WEBVTT - Scott Fawcett 0:00:00.080 --> 0:00:00.760 I miss the green. 0:00:00.840 --> 0:00:03.480 For example, I'm already upset. When I find my ball 0:00:03.520 --> 0:00:04.960 in the bunker, I'm really upset. 0:00:05.040 --> 0:00:07.000 And when I find my ball in a frid Egg, 0:00:07.240 --> 0:00:11.959 Friday Egg, the dreaded Friday Egg, Friday Friday Bride Egg, Lie, 0:00:11.960 --> 0:00:14.160 I'm about ready to run off of the course. 0:00:39.520 --> 0:00:42.320 Ladies and gentlemen, Welcome back to another edition of the 0:00:42.320 --> 0:00:45.960 Frida Egg Podcast. I'm your host, Andy Johnson, and today 0:00:46.000 --> 0:00:51.080 I'm joined by Scott Fawcett. Scott is works with a 0:00:51.320 --> 0:00:55.160 number of tour players, about twenty five tour players, a 0:00:55.240 --> 0:00:59.720 great deal of college and high level amateur players on 0:01:00.600 --> 0:01:04.520 kind of course management and strategy and how they navigate, 0:01:04.600 --> 0:01:06.319 you know, these tracks and score. 0:01:06.360 --> 0:01:07.720 The best they possibly can. 0:01:09.080 --> 0:01:12.039 So his decade system has been kind of one of 0:01:12.080 --> 0:01:15.679 these new systems is on the rise, and you know, 0:01:15.720 --> 0:01:17.400 he's getting a lot of buy in and a lot 0:01:17.400 --> 0:01:20.959 of great success from his students. Scott, welcome on. 0:01:22.360 --> 0:01:26.440 Thanks, I appreciate you having me on. Should be some conversation, Yeah, yeah. 0:01:26.240 --> 0:01:28.679 We're excited to hear about how you kind of came 0:01:28.760 --> 0:01:31.600 up with it. So I think it'd be great for 0:01:31.920 --> 0:01:34.520 you know, all of our listeners to hear a little 0:01:34.520 --> 0:01:37.240 bit about your background and how you got into golf. 0:01:39.080 --> 0:01:42.280 Sure. I mean, I'm just your normal Texas kid growing up, 0:01:42.319 --> 0:01:46.399 played all the sports football, basketball, baseball, everything. And I 0:01:46.400 --> 0:01:48.640 wouldn't say suffered a knee injury in seventh grade, but 0:01:48.680 --> 0:01:50.680 I hurt my knee in seventh grade, which kind of 0:01:50.720 --> 0:01:53.600 made me decide to focus on golf because pain is 0:01:53.640 --> 0:01:56.720 not my friend. And you know, so my dad was 0:01:56.760 --> 0:01:58.840 a very good golfer. He was probably a scratcher, a 0:01:58.880 --> 0:02:02.880 plus one or two maybe, and so just getting involved 0:02:02.920 --> 0:02:04.680 in the game through him at a young age and 0:02:04.720 --> 0:02:06.600 then focusing on it. You know, I never really played 0:02:06.640 --> 0:02:09.080 any aggs or anything through high school, just because I 0:02:09.120 --> 0:02:11.760 was kind of a late starter. So I went to 0:02:12.040 --> 0:02:14.600 a smaller school first in Texas, won my freshman year, 0:02:14.600 --> 0:02:17.040 and then transferred to Texas A and M and I 0:02:17.120 --> 0:02:21.040 wound up winning a tournament there and graduated, turn professional 0:02:21.040 --> 0:02:23.720 and kind of played everywhere but the one tour you 0:02:23.720 --> 0:02:25.960 want to play on over the next six years, and 0:02:26.440 --> 0:02:28.680 probably won ten or so different mini tour events on 0:02:28.680 --> 0:02:31.800 the Hooters Tour and other places. And you know, luckily 0:02:31.800 --> 0:02:33.880 for me, I actually was kind of heart again in 0:02:33.919 --> 0:02:36.720 two thousand and two and started an electricity company when 0:02:36.760 --> 0:02:39.840 Texas te regularly electricity market and kind of ran that, 0:02:40.520 --> 0:02:42.399 you know, doing one hundred plus hour weeks for about 0:02:42.440 --> 0:02:45.440 four or five years, and then I actually wanted up 0:02:45.480 --> 0:02:49.280 becoming good friends with Chris Como, playing you know, just 0:02:49.360 --> 0:02:52.880 friendly poker games around town and whatnot. And once I 0:02:52.919 --> 0:02:55.400 actually realized that he was a golf instructor, decided to 0:02:55.480 --> 0:02:56.760 go out and get a lesson from it. And it 0:02:56.800 --> 0:03:00.000 was the first time that I had ever heard modern 0:03:00.080 --> 0:03:03.000 ball flight logs and just everything and completely changed the 0:03:03.000 --> 0:03:06.040 way that I view the game. And so in two 0:03:06.120 --> 0:03:08.200 thousand and eight, I decided that I was going to 0:03:08.280 --> 0:03:12.280 kind of play full time amateur golf, and you know, 0:03:12.320 --> 0:03:14.760 in hopes of winning to the US Midam and actually 0:03:14.760 --> 0:03:16.480 on getting to where I was playing well enough that 0:03:16.520 --> 0:03:18.240 I decided to enter Q school is a thirty five 0:03:18.320 --> 0:03:21.720 year old amateur and got through all four stages, went 0:03:21.760 --> 0:03:23.480 out and kind of floundered around a little bit on 0:03:23.520 --> 0:03:26.799 the webbut CONIR nationwide tour. At the time, the game 0:03:26.800 --> 0:03:28.200 plan was originally for my wife and I had to 0:03:28.240 --> 0:03:30.000 go out and travel, and I was sitting in Phoenix 0:03:30.280 --> 0:03:33.320 for a Monday qualifier. About two months later, my wife 0:03:33.320 --> 0:03:35.600 had gotten pregnant in the interim, so I kept her 0:03:35.600 --> 0:03:38.160 at home and just something going, what am I doing here? 0:03:38.200 --> 0:03:40.320 So I just kind of screwed around for a couple 0:03:40.360 --> 0:03:43.360 of years, and then in twenty thirteen I got my 0:03:43.360 --> 0:03:46.680 amateur statisfac again for the second time. And that was 0:03:46.720 --> 0:03:49.120 right when Mark Brody's book Every Shot Counts was coming 0:03:49.160 --> 0:03:52.640 out with all the new strokes skin statistics and whatnot, 0:03:52.680 --> 0:03:56.200 and I kept a very crude version of Strokes gained 0:03:56.720 --> 0:03:59.080 just on my own game, basically with me making up 0:03:59.160 --> 0:04:01.240 the benchmarks not even realized. And that's what they were 0:04:01.280 --> 0:04:04.160 doing with the new shot Link data, and so I 0:04:04.200 --> 0:04:06.440 was kind of familiar with the idea all right, and 0:04:06.800 --> 0:04:08.520 all of a sudden realized from one of the excers 0:04:08.560 --> 0:04:10.720 where he talked about that Tiger was number one in 0:04:10.760 --> 0:04:13.840 the world because of his proximity from one hundred and 0:04:13.840 --> 0:04:17.280 seventy five yards and a number one twenty five only 0:04:17.360 --> 0:04:20.000 hit it three feet further away. And that's that just 0:04:20.160 --> 0:04:22.480 kind of blew my mind, which I think Mark and 0:04:22.520 --> 0:04:24.280 I would definitely say at this point, that's, you know, 0:04:24.400 --> 0:04:26.839 not entirely like the way I read it originally was 0:04:26.839 --> 0:04:30.080 not entirely the meeting, but it gave me enough of 0:04:30.120 --> 0:04:32.719 an idea with my finance and economics and kind of 0:04:32.720 --> 0:04:34.839 statistics background, a little bit of poker, a little bit 0:04:34.880 --> 0:04:38.520 professional golf, that I could kind of create a giant 0:04:38.600 --> 0:04:42.920 spreadsheet where I introduced the strokes, gained statistics, and then 0:04:43.080 --> 0:04:44.760 the shot pattern of you know, at the time, I 0:04:44.800 --> 0:04:48.440 was probably about a plus six or so handicap, and 0:04:48.760 --> 0:04:51.520 the theory solved course management. So I took about six 0:04:51.560 --> 0:04:54.880 months and did all that, and then the week before 0:04:54.920 --> 0:04:57.320 the Texas Amitur in twenty fourteen, I was going to 0:04:57.440 --> 0:04:58.920 play in it the following week and I got a 0:04:59.000 --> 0:05:01.440 quarters and shot in my right elbow, and the doctor 0:05:01.480 --> 0:05:04.440 caroalyzed my right arm actually for a few days, so 0:05:04.480 --> 0:05:06.440 I wound up. You know, there's a junior golfer at 0:05:06.480 --> 0:05:09.560 my home course named Wills Ala Taurus. I actually wound 0:05:09.640 --> 0:05:11.560 up calling him and saying, hey, I can't play next 0:05:11.600 --> 0:05:14.000 week in the stadium. Can I caddy for you? And 0:05:14.440 --> 0:05:16.120 if you'll do everything I tell you to do, I 0:05:16.440 --> 0:05:19.120 promise you'll win. The kids. Was a phenomenal player, even 0:05:19.120 --> 0:05:21.279 though at the time and he hadn't really done a 0:05:21.320 --> 0:05:24.080 whole lot, but I've watched him play, you know, since 0:05:24.080 --> 0:05:26.080 he was nine years old, and the kid is amazing. 0:05:26.160 --> 0:05:28.400 So go out and caddy for him, and he wins 0:05:28.440 --> 0:05:31.880 by thirty, so it's pretty cool. Definitely, as we were 0:05:31.920 --> 0:05:34.880 going along, I didn't really feel like I was doing anything. 0:05:34.920 --> 0:05:36.919 I mean, I was using the course of management that 0:05:36.960 --> 0:05:39.880 I had put together, but honestly, then the day I 0:05:39.920 --> 0:05:41.679 was like, I don't think this is that much different 0:05:42.200 --> 0:05:45.880 than what I was doing as a professional golfer. Anyways, 0:05:46.440 --> 0:05:49.880 But I was also watching our opponents and just listening 0:05:49.880 --> 0:05:52.160 to some of the stuff that they were saying, like targets, 0:05:52.200 --> 0:05:56.080 and they were, you know, effectively pretty clueless. And then 0:05:56.080 --> 0:05:58.520 I'll also say, like even myself, I don't know that 0:05:58.560 --> 0:06:00.839 I would have been disciplined. I might have known the 0:06:00.920 --> 0:06:03.040 right place to in theory be aiming a golf shop, 0:06:03.040 --> 0:06:05.560 but I wouldn't have actually really been committed to trying 0:06:05.560 --> 0:06:07.880 to put it there. And yet Will was doing a 0:06:08.000 --> 0:06:11.480 very good job of doing that well. A month later, 0:06:11.640 --> 0:06:14.360 the US Junior was down in Houston, so I went 0:06:14.360 --> 0:06:16.960 down and Kelly for him down there also, and he 0:06:17.200 --> 0:06:20.040 wins the US Junior And next thing, I've got a 0:06:20.080 --> 0:06:22.320 couple of college coaches saying, I don't know what the heck, 0:06:22.360 --> 0:06:26.359 you're telling him, but you know, congratulations really fun to watch, 0:06:26.400 --> 0:06:29.040 and it really dawned on me at that point that 0:06:29.080 --> 0:06:33.000 I kind of created, you know, Matt based system that 0:06:33.160 --> 0:06:37.080 actually was going to be pretty easy to teach. Of course, 0:06:37.200 --> 0:06:39.159 you know, basically the course management of a guy like 0:06:39.200 --> 0:06:41.400 Tiger would take that brain and put it into a 0:06:41.560 --> 0:06:44.919 sixteen year old kid. And honestly, just watching the result 0:06:44.960 --> 0:06:48.359 over the last few years as people really put the 0:06:48.400 --> 0:06:51.160 process into play and commit to it, you seeing some 0:06:51.480 --> 0:06:54.200 you know, some pretty cool stuff come about. So you know, 0:06:54.400 --> 0:06:57.000 next thing, you know, because SMUs here in Dallas, I'm 0:06:57.000 --> 0:06:59.160 friends with Chase Mender of the SMU coach, and I 0:06:59.200 --> 0:07:02.560 wound up giving am are there in February twenty fifteen. 0:07:02.600 --> 0:07:06.520 Bryson goes on to win the NCAA's and the US Ameters. 0:07:06.520 --> 0:07:10.000 And obviously I don't really pay attention to where a 0:07:10.000 --> 0:07:12.720 bunch of golfers come from, buttons, I'm from Dallas. I'm 0:07:12.760 --> 0:07:16.240 certainly keenly aware that quite a few great players have 0:07:16.280 --> 0:07:18.840 been coming out of Dallas, amateurs and juniors and whatnot 0:07:18.800 --> 0:07:22.040 over the last few years. And I don't think that's 0:07:22.080 --> 0:07:22.800 a coincidence. 0:07:24.320 --> 0:07:25.480 It's a it's interesting. 0:07:26.160 --> 0:07:29.840 You know, your system kind of speaks to this old 0:07:29.880 --> 0:07:33.760 adage that golf is ninety percent mental and ten percent physical, 0:07:34.280 --> 0:07:37.280 and like, you know, golfers have had that shoved down 0:07:37.320 --> 0:07:40.840 their throats their whole lives, but never any solutions to 0:07:41.600 --> 0:07:45.480 you know, kind of manage that and you know, understand 0:07:45.520 --> 0:07:47.880 what really they should be thinking, where they should be 0:07:47.920 --> 0:07:51.880 aiming in. You know, kind of a cliff nos version. 0:07:52.360 --> 0:07:54.560 Could you give us like a little bit of a 0:07:55.000 --> 0:07:58.440 you know, overview of you know, kind of what what 0:07:58.520 --> 0:08:01.160 your decade system preach it? 0:08:03.280 --> 0:08:09.080 Ye, I mean the sound bite would simply be very 0:08:09.080 --> 0:08:13.000 aggressive off the tee within certain parameters. Like it's not 0:08:13.120 --> 0:08:16.800 just firing driver absolutely everywhere, but if a hole meets 0:08:16.840 --> 0:08:20.920 three or four different criteria, it's driver. There isn't any 0:08:20.960 --> 0:08:24.640 discussing it, and it might be your week, it might 0:08:24.680 --> 0:08:26.480 not be your week. But by hitting a lot more 0:08:26.560 --> 0:08:29.840 drivers off the tee, you're going to see you know, 0:08:30.360 --> 0:08:33.360 intelligent drivers, I should say, you're going to see yourself 0:08:33.400 --> 0:08:36.880 in a much better position to score quite often. And 0:08:36.920 --> 0:08:41.319 then honestly, from the approach shots in, it's more about understanding, 0:08:41.520 --> 0:08:43.439 like we talked about all the time, the shotgun plottern 0:08:43.520 --> 0:08:47.920 you don't really have a specific idea where the ball's going. 0:08:48.040 --> 0:08:51.080 And man, just the difference in having a you know, 0:08:51.120 --> 0:08:53.800 a twenty foot birding cut from the fat side of 0:08:53.840 --> 0:08:56.680 the pen versus an up and down from the short 0:08:56.720 --> 0:08:58.480 side of the pin and the rough or a bunker. 0:08:59.040 --> 0:09:02.240 It's just a it's a huge gain. So you're really 0:09:02.240 --> 0:09:04.480 adding up all these little fractions of shots over the 0:09:04.480 --> 0:09:09.400 course of eighteen holes. I mean again, this was designed 0:09:09.400 --> 0:09:12.760 for elite tournament golfer. We've obviously made it quite generic 0:09:12.880 --> 0:09:18.360 for any golfer to see some benefits and really realizing 0:09:18.400 --> 0:09:21.400 that it's not about just taking a nine iron and 0:09:21.480 --> 0:09:24.280 hitting it to a foot and gaining a full shot. 0:09:24.480 --> 0:09:26.720 It's about taking a nine iron and hitting it to 0:09:26.760 --> 0:09:29.560 twenty five feet and gaining a tenth of a shot, 0:09:29.640 --> 0:09:32.920 and doing that over and over and over again. The 0:09:32.920 --> 0:09:35.079 next thing you know, you've gained you know, a full 0:09:35.120 --> 0:09:38.680 stroke with your irons versus where you normally are. It's 0:09:38.720 --> 0:09:40.720 just up to your putter, you know, which may or 0:09:40.720 --> 0:09:42.880 may not be hot on a given a week. It's funny, 0:09:42.880 --> 0:09:45.240 I've got a tour player who's putting the stats were 0:09:45.400 --> 0:09:48.720 terrible last week. Just going to text, like, hey, if 0:09:48.720 --> 0:09:50.480 you want to roll any cuts or talk about anything, 0:09:50.600 --> 0:09:52.800 let me know. And this was a great answer because 0:09:52.800 --> 0:09:54.560 he was just like, Oh, dude, don't worry, I'm rolling 0:09:54.600 --> 0:09:56.600 it fine. You know, it's just nothing fell this week. 0:09:56.800 --> 0:10:01.439 And that's usually true. I mean, the difference in losing 0:10:01.559 --> 0:10:04.760 three strokes with your putter and gaining two, I mean 0:10:04.880 --> 0:10:08.839 obviously making five more putts, but that's just the way 0:10:08.880 --> 0:10:10.439 the game works. I mean, it's not like if you're 0:10:10.480 --> 0:10:13.040 sitting on a petting green with the one hundred straight 0:10:13.120 --> 0:10:15.920 fifteen footers, you know you would just make one miss 0:10:15.920 --> 0:10:18.200 to make one miss too, you know, you kind of 0:10:18.240 --> 0:10:19.920 make two, three, four in a row, and then you 0:10:19.960 --> 0:10:22.120 missed maybe five sixty seven in a row, and they 0:10:22.240 --> 0:10:25.160 come in these little stretches, and so much of what 0:10:25.240 --> 0:10:28.040 I teach, even though it is, you know, like a 0:10:28.080 --> 0:10:33.760 mass based strategy system, it really winds up helping psychologically 0:10:33.800 --> 0:10:35.480 as much as anything. Because you're like, I mean, it 0:10:35.520 --> 0:10:38.199 didn't look that was fine. I didn't do anything wrong. 0:10:38.280 --> 0:10:43.199 Now my stats look terrible, but I know I was 0:10:43.240 --> 0:10:46.040 better than that. Or sometimes your stats can kind of 0:10:46.080 --> 0:10:48.280 look really good and you also be like, oh, it 0:10:48.320 --> 0:10:51.160 wasn't that good that I got extraordinarily lucky on here, 0:10:51.200 --> 0:10:53.760 here and here, and you know, I think my job 0:10:53.800 --> 0:10:56.720 is to really help educate a player how to get 0:10:56.760 --> 0:10:59.040 to the bottom line of what was or was good. 0:10:59.679 --> 0:11:02.440 Yeah, you know, it brings up something that's interesting. 0:11:02.480 --> 0:11:05.840 You know, in hockey, they have like scoring opportunity stats, 0:11:06.000 --> 0:11:08.600 and I'm surprised that, you know, the PGA Tour hasn't 0:11:08.640 --> 0:11:11.600 come up with like, hey, you know, this player had 0:11:11.960 --> 0:11:15.920 ten you know, great scoring opportunities, you know, whether it 0:11:15.920 --> 0:11:18.199 be a birdie or an eagle, you know, if they 0:11:18.480 --> 0:11:20.880 you know, and having a qualifying of you know, a 0:11:20.920 --> 0:11:24.280 putt inside of this or so on and so forth. 0:11:25.559 --> 0:11:27.840 Well, and there's some other statisticians. I think that that's 0:11:27.880 --> 0:11:31.559 the way Richie Hunt does his stuff here at the 0:11:31.640 --> 0:11:33.520 nice little synopsis at the end of each year where 0:11:33.600 --> 0:11:36.600 he goes through and and talks about stuff like that 0:11:36.640 --> 0:11:39.040 and exactly kind of what you're talking about. There is 0:11:40.000 --> 0:11:43.320 so many of the statistics they're not or say they're 0:11:43.360 --> 0:11:46.520 not fair. But and I'm pulling this out as air, 0:11:46.559 --> 0:11:48.840 but I feel like Grendon Todd last year was maybe 0:11:50.280 --> 0:11:52.959 led the tour in strokes gained around the greens, so 0:11:53.040 --> 0:11:56.200 he was the best shipper. Quote unquote schipper on tour. Well, 0:11:56.200 --> 0:11:59.200 he also was dead last in greens and regulation. So 0:11:59.240 --> 0:12:02.679 if you actually broke it out by strokes game per attempt, 0:12:03.120 --> 0:12:05.840 he's positive, he's fifty ath place on time or something like, 0:12:05.880 --> 0:12:08.880 he's got a nice short game. But when it's a 0:12:09.000 --> 0:12:14.520 cumulus statistic, so much of it can get buried in that, like, yeah, 0:12:14.559 --> 0:12:16.960 you chip it decent, but you only hit forty seven 0:12:17.000 --> 0:12:20.520 percent of your greens, you're going to have the higher 0:12:20.559 --> 0:12:24.320 strokes gained chipping than Jason Day or somebody else who's 0:12:24.360 --> 0:12:27.240 only getting you know, three four or five attempts around. 0:12:27.760 --> 0:12:30.040 They would have to chip in once around in order 0:12:30.080 --> 0:12:34.280 to mount the cumulus amount that Brendan Todd is simply 0:12:34.320 --> 0:12:36.640 because I just pulled it up on the computer right now. 0:12:36.640 --> 0:12:40.880 This year he is, he's losing two shots around in 0:12:40.960 --> 0:12:43.880 his strokes gained approach and he's gaining point three four 0:12:44.040 --> 0:12:49.319 six with his short game. I mean, he was okay, 0:12:49.320 --> 0:12:51.880 So here's fifth last year in total strokes gained shipping 0:12:51.880 --> 0:12:54.480 with gaining point four strokes, he was one hundred and 0:12:54.520 --> 0:12:57.840 eighty fourth and strokes gained approach the greens. So yeah, 0:12:57.880 --> 0:13:00.400 he chips at decent, but he also had more tempts 0:13:00.400 --> 0:13:04.320 than anyone else on tour every single day, so it's 0:13:04.360 --> 0:13:06.600 not exactly fair. Kind of like Jason Day with what 0:13:06.640 --> 0:13:10.080 he did with his putter, well, I mean he gained 0:13:10.360 --> 0:13:12.520 you know, four tenth almost half a stroke more than 0:13:12.559 --> 0:13:15.400 second place in stroke skin putting. Well, he also is 0:13:15.440 --> 0:13:17.880 probably one of the more conservative players on tour, So 0:13:18.480 --> 0:13:20.400 the easiest way to make a bunch of thirty footers 0:13:20.440 --> 0:13:22.800 is to have a bunch of thirty footers, which is 0:13:22.840 --> 0:13:25.080 exactly what he did, and as a result, when he 0:13:25.160 --> 0:13:27.840 has a hot year, it looks like he's the greatest 0:13:27.880 --> 0:13:30.000 putter on earth. If he had just hit some shot 0:13:30.120 --> 0:13:33.400 a little closer, his strokes, skin number putting would have 0:13:33.400 --> 0:13:37.600 actually gone down. These categories sometimes steal from each other. 0:13:37.679 --> 0:13:41.400 So if you're Dustin Johnson and I vombit off the 0:13:41.440 --> 0:13:45.199 t three forty and in the fair way, and that 0:13:45.920 --> 0:13:50.240 removes value, that removes exceptation from my remaining shot. It's 0:13:50.520 --> 0:13:53.160 very hard to be really high in stroke, skin driving 0:13:53.640 --> 0:13:56.480 and really high in strokes game to approach as a result, 0:13:56.600 --> 0:13:58.240 because they kind of take from each. 0:13:58.040 --> 0:14:02.240 Other because you're hitting from an advantage, right. 0:14:02.840 --> 0:14:06.920 Yeah, I mean Dustin Johnson's strokes gained approach number is 0:14:07.120 --> 0:14:11.080 just handicapped compared to ten Clark's period. There is nothing 0:14:11.160 --> 0:14:14.800 he can do to possibly put up and say, Tim Clarks, 0:14:14.840 --> 0:14:16.360 who knows if his number is better or not. But 0:14:16.800 --> 0:14:20.840 it's impossible for Dustin Johnson to be able to accumulate 0:14:21.440 --> 0:14:25.360 and lead strokes gained approach simply because of what he 0:14:25.400 --> 0:14:29.480 does with his driver an upper It'd. 0:14:29.280 --> 0:14:32.920 Be like comparing speF and Dustin Johnson. You know where 0:14:32.960 --> 0:14:36.040 Spef's at the top of strokes gained approach, but you know, 0:14:36.120 --> 0:14:38.360 middle of the road in strokes gained. 0:14:38.240 --> 0:14:41.440 Driving well exactly. And that's one thing that I feel 0:14:41.480 --> 0:14:44.160 like Tiger because he hit the driver into so many 0:14:44.200 --> 0:14:47.720 screwy s thoughts while he was best an approach well 0:14:47.760 --> 0:14:50.720 as a result, if you just aren't an idiot from 0:14:50.760 --> 0:14:53.479 some of the places that Tiger put his t shots, 0:14:53.520 --> 0:14:55.400 either into the trees or into the rough for god 0:14:55.480 --> 0:14:58.800 knows where you're almost given a third or a half 0:14:58.840 --> 0:15:02.320 of a stroke around, and strokes can approach simply because 0:15:02.320 --> 0:15:05.040 you're starting with such a higher initial value because of 0:15:05.080 --> 0:15:07.240 being in the trees an extra time or two around, 0:15:07.720 --> 0:15:09.520 and then, like I say, if you just play a 0:15:10.280 --> 0:15:13.480 solid shot from there, like the trees are about the 0:15:13.480 --> 0:15:16.240 only place in golf you can go out and intentionally 0:15:16.360 --> 0:15:20.040 gain roughly a third of a stroke every single time 0:15:20.080 --> 0:15:22.640 you do it. I mean, there's just no other shot 0:15:22.720 --> 0:15:26.480 that's easy. It's just they're giving strokes away. And that's 0:15:26.560 --> 0:15:28.760 mainly because the tour players are so bad at it, 0:15:29.520 --> 0:15:31.920 which obviously has a trickle down back to your listeners 0:15:31.920 --> 0:15:36.120 of ander golfers, they're most likely just as bad. It's 0:15:36.160 --> 0:15:39.720 the easiest place on earth to pick a value against 0:15:40.080 --> 0:15:40.800 against your. 0:15:40.680 --> 0:15:44.960 Competition, so so the same thing would go for like, 0:15:45.760 --> 0:15:47.000 you know, like Aaron Badley. 0:15:47.160 --> 0:15:49.680 Why he's always at the top of strokes game putting 0:15:49.760 --> 0:15:53.480 is because he's a really poor ball striker and leaves 0:15:53.520 --> 0:15:56.480 himself a lot of opportunity. I mean, he's a great putter, 0:15:57.080 --> 0:16:01.520 but he has exponentially more opportunities really then somebody that 0:16:01.680 --> 0:16:02.960 hits it close regularly. 0:16:04.280 --> 0:16:08.000 Potentially. Putting is one of the few of the four 0:16:08.080 --> 0:16:11.840 main stroke scene specifics. Putting, for the most part, can 0:16:11.960 --> 0:16:14.320 run fairly accurate. I mean, you're not going to have 0:16:14.320 --> 0:16:18.600 a guy who's a decent putter that gets the Brendan 0:16:18.640 --> 0:16:21.840 Todd effect and leads stroke scene putting as a result 0:16:22.000 --> 0:16:25.920 just by having more oportuo, everyone has eighteen opportunities dish around. 0:16:26.320 --> 0:16:29.440 So it's but a guy like Jason Day who's playing 0:16:29.440 --> 0:16:31.880 a little bit more conservatively, who winds up with a 0:16:31.880 --> 0:16:34.800 few extra thirty footers around well, and he's also having 0:16:34.800 --> 0:16:36.760 a season where he's making quite a few of them, 0:16:37.800 --> 0:16:40.360 Well that's going to wind up mounting to a huge number. 0:16:41.920 --> 0:16:44.080 But yeah, I mean there is a certain biason there 0:16:44.960 --> 0:16:47.920 certainly that can either help or hurt you. It's not 0:16:48.000 --> 0:16:49.400 quite as bad as the other ones though. 0:16:49.840 --> 0:16:52.440 Yeah. 0:16:50.680 --> 0:16:54.800 I think it's something that you know, I've never really 0:16:54.840 --> 0:16:57.520 thought about with like the approach and driving thing, how 0:16:57.600 --> 0:16:58.640 they steal from each other. 0:16:58.680 --> 0:16:59.880 But it makes a ton of sense. 0:17:01.040 --> 0:17:05.600 Yeah, absolutely. I mean again, Tim Clark simply cannot do 0:17:05.680 --> 0:17:08.479 with Dustin Johnson can off the tee period. So no 0:17:08.520 --> 0:17:11.240 matter what, obviously Dustin is going to have a higher 0:17:11.280 --> 0:17:15.720 strokes gained driving number. But then the flip side of 0:17:15.760 --> 0:17:18.480 that is, if I have eighteen opportunities, well fourteen, let's 0:17:18.480 --> 0:17:21.439 start out the park three. I have fourteen opportunities as 0:17:21.520 --> 0:17:27.080 Dustin Johnson, what my initial expectation number is going to 0:17:27.119 --> 0:17:29.560 be lower, And you know you have to sit technically 0:17:29.600 --> 0:17:33.120 the same kind of quality of shots. So in theory 0:17:33.240 --> 0:17:38.879 it wouldn't do that, but it simply does just because again, 0:17:38.960 --> 0:17:42.080 the better you drive at the lower your remaining expectation, 0:17:42.560 --> 0:17:44.880 you still have to hit a very quality shot now 0:17:44.920 --> 0:17:48.240 to get it inside of it, and almost of any 0:17:48.280 --> 0:17:50.360 bad shot you get really penalized. 0:17:51.000 --> 0:17:53.840 So I'd be interested, you know, like, in terms of 0:17:53.960 --> 0:17:57.200 stats that you'd like to see more of that aren't 0:17:57.320 --> 0:18:00.600 currently available. Would one of them be like a kind 0:18:00.600 --> 0:18:03.280 of like a strokes gain? Could you create a strokes 0:18:03.320 --> 0:18:08.880 gained driving that's relative to say, Dustin Johnson, So like, hey, 0:18:08.960 --> 0:18:11.960 Dustin Johnson, was you know, a full shot better than 0:18:12.200 --> 0:18:16.440 average his average today? 