Thursday, August 17, 2006

On par

FirstName: Points Num rounds Par: Avge HH Avrge SP Avrge
Jonny -31 24 39 38.67 38.00 39.60
George -20 28 40 40.50 39.79 41.21
Neal -19 22 43 42.91 42.50 43.40
Mike -17 34 39 39.91 39.22 40.69
Andy -17 35 40 41.60 40.89 42.35
Steve -12 22 43 44.86 43.58 46.40
Bud -6 19 38 39.11 37.90 40.44
Pete 3 16 47 48.56 48.78 48.29

First off, look at Neal! Suddenly he's found himself in third. A cracking start to his round yesterday saw his first three drives within very "gettable" distances to the pin. One birdy out of the three and a boost in confidence saw him go on to a great round.

So, what can we see from the numbers? First of all, there's a huge discrepancy between South Park and Headington Hill average scores - we are all between one and three shots better in HH than SP. Next year, on Steve's suggestion, we'll change the league to ensure the top ten must include five scores from each course.

Only Jonny and Neal have overall averages that are lower than their par. Does that mean we set the par too high, or they're playing really well? It's the latter, surely.This tally may be interesting though:

Jonny 1%
George 1%
Neal 0%
Mike 2%
Andy 4%
Steve 4%
Bud 3%
Pete 3%

What does this show? This is the percentage difference of a player's average away from their par.It means that Andy and Steve's averages are the furthest away from their par, but the people at the top of the league are closest to their par. (if we do the same stats on those with less than 10 rounds, the deviation gets pretty huge).

Conclusion? I think the pars were, on the whole, well calculated.

(sorry about the awful HTML on this - i'm still struggling to work out a quick and efficient way to copy the data from Access or Excel into a blog post...

No comments: