I thought you might be interested in taking a look at a new research paper entitled A New Method for Ranking Total Driving Performance on the PGA Tour, written by three PhDs and business school professors at Northeastern University. Below I provide the abstract, introduction and conclusion to this piece, as well as short bios of the three authors. If you’d like to receive a copy of the research, or talk to one of the authors, I’d be happy to facilitate an interview.
The Professional Golf Association Tour (PGA Tour) currently ranks its players according to their overall Total Driving performance by adding together the individual ranks given to each golfer for their average driving distance and for their driving accuracy percentage. However, this widely used and reported measure is inappropriate because it is based upon the addition of two ordinal-scaled measures in which the underlying differences between successive ranks are not equal. In this paper, we propose a new method for ranking golfers in terms of their overall driving performance. The method eliminates the drawbacks of previously reported measures, including the one used by the PGA Tour. Using the new methodology, we re-rank all PGA Tour golfers for the 2005 season and compare these ranks to the “official” ranks reported by the PGA Tour. In some cases, large differences in players’ rankings existed. The reasons for these large differences are then discussed.
Introduction
In recent years, numerous statistical analyses have been conducted in an attempt to assess the relative importance of various shot-making skills on overall performance on the PGA Tour and among amateur golfers (Shmanske, 2000; Dorsel and Rotunda, 2001; Engelhardt, 1997 and 2002; Callan and Thomas, 2004 and 2006; and Wiseman and Chatterjee, 2006). While most of the measures that have been used in these analyses have been well-defined and widely accepted, there is one performance statistic, “Total Driving,” that has not been well-defined. This particular statistic, which combines a golfer's (i) average driving distance and his/her (ii) driving accuracy percentage, has been operationally defined in numerous ways, but no methodologically sound measure has emerged to date. This includes the measure now being used by the PGA Tour.
In this paper, we propose a new statistical measure based upon standardized z-scores for ranking golfers according to their Total Driving performance. This new measure eliminates the methodological drawbacks of previously developed measures. Using this new measure, we re-rank PGA Tour golfers on their Total Driving performance during the 2005 season and compare these rankings to the "official" PGA Tour rankings for that season.
We first examine the evolving nature of the relationship that has existed between driving distance and driving accuracy on the PGA Tour over the last sixteen years (1990-2005). We then focus our attention on alternative ranking methods that have been proposed and discuss the necessity of and the rationale for a new composite measure of Total Driving performance. Following this, we describe the new measure and apply it to the 2005 PGA Tour season. These new rankings dramatically alter the previous ranking of many golfers on the tour. The reasons for the differences in rankings will be explored.
Summary
The proposed method for ranking golfers according to their Total Driving skill takes into account the magnitude of the differences that exist between players on each of the two driving dimensions. The current PGA Tour method does not. The proposed method also takes into account the strong negative relationship that exists between driving accuracy and driving distance. This negative relationship is reflected in the new conditional standardized z-score. As a result, this new method gives a better overall reflection of the true Total Driving performance of PGA Tour golfers than does the current ranking system. Computationally, the proposed method is slightly more involved than other existing methods, but this is not a significant factor today.
It should be noted that this methodology can be applied in other areas in which an overall ranking is desired based on two correlated factors, which have different units of measurement and need to be combined in some way to provide an overall ranking.
The Professional Golf Association Tour (PGA Tour) currently ranks its players according to their overall Total Driving performance by adding together the individual ranks given to each golfer for their average driving distance and for their driving accuracy percentage. However, this widely used and reported measure is inappropriate because it is based upon the addition of two ordinal-scaled measures in which the underlying differences between successive ranks are not equal. In this paper, we propose a new method for ranking golfers in terms of their overall driving performance. The method eliminates the drawbacks of previously reported measures, including the one used by the PGA Tour. Using the new methodology, we re-rank all PGA Tour golfers for the 2005 season and compare these ranks to the “official” ranks reported by the PGA Tour. In some cases, large differences in players’ rankings existed. The reasons for these large differences are then discussed.
Introduction
In recent years, numerous statistical analyses have been conducted in an attempt to assess the relative importance of various shot-making skills on overall performance on the PGA Tour and among amateur golfers (Shmanske, 2000; Dorsel and Rotunda, 2001; Engelhardt, 1997 and 2002; Callan and Thomas, 2004 and 2006; and Wiseman and Chatterjee, 2006). While most of the measures that have been used in these analyses have been well-defined and widely accepted, there is one performance statistic, “Total Driving,” that has not been well-defined. This particular statistic, which combines a golfer's (i) average driving distance and his/her (ii) driving accuracy percentage, has been operationally defined in numerous ways, but no methodologically sound measure has emerged to date. This includes the measure now being used by the PGA Tour.
In this paper, we propose a new statistical measure based upon standardized z-scores for ranking golfers according to their Total Driving performance. This new measure eliminates the methodological drawbacks of previously developed measures. Using this new measure, we re-rank PGA Tour golfers on their Total Driving performance during the 2005 season and compare these rankings to the "official" PGA Tour rankings for that season.
We first examine the evolving nature of the relationship that has existed between driving distance and driving accuracy on the PGA Tour over the last sixteen years (1990-2005). We then focus our attention on alternative ranking methods that have been proposed and discuss the necessity of and the rationale for a new composite measure of Total Driving performance. Following this, we describe the new measure and apply it to the 2005 PGA Tour season. These new rankings dramatically alter the previous ranking of many golfers on the tour. The reasons for the differences in rankings will be explored.
Summary
The proposed method for ranking golfers according to their Total Driving skill takes into account the magnitude of the differences that exist between players on each of the two driving dimensions. The current PGA Tour method does not. The proposed method also takes into account the strong negative relationship that exists between driving accuracy and driving distance. This negative relationship is reflected in the new conditional standardized z-score. As a result, this new method gives a better overall reflection of the true Total Driving performance of PGA Tour golfers than does the current ranking system. Computationally, the proposed method is slightly more involved than other existing methods, but this is not a significant factor today.
It should be noted that this methodology can be applied in other areas in which an overall ranking is desired based on two correlated factors, which have different units of measurement and need to be combined in some way to provide an overall ranking.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment