Journal of Sports Economics-2014-Baugher-Day-Burford

http://jse.sagepub.com/
Journal of Sports Economics
http://jse.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/03/24/1527002514528517
The online version of this article can be found at:
DOI: 10.1177/1527002514528517
published online 25 March 2014Journal of Sports Economics
Carson D. Baugher, Jonathan P. Day and Elvin W. Burford, Jr.
Drive for Show and Putt for Dough? Not Anymore
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
The North American Association of Sports Economists
can be found at:Journal of Sports EconomicsAdditional services and information for
http://jse.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:
http://jse.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:
http://jse.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/03/24/1527002514528517.refs.htmlCitations:
What is This?
- Mar 25, 2014OnlineFirst Version of Record>>
at WESTERN ILLINOIS UNIV on March 25, 2014jse.sagepub.comDownloaded from at WESTERN ILLINOIS UNIV on March 25, 2014jse.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Article
Drive for Show and Putt
for Dough? Not Anymore
Carson D. Baugher1
, Jonathan P. Day1
,
and Elvin W. Burford, Jr.2
Abstract
Ten years ago, some golf analysts believed that ‘‘drive for show and putt for dough’’
may no longer be true on the Professional Golfers’ Association Tour. Scholars ana-
lyzed data from 1991 to 2002 and found that the old adage was still true since putting
remained the number one skill determining earnings. We updated their models with
data from 2006 to 2013 and found that driving replaced putting as the number one skill
determining earnings starting in 2011. The most likely reasons for this return to skill
are the lengthening of the courses and the shortening of the rough.
Keywords
sports economics, earnings determination, golf skills
In the early 2000s, golf analysts started to question the wisdom of ‘‘drive for show
and putt for dough.’’ Before then, there seemed to be a near universal consensus
about this wisdom that your skill and brute strength of driving the ball would impress
people, but unless you could putt well a la Jack Nicklaus, you could not win money.1
It seemed as though straight driving had almost no influence on how much money
you would win and putting was the only thing that really mattered. Why did putting
seem to matter so much more? Alexander and Kern write:
The belief that putting is important stems from the aforementioned fact that the majority
of a golfer’s shots are taken within 100 yards of the hole. Professional golfers take
1
Western Illinois University, Macomb, IL, USA
2
Junior’s Shaft Shack, Forest, VA, USA
Corresponding Author:
Jonathan P. Day, Western Illinois University, 1 University Circle, Macomb, IL 61455, USA.
Email: jp-day@wiu.edu
Journal of Sports Economics
1-9
ª The Author(s) 2014
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1527002514528517
jse.sagepub.com
at WESTERN ILLINOIS UNIV on March 25, 2014jse.sagepub.comDownloaded from

roughly 40% of their strokes on the putting green. On the other hand, a skilled golfer may
use the driver a maximum of 14 times in a par 72 round. It would seem prudent to allocate
more time to the mastery of the club used most frequently—the putter. (2005, p. 47)
This wisdom affected the way golf coaches and players prioritized their practices:
Work more on your short game, less on your long game. As the game of golf seemed
to change over the years with the rise of better golfing technology, lengthening of the
courses, changing the height of the grass, and positioning of the holes, driving
seemed to take on more importance, so much so that many analysts seem to question
the old wisdom of ‘‘drive for show and putt for dough’’ to the point of calling for its
end. In 2005, two scholars took up these calls and analyzed golf statistics from 1991
to 2002 and concluded that while driving had indeed become more important, put-
ting still remained the number one skill determining earnings (Alexander & Kern,
2005). However, since 2002, the courses on the Professional Golfers’ Association
(PGA) Tour have continued to change. Courses have gotten even longer, the grass
height of the rough has gotten shorter, and the cups have been continually reposi-
tioned to harder locations. It has also seemed that great drivers are finding more and
more success than their counterpart great putters. An example is Bubba Watson, who
was the 5th longest driver in 2013, but 122nd best putter and made US$1.8 million in
earnings. Whereas Bryce Molder was the fourth best putter but drove the ball
14 yards less than the average golfer and made only US$816,922 in earnings. In fact,
8 of the top 10 longest drivers earned over a million dollars in 2013, whereas only 5
of the top 10 putters earned over a million dollars. This has continued the calls to
question the old wisdom. We have taken up these continued calls and once again
analyzed the old adage on data from 2006 to 2013. First, we discuss why the impor-
tance of skills would change. Then, we analyze the new data to determine whether
indeed there has been a return to skill.
The Changing Importance of Golf Skills
There are two important changes to many of the PGA Tour golf courses that we
believe are now causing driving to become the most important skill in determining
a golfer’s earnings. The golf courses over the last 20 years and especially in the last
5 years have become longer relative to par (Heiny, 2008). This has been done by
moving the tee back several yards and by reducing some Par-5 holes to Par-4 holes.
A golfer who can hit the ball longer has an advantage on longer courses because they
can reach Par-5 holes in two strokes and begin putting sometimes a shot before a
shorter driver or putt from a shorter distance, which increases their make percentage.
On Par-4 holes, a golfer who drives the ball 20 yards further than another golfer will
be able to use two clubs less than the shorter driver like a 60
wedge instead of an
eight or nine iron. The wedge allows the longer driver to control the height, distance,
and spin of the ball, allowing for a closer approach to the pin. The golfer using the
eight or nine iron would have a greater distance from the hole significantly decreas-
ing his make percentage.
2 Journal of Sports Economics

Furthermore, the PGA Tour has narrowed the fairway that has increased the
importance of driving accuracy.2
A driver who cannot get onto the fairway will have
a more difficult time getting the ball closer to the hole hitting from the rough
compared to hitting from the fairway.
In 2008, the average length of the golf course on the PGA Tour increased by
37.4 yards with no significant change in the few years prior (Golf Predictor Blog,
2009). So we should expect after 2008, the skills of driving distance and driving
accuracy to increase relative to all the other skills. In addition, the PGA Tour have
begun tucking more pins behind bunkers (Brown, 2004), which gives more advan-
tage to the longer driver using wedges over the shorter driver using longer irons. The
PGA Tour also requires the green to be more receptive to the balls, which causes the
ball to stay where it is hit or spin back toward the cup. The Tour does this because it
is a crowd pleaser, but it adds to the advantage of using the wedge by the longer
driver over the longer iron by the shorter driver.
Another change in the PGA Tour courses that we believe have increased the
relative importance of driving is the shortening of the rough grass. The height of the
grass has been reduced (Sports, 2009). This means that the disadvantage of a long
driver, who may hit it into the rough more than the shorter driver, now has an easier
time getting it out of the rough with wedges than they did when the rough grass was
longer. This would increase the relative importance of driving distance over all of
the other skills including driving accuracy.
As far as we know, there has not been a significant increase in the number of bun-
kers. So we should not expect an increase in the relative importance of sand ability.
On the PGA Tour, we expect chipping ability to be important, but we do not have
any expectation that it will have any significant change in importance over time.
Data and Methods
We collected data from the PGA TOUR ShotLink Intelligence Program (2013) for
the years 2006–2013. The variables we needed on each player were their amount of
earnings, the number of events they played in, their driving average, their driving
accuracy, their greens in regulation percentage, the number of greens they missed,
their average number of putts per green in regulation, their sand save percentage,
their number of sand saves, their number of sand traps hit, and their number of pars
made when missing the green in regulation. These variables allowed us to replicate
the Alexander and Kern (2005) model on data from 2006 to 2013. We then follow
the example of Shmanske (2009) and run a standardized regression in order to
properly compare the relative impact of each skill.3
We run separate standardized
regressions for each year to get the trend in the relative importance of each skill
in determining earnings over time.
In the Alexander and Kern (AK) model, there are six pure skills that are tested as to
their impact on earnings for individual golfers. These skills are driving (both distance
Baugher et al. 3

and accuracy), iron ability, putting ability, sand ability, and chip ability. Iron ability is
coded as the value of the residuals from the regression of greens in regulation percent-
age on driving average and driving distance to determine pure iron ability. This
method gives us the pure iron ability since the greens in regulation percentage is a
function of iron ability, driving distance, and driving average. Putting ability is coded
as the value of the residuals from the regression of average number of putts per green
in regulation on iron ability to determine pure putting ability. This method gives us the
pure putting ability because average number of putts per green in regulation is a func-
tion of both putting and iron ability. Sand ability is coded as the value of the residuals
from the regression of sand save percentage on putting ability to determine pure put-
ting ability. This method gives us the pure sand ability because sand save percentage is
a function of both sand ability and putting ability. Chipping ability is coded as the
value of the residuals from a regression on a modified scramble variable4
on putting
ability to determine pure chipping ability. This method gives us a pure chipping ability
because scrambling is a function of putting and other factors. In addition to these pure
skills, the AK model includes the number of events, the number of events squared, a
time variable as a proxy for increase in golf technology, and the total prize money in
constant dollars. The dependent variable in our replicated model is the money earned
from the total purse in 2006 constant dollars (Alexander Kern, 2005).
The summary statistics for the variables used in the model are reported in Table 1.
The average earnings for each golfer in the PGA Tour from 2006 to 2013 was
US$1,254,588 in 2006 constant dollars. This is more than 4 times the average
earnings from 1992 to 2001 coded in 1982-1984 constant dollars as reported in Alex-
ander and Kern (2005). The average number of events played by each golfer in this
data set is 24.78. The average driving distance has increased by 20 yards since the
1990s to 288.9 yards, most likely because of the increase in golf technology. The
driving accuracy has decreased by 6% to 62.8%, most likely because of the narrow-
ing of the fairways and the increasing of the average driving distance. Driving the
ball a further distance creates dispersion in where the ball ultimately lands which
decreases accuracy.
Table 1. Summary Statistics and Variable Descriptions.
Variables Mean SD Maximum Minimum
Money 1,254,588 1,103,478 10,700,000 94,987.86
Events 24.79 4.31 36 1
Drive Average 288.9 8.48 319.6 259
Drive Accuracy 0.628 0.052 0.784 0.419
IRON 0.00 0.019 0.066 À0.073
PUTT 0.00 0.025 0.1 À0.084
SAND 0.00 5.71 17.03 À20.53
CHIP 0.00 0.099 0.66 À0.449
Note. n ¼ 1,453 observations. SD ¼ standard deviation.

We then ran their regression model on the data from 2006 to 2013 and reported
the results in Table 2. We used a slightly different generalized least squares (GLS)
model with random effects to account for the AR(1) disturbance. It is unclear
whether Alexander and Kern (2005) tested for autocorrelation in their model, but the
coefficients do not change by a significant amount in either estimator used. We also
calculated an ordinary least squares (OLS) regression on the log of earnings per tour-
nament and reported the results. This transformed dependent variable corrected for
heteroskedasticity found in the OLS model using the Breusch–Pagan/Cook–Weis-
berg test.
After doing a pooled time-series model like they did, we analyzed every year
individually as to the level of impact each skill had on individual golf earnings.
Following the example put forward by Shmanske (2009), we used standardized
regressions to properly compare each skill relative to one another. By doing this
analysis on each year, we can see the trend in the relative importance of each skill
on determining earnings over time. In using this method, we no longer had to con-
trol for the changing purse or golf technology over time because we compared the
relative impact each skill had on earnings within each year. We then used the stan-
dardized coefficients to compare the relative impact that each skill had on earn-
ings. The standardized coefficients are recorded in Table A1 in the Appendix.
We then graphed the absolute value of the coefficients over time for each skill and
these are shown in Figure 1.
The first thing to note is that over the last 3 years (2011-2013), the average dis-
tance a golfer drives the ball has replaced putting as the most important skill deter-
mining earnings. Through these standardized coefficients, we can calculate the
Table 2. Regressions on Player Earnings From 2006 to 2013.
Variables
Earnings GLS Coefficients
(Standard Errors)
Log of Earnings per Event OLS
Coefficients (Standard Errors)
Events 83,346.78* (38,661.77) —
Events Squared À1,804.4* (799.83) —
Driving Average 42,850.03** (4,061.58) 0.044** (0.003)
Driving Accuracy 2,892,908** (632,828.3) 3.8** (0.465)
IRON 5,111,719** (1,152,987) 4.03** (0.938)
PUTT À16,700,000** (920,196.5) À15.83** (0.743)
SAND 22,322.5** (3,800.91) 0.026** (0.003)
CHIP À1,653,698** (220,077.5) À1.52** (0.194)
Time —a
À0.006 (0.0158)
Prize 0.00305 (0.0019) À1.82 Â 10∧
9 (3.01 Â 10∧
9)
Constant À14,700,000** (1,483,194) À4.053** (1.24)
R2
.33 .33
Note. n ¼ 1,453 observations. OLS ¼ ordinary least squares; GLS ¼ generalized least squares.
a
No time variable is included in a GLS regression accounting for AR(1) disturbance.
**p .01. *p .05.
Baugher et al. 5

