Danny Lee has been pretty terrible recently. Last 3 tournaments he's been 71 or worse in the first round. Woodland only has one first round worse than 70 the last 6 tournaments. The last 2 tourneys they've played in together Woodland has been better in the first round by 6 shots in the Farmers, and 2 shots in the Waste Management.
There is a play I'm going to make...
Official play
Gary Woodland -1/2 ov Danny Lee 1st round
Danny Lee has been pretty terrible recently. Last 3 tournaments he's been 71 or worse in the first round. Woodland only has one first round worse than 70 the last 6 tournaments. The last 2 tourneys they've played in together Woodland has been better in the first round by 6 shots in the Farmers, and 2 shots in the Waste Management.
Literally all of your write-ups are based on golfers form and sometimes course history. Turth is, courses in California and west coast have very little to do with this week course, so someone missing/making couple straight cuts, might not mean much, if anything at all.
Florida courses are full of water hazards, wind, bermuda greens and it's not uncommon for British golfers to do much better on similar courses to this one, simply because of their golf strategy. Smashing ball off the tee and then trying to find green from wherever ball landed is simply not going to work on course that has plenty of trouble if you stray too far off the fairways.
That means the field usually has very low GIR% and in past 7 years on this course, the field has averaged just 60% of greens in regulation.
Most of the field will use less than driver for vast majority of rounds, so simply targeting accuracy is not best way to go.
Overall, aside from golfers form, I believe you must pay attention how golfer does on courses with very hard to hit greens and also how does the one do on courses where driving distance is restricted off the tee. Some of the guys you like are losing strokes on similar courses so, despite their better form, they might not be such a good plays after all.
With my particular style of handicapping, I put more into current form than course history. If someone has played good at a course for a few years, but they get a new coach, a new putting stroke, a kink in their swing, an injury...those past numbers can be deceiving.
I just value current form as my main stat...then I look at past performance. I don't think there's a right or a wrong way...it's just what works for me.
We actually went over a bet on the podcast that I almost took, but the guy I was going to bet against has a strangely great track record here...so I backed out of it.
Quote Originally Posted by Ningishzida:
Literally all of your write-ups are based on golfers form and sometimes course history. Turth is, courses in California and west coast have very little to do with this week course, so someone missing/making couple straight cuts, might not mean much, if anything at all.
Florida courses are full of water hazards, wind, bermuda greens and it's not uncommon for British golfers to do much better on similar courses to this one, simply because of their golf strategy. Smashing ball off the tee and then trying to find green from wherever ball landed is simply not going to work on course that has plenty of trouble if you stray too far off the fairways.
That means the field usually has very low GIR% and in past 7 years on this course, the field has averaged just 60% of greens in regulation.
Most of the field will use less than driver for vast majority of rounds, so simply targeting accuracy is not best way to go.
Overall, aside from golfers form, I believe you must pay attention how golfer does on courses with very hard to hit greens and also how does the one do on courses where driving distance is restricted off the tee. Some of the guys you like are losing strokes on similar courses so, despite their better form, they might not be such a good plays after all.
With my particular style of handicapping, I put more into current form than course history. If someone has played good at a course for a few years, but they get a new coach, a new putting stroke, a kink in their swing, an injury...those past numbers can be deceiving.
I just value current form as my main stat...then I look at past performance. I don't think there's a right or a wrong way...it's just what works for me.
We actually went over a bet on the podcast that I almost took, but the guy I was going to bet against has a strangely great track record here...so I backed out of it.
coulda been worse...although a loss is a loss..they coulda been tied going into 18 and the dagger 18fter birdie from Lee woulda made your loss feel that much worse.
coulda been worse...although a loss is a loss..they coulda been tied going into 18 and the dagger 18fter birdie from Lee woulda made your loss feel that much worse.
You can find him, Brendan Grace, and Matt Every knee deep at the clubhouse bar tonight
"Dis-Grace" took a WD runout powder the 1st round along with Tim Wilkinson and Cam Percy. my guy "Salt" Pieters sucking eggs with a [+2] opening round. these damn guys are SO inconsistant
Quote Originally Posted by alangrrbs:
You can find him, Brendan Grace, and Matt Every knee deep at the clubhouse bar tonight
"Dis-Grace" took a WD runout powder the 1st round along with Tim Wilkinson and Cam Percy. my guy "Salt" Pieters sucking eggs with a [+2] opening round. these damn guys are SO inconsistant
Hot Forum Topics