0:18:16.880 --> 0:18:20.560 You could? But more importantly, like are you talking about 0:18:20.600 --> 0:18:24.119 for the tour or just for us amateurs trying to 0:18:24.200 --> 0:18:25.160 use a stats. 0:18:24.840 --> 0:18:29.280 Portal, I'd say for the tour or you know, either way. 0:18:29.400 --> 0:18:31.680 You know, I'm just kind of curious what stats you'd 0:18:31.720 --> 0:18:35.000 like to see more of, you know, kind of rise 0:18:35.400 --> 0:18:36.879 in the near future. 0:18:37.960 --> 0:18:42.919 You know, It's funny because I feel like from an understanding, 0:18:42.960 --> 0:18:46.240 so from a logic standpoint, I'm as good as anyone 0:18:46.359 --> 0:18:48.919 like Mark Brodie. It's understanding. So once you give me 0:18:48.960 --> 0:18:52.639 the stat I'm certainly as good at computing it and 0:18:52.880 --> 0:18:56.119 or you know, the true a math isn't that hard. 0:18:56.520 --> 0:18:58.320 But the true art of math is how do I 0:18:58.400 --> 0:19:01.880 take this number and give you some actional information? So 0:19:02.160 --> 0:19:04.640 you've given me a stat what could I actually tell 0:19:04.680 --> 0:19:08.080 my player from it? That's the art of statistics, you know, 0:19:08.320 --> 0:19:12.240 how do I change something? But beyond that, a guy 0:19:12.320 --> 0:19:14.800 like Mark Brody what he created a strokes game like, 0:19:14.840 --> 0:19:16.640 I mean, that's just genius, like for me to say 0:19:16.920 --> 0:19:19.320 here's what I would like to see. I mean, honestly, 0:19:19.320 --> 0:19:21.160 I've been so busy that stuff. I haven't even thought 0:19:21.200 --> 0:19:23.240 about what I would like to see. I just take 0:19:23.320 --> 0:19:25.879 what hopefully a smart guy like Mark Creed and be like, okay, 0:19:25.880 --> 0:19:27.760 now what can I do for that? But you know, 0:19:27.800 --> 0:19:30.159 the one thing that I would say that should happen 0:19:30.880 --> 0:19:35.080 is the strokes gained around the green should definitely be 0:19:35.160 --> 0:19:40.159 boiled into per attempt. You could do strokes gained putting 0:19:40.280 --> 0:19:43.080 rather than how they give you know, your may crate 0:19:43.119 --> 0:19:47.440 your averages on you know, every every foot from inside 0:19:47.520 --> 0:19:51.480 ten feet. I mean again that that may creates nice, 0:19:51.520 --> 0:19:55.479 but a strokes gain per attempt for each distance bucket 0:19:55.520 --> 0:19:58.720 and putting would be nice. Same thing strokes gain per 0:19:58.760 --> 0:20:02.840 attempt at various areas in the fairway. But I honestly 0:20:02.880 --> 0:20:05.560 don't even know if the math of that would be 0:20:05.640 --> 0:20:09.399 allowed because the way they actually recomputed on each hole 0:20:09.520 --> 0:20:13.320 on each course to get a different benchmarking baseline. Which 0:20:13.359 --> 0:20:15.040 that's the reason I was asking the question what do 0:20:15.119 --> 0:20:17.399 you mean a second ago, because so there's a couple 0:20:17.440 --> 0:20:21.639 other stats programs out there aside from our decade app 0:20:21.760 --> 0:20:26.640 that offers stroke skain driving, which is it's completely bocused. 0:20:26.680 --> 0:20:31.560 You cannot use a benchmark in order to create stroke 0:20:31.600 --> 0:20:34.119 skain driving, like can you use it in putting? I mean, 0:20:34.160 --> 0:20:36.879 it's flawed, but it's about right, and you're probably going 0:20:36.960 --> 0:20:38.719 to get a nice trend where you can see if 0:20:38.760 --> 0:20:42.000 you're doing better or worse. It's flawed a little bit, 0:20:42.040 --> 0:20:46.480 but it's at least acceptable. But with driving, if you 0:20:46.520 --> 0:20:50.359 and I are both entering our stats into just a 0:20:50.440 --> 0:20:53.879 random staff portal, and your home course is Harbortown and 0:20:53.960 --> 0:20:57.359 my home course is Augusta, and we're using a benchmark, 0:20:57.440 --> 0:21:00.760 so a three hundred yard drive in the fairway gains 0:21:00.800 --> 0:21:03.880