.000 well and so few starts. 0:58:21.800 --> 0:58:24.720 Yeah, well, he's he's my answer for the breakout player, 0:58:24.880 --> 0:58:28.640 even though he might have already broken out already by 0:58:28.680 --> 0:58:31.880 the numbers through his first four or five tournaments back 0:58:31.920 --> 0:58:35.800 he's you know, he looks incredible, looks like he's going 0:58:35.920 --> 0:58:39.400 to you know, pick up easily and you know, finish 0:58:39.640 --> 0:58:41.760 as like a top twenty five or top fifty player 0:58:41.760 --> 0:58:42.200 in the world. 0:58:42.320 --> 0:58:45.080 Once he gets enough, once he gets enough. 0:58:44.880 --> 0:58:48.880 Starts, Yeah, I mean he used to. I mean, he 0:58:49.000 --> 0:58:55.080 was unbelievable in college. It's it's unbelievable that he he 0:58:55.920 --> 0:58:58.720 kind of the whole thing that's happened. And you know, 0:58:58.800 --> 0:59:02.480 he overshadowed beef in college, which is crazy, you know, 0:59:02.600 --> 0:59:03.240 and how good? 0:59:03.320 --> 0:59:03.960 Oh exactly. 0:59:04.040 --> 0:59:09.240 Yeah, And those guys, those guys who are number one, 0:59:09.480 --> 0:59:11.520 number two players in the world for a few years 0:59:11.520 --> 0:59:15.160 in college and as amateurs almost always turn out to 0:59:15.200 --> 0:59:18.040 be at the very least top fifty guys. 0:59:17.880 --> 0:59:18.400 In the world. 0:59:18.640 --> 0:59:21.280 That's what I said to Tron the other day. He 0:59:21.280 --> 0:59:23.640 he but like, because like I still kind of I 0:59:23.720 --> 0:59:26.560 still am in on Casey Wittenberg. You know, I think 0:59:26.560 --> 0:59:27.400 he's gonna make it. 0:59:27.400 --> 0:59:30.720 It might feel a little long for Casey Puttenberg, but hey, 0:59:30.760 --> 0:59:31.440 I'm in on it. 0:59:31.760 --> 0:59:34.320 I haven't sold my property yet. 0:59:35.000 --> 0:59:37.680 Yeah, No, we'll see, all right. 0:59:37.720 --> 0:59:41.880 Sean Martin wants to know what's the next frontier for 0:59:42.080 --> 0:59:46.080 golf stats, and you know, how will they more accurately 0:59:46.160 --> 0:59:51.080 depict what occurs on the course? What's in the next frontier? 0:59:51.080 --> 0:59:53.160 He asked, like three questions in one. 0:59:53.840 --> 0:59:56.560 Yeah, Sean got a little greedy with that on, Yeah, 0:59:57.720 --> 1:00:03.680 I would say, just really create so we have strokes gained, 1:00:03.720 --> 1:00:06.960 which is which is fantastic and really helped us understand 1:00:07.760 --> 1:00:11.440 why players are getting it done and why they aren't. 1:00:11.960 --> 1:00:12.960 So I think that's great. 1:00:13.440 --> 1:00:20.280 The next step is to dig into maybe more granular examinations, 1:00:20.280 --> 1:00:23.080 sort of like that missfair Way stat I talked about earlier. 1:00:26.040 --> 1:00:26.880 There's a there was a. 1:00:26.800 --> 1:00:29.800 Great piece I can't remember who wrote it from last 1:00:29.880 --> 1:00:32.800 year or the year before about what makes Jordan Spieth 1:00:33.040 --> 1:00:36.360 such a great putter, And it's because he always gets 1:00:36.360 --> 1:00:36.840 it to the hole. 1:00:36.880 --> 1:00:40.880 He always gives it a chance. So I think a 1:00:40.880 --> 1:00:41.680 stat like that. 1:00:41.640 --> 1:00:43.520 Like who are the guys who are always giving it 1:00:43.560 --> 1:00:46.040 a chance versus the ones who are trying to diet 1:00:46.120 --> 1:00:50.240 into the hole? Just really these these new stats to 1:00:50.280 --> 1:00:56.520 help us understand the parts of a player's game. Uh, 1:00:56.600 --> 1:00:59.760 And that's what we've seen in other sports. Baseball has 1:00:59.800 --> 1:01:04.320 this this radar system which tracks everyone in the field 1:01:04.400 --> 1:01:07.840 now and so you can you can tell how far 1:01:07.880 --> 1:01:10.840 a player ran to catch a ball, and so they rank, 1:01:11.000 --> 1:01:14.280 you know, who's the fastest outfielder, you know, who makes 1:01:14.360 --> 1:01:17.320 more catches, who you know hits the ball the hardest 1:01:18.360 --> 1:01:21.800 and all those sort of stats are are you know, 1:01:21.880 --> 1:01:24.920 getting people more comfortable with these, It just gives you 1:01:24.960 --> 1:01:28.080 more tools for for someone like for someone like Sean 1:01:28.160 --> 1:01:30.720 to tell a story about a player, and you get 1:01:30.720 --> 1:01:35.080 fans interested in the broadcast can can use these things 1:01:35.160 --> 1:01:37.200 just just to tell the story a little bit better. 1:01:37.760 --> 1:01:40.080 So when Sam Saunders is out there, it's not just 1:01:40.280 --> 1:01:43.560 well he's Arnie's grandson. We can actually talk a little 1:01:43.560 --> 1:01:45.800 bit about a little bit about what makes him a 1:01:45.840 --> 1:01:46.360 good player. 1:01:46.640 --> 1:01:51.480 Yeah. I think that's you know, it's the out of 1:01:51.520 --> 1:01:55.400 the backs narratives are just awful. It's a you know, 1:01:55.440 --> 1:01:59.240 at least put some context behind why he's a professional 1:01:59.560 --> 1:02:03.040 golfer rather than he's, you know, our grandson of Arnold 1:02:03.080 --> 1:02:06.720 Palmer or friends with Jordan Speed. It's uh, the stats 1:02:07.160 --> 1:02:11.320 can fill that void. This kind of relates to what 1:02:11.360 --> 1:02:14.520 you were just talking about, And I think this is interesting, 1:02:14.600 --> 1:02:18.480 Like do you have currently had the ability with stats 1:02:18.520 --> 1:02:21.280 to tell who performs better on a back nine in 1:02:21.360 --> 1:02:23.600 a major or other bit like a nerve stat. 1:02:25.240 --> 1:02:30.400 Yeah, we do calculate a round basically looking at how 1:02:30.440 --> 1:02:34.800 someone plays in contention under like stressful rounds. We call 1:02:34.840 --> 1:02:39.560 it uh, and that just looks at if you enter 1:02:39.640 --> 1:02:43.880 around within a shot or two of the lead, how 1:02:43.880 --> 1:02:47.040 do you play with the lead versus how you normally play? 1:02:47.160 --> 1:02:50.800 So if you're so, if you're Rory mcilroyan, you normally 1:02:50.840 --> 1:02:54.160 beat the field by x amount? Then how do you 1:02:54.160 --> 1:02:57.520 play under pressure? And vice versa? If you're if you're 1:02:57.560 --> 1:03:00.280 six back going into the fourth round, how do you play? 1:03:01.880 --> 1:03:03.880 How do you play when there isn't as much to 1:03:03.880 --> 1:03:04.280 play for? 1:03:04.960 --> 1:03:06.560 Yeah? 1:03:06.600 --> 1:03:08.480 So, yeah, and there's a lot of work to be 1:03:08.560 --> 1:03:11.680 done in that area. We just just in the last 1:03:11.680 --> 1:03:15.000 few weeks we've rolled out a basically a win probability 1:03:15.040 --> 1:03:20.600 model where we're going to be tracking with more exact numbers. 1:03:20.640 --> 1:03:23.840 How people if you have a forty percent chance by 1:03:23.840 --> 1:03:26.680 our model on the tenthal the final round, you know, 1:03:26.760 --> 1:03:29.760 how do you play going in from there? So I 1:03:29.760 --> 1:03:32.200 think the data is out there, it's just a matter of, 1:03:33.120 --> 1:03:34.360 you know, putting it together. 1:03:35.080 --> 1:03:40.040 Who would be who's like the best in contention by 1:03:40.600 --> 1:03:41.880 your metrics? 1:03:42.760 --> 1:03:47.320 So neither of these guys have been in contention very often. 1:03:47.640 --> 1:03:50.760 I think only about a dozen or fifteen times. But 1:03:51.320 --> 1:03:55.120 Thomas Peters and Matt Fitzpatrick pretty much always have gotten 1:03:55.120 --> 1:03:58.520 the job done. When they're in contention, or at least 1:03:58.720 --> 1:04:01.600 when I say got the job on, they've played better 1:04:01.640 --> 1:04:03.920 than they normally play in other rounds. 1:04:06.400 --> 1:04:09.800 I'm a big fan of Fitzpatrick. Do the stats prove out, 1:04:10.080 --> 1:04:14.840 you know, like is he a really you know, like 1:04:15.120 --> 1:04:17.200 tell us a little bit about like what makes him 1:04:17.240 --> 1:04:17.680 so good? 1:04:19.520 --> 1:04:23.840 His ball striking's excellent and his putting is excellent, and 1:04:23.920 --> 1:04:30.520 those are two pretty decent cornerstones to build your game around. 1:04:30.560 --> 1:04:35.840 Comparison for him. 1:04:34.120 --> 1:04:38.920 I think Jordan Speith is a longer hitter than him, 1:04:39.280 --> 1:04:43.120 and I think I think. 1:04:43.080 --> 1:04:45.800 Fits might be a little bit better of a ball striker. 1:04:46.280 --> 1:04:47.000 Speith kind of. 1:04:46.960 --> 1:04:49.600 Has these good years in these bad years, But I 1:04:49.600 --> 1:04:53.240 think overall that's not a bad comparison for what for 1:04:53.320 --> 1:04:56.120 what Matt could be if he added some more distance 1:04:56.200 --> 1:05:00.560 to his game. That's sort of like a you know, 1:05:00.720 --> 1:05:03.760 a high high target for him to reach. 1:05:04.440 --> 1:05:07.200 Yeah, I mean, like I imagine if he could have 1:05:07.280 --> 1:05:10.800 like some sort of like a Justin Rose like renaissance 1:05:11.000 --> 1:05:13.320 like that. What that guy did with to his game, 1:05:13.400 --> 1:05:16.920 it like is unbelievable to me, with like how he 1:05:16.960 --> 1:05:19.479 added like thirty yards, Like it's not easy to add 1:05:19.560 --> 1:05:21.280 thirty yards to your t shot. 1:05:22.320 --> 1:05:24.600 Oh yeah, absolutely, And there's been a handful of guys 1:05:24.640 --> 1:05:27.400 who've on that. Brendan Steel, like I mentioned earlier, but 1:05:27.640 --> 1:05:30.440 Justin Rose is a completely different player than he was 1:05:30.880 --> 1:05:34.760 even eight or ten years ago. So yeah, I think 1:05:34.800 --> 1:05:40.240 that's definitely in play for for fits. And when he 1:05:40.320 --> 1:05:44.040 already comes in here putting extremely well and ball striking 1:05:44.120 --> 1:05:47.440 is great, he could has a really high potential. 1:05:47.760 --> 1:05:50.480 Okay, I got I got a quick question for you. 1:05:50.920 --> 1:05:56.520 And next first time winner Major winner, who's it going 1:05:56.600 --> 1:05:56.800 to be? 1:05:58.560 --> 1:06:01.840 Uh So, who among the leak guys have one? One Fowler, 1:06:02.000 --> 1:06:03.760 Aduckie and John Rahm. 1:06:04.240 --> 1:06:06.200 Yeah, and then you've got a ton of young guys. 1:06:06.440 --> 1:06:08.960 You've got you know, you've well, you've got Paul Casey's 1:06:09.040 --> 1:06:20.880 right there, Justin Thomas. You've got Norrin Hatton Coocher. Yeah. 1:06:21.000 --> 1:06:23.880 So so I can't say Coocher, I'm like get blocked 1:06:23.920 --> 1:06:25.040 on Twitter by some people. 1:06:25.200 --> 1:06:29.080 No, that's fine. You're in a you're in a safe 1:06:29.080 --> 1:06:33.120 haven here. We there's not as much hate on I 1:06:33.200 --> 1:06:33.520 kind of. 1:06:33.960 --> 1:06:37.560 I would say the next next Major winner is probably 1:06:37.640 --> 1:06:42.360 rom first time. I think his game sets up well 1:06:42.440 --> 1:06:45.080 for Aaron Hills. I think it sets up well for 1:06:45.560 --> 1:06:51.520 Quail Hollow too, so I think he'll be in serious 1:06:51.520 --> 1:06:52.640 contingent of both of those. 1:06:53.240 --> 1:06:56.480 It is interesting. So we I had this talk with 1:06:56.960 --> 1:07:01.080 Starson and Tron and and DJ after them, and I 1:07:01.120 --> 1:07:04.480 was talking about how I'd probably take if I was 1:07:04.560 --> 1:07:06.680 if it was a major and I had three guys, 1:07:06.680 --> 1:07:09.640 I think Justin Rose would be in my three, like 1:07:09.960 --> 1:07:13.840 with you know, probably Dustin and and Rory? Who would 1:07:13.840 --> 1:07:17.400 be your Dustin and Speth? Who would be your three 1:07:17.480 --> 1:07:20.680 that you'd pick if it was every major championship, you 1:07:20.760 --> 1:07:23.640 get your top three and it you know, regardless, you know, 1:07:23.640 --> 1:07:27.880 knowing the courses, Yeah. 1:07:27.680 --> 1:07:31.080 I think I would pick speF because his game kind 1:07:31.120 --> 1:07:32.960 of travels to a lot of different courses. 1:07:33.360 --> 1:07:34.360 H uh. 1:07:34.400 --> 1:07:38.160 And then DJ and Rory because they're the best. So 1:07:38.560 --> 1:07:39.720 that isn't very exciting. 1:07:39.760 --> 1:07:43.200 But so I'm off base going with Rose. 1:07:44.480 --> 1:07:47.840 I mean, Roses Rose is a great player. He's right 1:07:47.920 --> 1:07:50.760 up there in terms of ball striking travels. 1:07:50.760 --> 1:07:55.000 So, okay, all right, we're gonna get you out of here. 1:07:55.120 --> 1:07:58.120 You've been more than gracious with your time and listening 1:07:58.160 --> 1:08:03.040 to my stupid questions, So let's go. Let's go with 1:08:03.160 --> 1:08:07.280 our tradition of overrated underrated. So you just you know, 1:08:07.640 --> 1:08:10.040 you got to decide if there're you know, no middle 1:08:10.080 --> 1:08:10.600 ground here. 1:08:11.240 --> 1:08:13.000 All right, Oh I'm ready. 1:08:13.080 --> 1:08:15.920 Yeah, all right. Practice rounds. 1:08:17.200 --> 1:08:19.679 Underrated as long as you do them right. 1:08:20.600 --> 1:08:22.360 What what do you have to do to do them right? 1:08:24.560 --> 1:08:28.320 I we don't really work with players in terms of 1:08:28.360 --> 1:08:31.640 practice round type stuff, but I'd like to turn a 1:08:31.640 --> 1:08:33.960 few guys into some guinea pigs and figure. 1:08:33.720 --> 1:08:37.160 Out how to do them right. Well, that's that's where 1:08:37.200 --> 1:08:37.840 I'm coming from. 1:08:37.960 --> 1:08:41.040 I'll do your I played practice rounds for these tournament 1:08:41.120 --> 1:08:42.920 What would you do if you were me in a 1:08:42.960 --> 1:08:43.719 practice round? 