DGPT: Portland Open June 4-6

[nothinbuttree]

Another interesting stat, and not unexpected, the strokes gained tee to green ranged from +7.17 down to -11.4. The strokes gained putting ranges from +3.73 to -3.96, a much smaller spread. In other words, not much separated good putters from bad ones. But for someone who can crank out the distance, a big advantage. Again, not unexpected, but that is a pretty large difference in ranges.

 

[brutalbrutus]

With 17 attempts if I interpret the data correctly. There must be a back story or transcription errors.

Those C1x stats on the simple expanded scorecard also include "Parked" putts. If you look at the "Throw in Distance" you'll see he has 15 made putts at 5ft. If you click on the profile button when you expand a player's scorecard, it will give you a 3rd putting stat, which separates the C1x stats from the overall C1s.

He's 15/17 inside C1 overall and 0/2 from C1x. He also made 3 C2 putts. Just a weird day where he was either just outside the circle or basically parked.

I had this problem when i first started following the scores on udisc. They should have that expanded scorecard say C1 not C1x.

 

[sidewinder22]

MPO and FPO ratings appear to be quite different.

 

[brutalbrutus]

Data must be off--holes 2 and 3 for instance, he birdied. Unless he has 800' distance and missed eagle putts, Udisc shows he made 5' putts (the typical distance for a parked hole.) But there are entries for missed C1 putts as well. I don't think all his made putts were 5' or 38', which is what Udisc is saying.

It's either lazy scorekeeping, or maybe one of the players was doing it and just did as little as possible to keep in mind in the game or something. They have preset distances to make it quicker to use. For putts it goes 5' 16' 27' 38' and so on. Basically whoever did the scoring just made sure it was marked a C2 by making the minimum for a C2 putt at 38' and the shortest putt of 5' for all C1s.

 

[brutalbrutus]

MPO and FPO ratings appear to be quite different.

There several short tees for the FPO.

 

[sidewinder22]

There several short tees for the FPO.

That's not what I'm talking about.

FPO seems inflated across the board. PP and Cat hot round is well above their rating 30 and 40 pts. Hailey shoots 4 strokes worse and still almost 20 pts above her rating.

MPO seems deflated across the board. Ricky's hot round is only 2 pts higher than his rating.

 

[brutalbrutus]

Yea... That does look at bit odd. Maybe something weird like the two layouts are straddling a cut off point? One course is in this ratings tier and the other is in the next one up or down?

 

[Ryan P.]

Yea... That does look at bit odd. Maybe something weird like the two layouts are straddling a cut off point? One course is in this ratings tier and the other is in the next one up or down?

I don't know the nuances of the ratings formula, but from what I know it makes sense. The mpo scores are bunched up a lot. The top rated guys didn't shoot far ahead of the pack/there are a bunch of players right behind them. Also, a few of the higher rated guys played below their rating and are with the pack.

FPO is a different story. The pack is well behind the leaders and is even more bunched together. Therefore the distribution isn't as normal and it rewards the ladies who got ahead of the pack.

 

[runningoz]

What's with everybody using the tee pads and going off to the side? Outside of giving a better/different attack angle, seems to take away the intended design of the hole.

 

[Steve West]

That's not what I'm talking about.

FPO seems inflated across the board. PP and Cat hot round is well above their rating 30 and 40 pts. Hailey shoots 4 strokes worse and still almost 20 pts above her rating.

MPO seems deflated across the board. Ricky's hot round is only 2 pts higher than his rating.

Actually, for the whole field it was the opposite.

The average MPO player's round rating was 8.74 points avove their player rating.

The average FPO player's round rating was only 2.74 points above their player ratings.

Ryan P. explained why it looks like it does if you only look at the top players.

 

[swhite]

What's with everybody using the tee pads and going off to the side? Outside of giving a better/different attack angle, seems to take away the intended design of the hole.

In the round 1 Jomez video, the commentators were saying that something about the surface of the teepads is weird, making them soft and spongy. Players are allowed to tee off from the ground beside the teepads to avoid the strange teepad surfaces.

 

[dehaas]

What's with everybody using the tee pads and going off to the side? Outside of giving a better/different attack angle, seems to take away the intended design of the hole.

I think they said on the Jomez coverage that the turf tees were basically too grabby or thick so they widened the tees to allow for a natural tee. But yeah, pretty obvious based off of coverage so far most people are taking lines that weren't originally intended…course designer included.

I could totally understand if the tees were unsafe…low lying areas and a lot of recent rain and they were slick…something like that. The explanation was in the footage was pretty much the turf tees killed momentum on a run up so they gave us some side space at the last minute with no practice. Safety concerns don't appear to be the justification though.

Everybody has the same opportunity to use the side tees, but if you've played a couple of practice rounds do you deviate from your game plan last minute? Surely there is a better solution to maintain the integrity of the originally designed course and still address whatever beef with the turf? If they're allowing them to tee from the grass on the side why not just take the turf pads up altogether? If it's a temporary course I can't imagine the tees are actually framed with crushed limestone underneath?

 

[Horsman]

I think they said on the Jomez coverage that the turf tees were basically too grabby or thick so they widened the tees to allow for a natural tee. But yeah, pretty obvious based off of coverage so far most people are taking lines that weren't originally intended…course designer included.

I could totally understand if the tees were unsafe…low lying areas and a lot of recent rain and they were slick…something like that. The explanation was in the footage was pretty much the turf tees killed momentum on a run up so they gave us some side space at the last minute with no practice. Safety concerns don't appear to be the justification though.

Everybody has the same opportunity to use the side tees, but if you've played a couple of practice rounds do you deviate from your game plan last minute? Surely there is a better solution to maintain the integrity of the originally designed course and still address whatever beef with the turf? If they're allowing them to tee from the grass on the side why not just take the turf pads up altogether? If it's a temporary course I can't imagine the tees are actually framed with crushed limestone underneath?

For me it would be 100% a safety concern. If the tees are too grabby then you have a good chance that your plant foot wont rotate and that can cause a lot of issues. I have only played on this kind of super grabby turf once and I would never do it again. Not sure if people would prefer these super grabby turf tees over the standard slick turf tees but either way, turf tees shouldnt be allowed for tournaments IMO

 

[Ryan P.]

It's either lazy scorekeeping, or maybe one of the players was doing it and just did as little as possible to keep in mind in the game or something. They have preset distances to make it quicker to use. For putts it goes 5' 16' 27' 38' and so on. Basically whoever did the scoring just made sure it was marked a C2 by making the minimum for a C2 putt at 38' and the shortest putt of 5' for all C1s.

For me it would be 100% a safety concern. If the tees are too grabby then you have a good chance that your plant foot wont rotate and that can cause a lot of issues. I have only played on this kind of super grabby turf once and I would never do it again. Not sure if people would prefer these super grabby turf tees over the standard slick turf tees but either way, turf tees shouldnt be allowed for tournaments IMO

I'll second this. I've messed up my hips playing on these kinds of pads and not being able to rotate my foot easily.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

I just started watching R1F9 on Jomez, and I don't know if anyone mentioned it yet but...

Props to the announcer for finding some of the players' more obscure wins/accomplishments as he announced them. Wish they would have shown him wearing the full suit and tie. Lulz.

That's having fun with it.

 

[2naphish]

I think they said on the Jomez coverage that the turf tees were basically too grabby or thick so they widened the tees to allow for a natural tee. But yeah, pretty obvious based off of coverage so far most people are taking lines that weren't originally intended…course designer included.

I could totally understand if the tees were unsafe…low lying areas and a lot of recent rain and they were slick…something like that. The explanation was in the footage was pretty much the turf tees killed momentum on a run up so they gave us some side space at the last minute with no practice. Safety concerns don't appear to be the justification though.

Everybody has the same opportunity to use the side tees, but if you've played a couple of practice rounds do you deviate from your game plan last minute? Surely there is a better solution to maintain the integrity of the originally designed course and still address whatever beef with the turf? If they're allowing them to tee from the grass on the side why not just take the turf pads up altogether? If it's a temporary course I can't imagine the tees are actually framed with crushed limestone underneath?

according to gatekeeper media Drew Gibson withdrew from the tournament due to an ankle injury on one of the teepads.

 

[Monkeypaws]

Not gonna read the thread, wary of spoilers.

If the teepads are rubbish, remove them, and make them throw the lines Brother Dave's fave intended. Chalk lines if necessary.

 

[johnrhouck]

I'd like to see John Houck (insert your favorite course designers here) be a course consultant for DGPT (or any tour that uses temporary courses). .

Thanks for the vote of confidence, Darryl. I did do some work with the DGPT and the local club on the finals layout in Charlotte a couple years ago, and I think we made some changes -- some small, some bigger -- that had a good impact. (One change was opening up a 5' gap as a PITTSBORO that I saw at least two players use in the video coverage -- I doubt anyone else noticed that, but it did give those players a nice recovery option that they appreciated.)

The DGPT is a game-changer, and they are doing amazing things for the sport. I encourage everyone to be patient, and I'm looking forward to doing more with the DGPT in the coming years.

 

[BogeyNoMore]

Maybe I'm just not up on things, but...

Can someone please explain, "opening up a gap as a PITTSBORO?" I don't understand that reference.

 

[BionicRib]

He designed a course in Pittsburo NC. As far as the reference goes I have no idea. I'm thinking a typo was apart of that or some inside joke.