1:08:45.520 --> 1:08:48.280 So if you play a course that the pros play 1:08:48.320 --> 1:08:53.080 every year, I think we would just walk around and 1:08:54.040 --> 1:08:57.840 pick out maybe eight key shots in the realm and 1:08:58.120 --> 1:09:05.360 really talk through caddy stat geek and player and really 1:09:05.400 --> 1:09:09.920 talk through uh strategy in terms of those shots, you know, 1:09:09.960 --> 1:09:13.160 bringing data and you know how comfortable a player is 1:09:13.240 --> 1:09:15.120 hitting a certain shot and and all that. 1:09:15.000 --> 1:09:15.679 Sort of stuff. 1:09:16.320 --> 1:09:19.080 Yeah, that's a that's a good point. It's like because 1:09:19.080 --> 1:09:22.640 like when you're uncomfortable, that's usually when you hit bad shots. 1:09:23.920 --> 1:09:26.760 Yeah, that's why I try not to stray too much 1:09:26.840 --> 1:09:32.599 into criticizing players for laying up or you know, whatever 1:09:33.080 --> 1:09:37.360 during tournaments is they might not be super comfortable hitting 1:09:37.439 --> 1:09:41.400 that particular shot in that particular win to that particular 1:09:41.439 --> 1:09:44.680 green that day. Yeah, and that the solution to that 1:09:44.840 --> 1:09:47.120 is just, you know, realize that that shot might be 1:09:47.160 --> 1:09:48.880 coming in and try to prepare for it. 1:09:49.479 --> 1:09:55.599 Interesting, all right, The like the equipment transition period when 1:09:55.600 --> 1:10:03.519 you change equipment overrated, I think so too. It's so similar. 1:10:03.560 --> 1:10:05.960 Do you do you what do you guys see like that? 1:10:06.080 --> 1:10:08.000 I'm turning all these quick questions in. 1:10:08.000 --> 1:10:11.120 The long one. Yeah, it's not something that I know 1:10:11.240 --> 1:10:13.400 too much about. I can't give you that much of 1:10:13.439 --> 1:10:14.519 an informed opinion. 1:10:15.760 --> 1:10:16.519 Laying up. 1:10:19.320 --> 1:10:25.240 Overrated, all right, So be aggressive, be aggressiveness. 1:10:27.320 --> 1:10:29.200 Jet lag and international travel. 1:10:31.479 --> 1:10:34.280 Oh wow, this is definitely properly rated. I think people 1:10:34.360 --> 1:10:39.440 really get it, though, I would say, let's say underrated, 1:10:39.439 --> 1:10:43.439 because you still see guys who are flying back from 1:10:43.760 --> 1:10:47.200 Asia to playing tournaments the next week, which is crazy 1:10:47.240 --> 1:10:47.840 to my mind. 1:10:48.640 --> 1:10:51.040 Doing it this week, Yeah. 1:10:51.600 --> 1:10:56.200 Buba's doing it. There are a few guys who played 1:10:56.200 --> 1:10:59.519 in the European Tour event in India the week before 1:10:59.560 --> 1:11:04.000 the match play, and that's basically flying around the world. 1:11:05.600 --> 1:11:07.360 We saw, at least. 1:11:07.200 --> 1:11:11.200 Anecdotally what happened to speak a year ago. Yeah, I 1:11:11.240 --> 1:11:16.040 think underrated in terms of how players make their decisions. 1:11:16.479 --> 1:11:22.080 Yeah, I'm curious. You know. The last question now is 1:11:22.600 --> 1:11:26.600 Bubba and the golf ball. Has there been like a 1:11:26.720 --> 1:11:31.160 statistical change since he switched to the putt put both? 1:11:32.640 --> 1:11:36.839 Yeah, he's terrible now. The ball strikings bad. 1:11:37.880 --> 1:11:42.559 His wedge play is bad, which makes sense if you're 1:11:42.560 --> 1:11:46.040 gonna play a you know, if that's an inferior ball, 1:11:46.720 --> 1:11:52.000 if it's something he isn't used to. But who knows 1:11:52.280 --> 1:11:54.760 who has any insight into that head? 1:11:54.840 --> 1:11:57.479 So do you think JB and them are going to 1:11:57.600 --> 1:12:00.599 use the Volvic during alternate shot? 1:12:02.960 --> 1:12:06.840 I hope not for their sake. I can't imagine what 1:12:06.880 --> 1:12:09.800 it would be like to for JB. Holmes to use 1:12:09.840 --> 1:12:12.720 a to use an orange or a pink ball that 1:12:12.760 --> 1:12:18.559 he's never hit before and for nine holes or even eighteen. 1:12:18.920 --> 1:12:22.040 I remember I one time hit my mom's like women's 1:12:22.080 --> 1:12:25.400 ball and the way it launches with like a nine 1:12:25.439 --> 1:12:31.720 iron is insanely different. Yeah, Like I couldn't even imagine 1:12:31.840 --> 1:12:34.479 playing something like that and like trying to get used 1:12:34.479 --> 1:12:34.760 to it. 1:12:36.360 --> 1:12:37.400 Yeah, I think that's. 1:12:38.800 --> 1:12:41.599 To play overrated, underrated on the ball thing I think 1:12:42.080 --> 1:12:44.000 it seems like it would be something that I'd at 1:12:44.080 --> 1:12:48.240 least want my partner to spend some time with it 1:12:48.320 --> 1:12:52.000 the week before and in practice arounds getting used to it. 1:12:51.400 --> 1:12:54.960 So, like the million dollars a year he gets paid 1:12:54.960 --> 1:12:58.759 by them, I think personally that he's losing that inn 1:12:58.800 --> 1:12:59.600 course earnings. 1:13:00.400 --> 1:13:02.879 Oh, if he's playing like he is now, he's losing 1:13:02.920 --> 1:13:05.679 more than that. He's like a he's like a five 1:13:05.720 --> 1:13:07.920 million dollar player. If he plays like he is the 1:13:08.040 --> 1:13:11.519 last few years and playing like this, he's you know, 1:13:12.720 --> 1:13:17.000 he's gonna make three million dollars less probably if he 1:13:17.040 --> 1:13:18.120 can't figure something out. 1:13:19.400 --> 1:13:21.439 Yeah, good smart decision making. 1:13:21.640 --> 1:13:24.200 But he knows he might turn the round and make 1:13:24.320 --> 1:13:26.519 us look at Lake idiots for criticizing him. 1:13:26.520 --> 1:13:30.040 But yeah, the Vulvic Revolution is happening. He just has 1:13:30.080 --> 1:13:33.920 to get used to it. Yeah, he could just start 1:13:33.960 --> 1:13:35.559 painting the ball too, you know. 1:13:36.600 --> 1:13:40.360 Yeah, do the what was it Tiger used to do that? Yeah? 1:13:40.520 --> 1:13:44.320 Have somebody paint the Nike's the Swish one ya. Yeah, 1:13:44.360 --> 1:13:46.600 I think he might just I might want to just 1:13:46.600 --> 1:13:49.599 go to title list and say, hey, can you can 1:13:49.640 --> 1:13:51.080 you put some paint on these balls? 1:13:51.479 --> 1:13:56.080 Yeah? Well, we'll get out on the Bubba Talk. Thanks 1:13:56.080 --> 1:14:00.200 for coming on and uh, if anybody doesn't follow Jake, Uh, 1:14:00.560 --> 1:14:03.560 it's a great Twitter follow. If people are interested in 1:14:03.960 --> 1:14:07.640 Fifteenth Club, I guess you just find a out of 1:14:07.680 --> 1:14:08.400 contact for him. 1:14:09.680 --> 1:14:12.360 Yeah, we have a contact form on the website and 1:14:12.479 --> 1:14:14.920 also just follow us on Twitter and we're you know, 1:14:14.920 --> 1:14:16.080 we're happy to talk on there. 1:14:16.280 --> 1:14:18.040 It's at Fifteenth Club 1:14:19.800 --> 1:14:22.599 And always you can reach out to me too, So awesome, 1:14:23.200 --> 1:14:24.160 happy to talk golf.