average amount of additional earnings a golfer is expected to make from an increase
in their skill relative to other players. If for example, a golfer increases his putting
skills by 1 standard deviation (SD) relative to the other golfers in 2013, then the gol-
fer would increase their earnings on average by US$510,195.91. But if a golfer were
to increase his driving distance by 1 SD relative to the other golfers in 2013, then the
golfer would increase their earnings by US$671,779.15. Driving distance thus now
has a greater impact on earnings than putting.
Another very striking thing to note is that driving accuracy has surged in the last 5
years in relative importance and has also surpassed putting in 2013 in importance in
determining earnings. A golfer who increases their driving accuracy by 1 SD relative
to other golfers in 2013 would expect to see their earnings increase by
US$549,637.49. So both driving distance and driving accuracy are now more impor-
tant than putting ability. Therefore, this statistical model is clearly calling for a new
saying: ‘‘Drive for dough in order to putt for dough.’’
Over the same time period, the importance of iron ability and chipping ability
increased and decreased, but both remained far below driving and putting in impor-
tance. Sand ability hardly changed at all in importance during this time period and
was also significantly less important than driving and putting in almost every year.5
Discussion and Conclusion
Golf has always been a game that emphasized the importance of a fundamentally
sound putting game. Over the years, as courses began to change and develop, a new
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
DRIVE-AVERAGE
DRIVE-ACCURACY
IRON
PUTT
SAND
CHIP
Figure 1. The change in relative impact of skills on earnings over time from 2006 to 2013.

trend began emerging. This new trend was an increased importance on a player’s
driving abilities. This new way of approaching the game of golf became evident
as a new generation of players emerged onto the professional tours. Fans and players
alike began to notice the younger players who had an aptitude for hitting the ball a
long distance had extreme success on the PGA Tour. Existing players who sub-
scribed to the old theory of ‘‘drive for show and putt for dough’’ took notice and
started practicing various ways to increase their distance. This new approach gained
ground, and researchers began studying the impact of various skills on earnings
(Alexander and Kern, 2005; Callan Thomas, 2007; Rinehart, 2009).
Old sayings like ‘‘drive for show and putt for dough’’ are never meant to change.
They are meant to be a fixed truth by which to understand the world and in the case
of this saying, the world of golf. But when the context of the saying continues to
change as the game of golf has done in the last 20 years and especially in the last
3 years, sometimes these sayings are no longer true. We believe that given the
increasing importance of driving for determining earnings and good evidence that
it may be now the most important skill determining earnings, we propose a slight
amendment to the old wisdom. It should say ‘‘drive for dough in order to putt for
dough,’’ since both skills are now so clearly essential to winning the game of golf
on the PGA Tour. This is not to say that this will be an unchanging wisdom. For
if the game of golf changes back to the time of old or progresses in a wholly new
way, the understanding of the game will need to change with it.
There is also some evidence to suggest why the PGA Tour may be changing its
course to emphasize driving distance. Shmanske (2013) has found using Granger
causality tests that the increasing driving distances has increased the size of the
purses. Thus, designing a course to emphasize driving could increase the number
of sponsors and viewers. This is why driving remains important for show, but now
also is getting the dough.
If the PGA Tour wanted to reverse the current trend in the change in relative
importance of golf skills, then all they would have to do is increase the height of the
rough by one or two inches, change the width of the fairways,6
or decrease the length
of the course. The importance of this new understanding of the game of golf cannot
be understated because it may lead to a reprioritization in the practice of competitors.
They may now work equally as hard on their long game as they do on their short
game. Or they may spend more time on increasing the length and accuracy of their
drive than on their putting ability. Hidden within the data may be a clue that golfers
have already started to recognize this shift. The SD of driving distance has decreased
in the last 8 years, whereas the SD of putting has increased. If PGA Tour golfers are
spending more time practicing their driving, we would expect the SD to decline as it
did. And if they are spending less time on practicing putting, then the SD would
increase as it has done. Thus, we may be confirming what golf analysts were seeing
what the future was becoming and demonstrating statistically to others what profes-
sional golfers already know; the game of golf is changing and so is the relative
importance of the skills.
Baugher et al. 7

Appendix
Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,
authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of
this article.
Notes
1. Berry (1999) however concludes that driving and putting are important for earnings, but
putting is more important than driving for determining earnings.
2. The PGA ShotLink Intelligence Program keeps track of the average width of the fairways
at 250, 275, 300, 325, and 350 yards from the championship tee. The average width of the
fairways has decreased by a couple of yards from 2006 to 2013. This may not seem sig-
nificant, but when driving at 280þ yards, a couple of yards can have a significant effect
on the importance of accuracy.
3. Shmanske (2009) runs a standardized regression on each course in 2006 to compare the
relative impact of each skill on scores. Our model uses this as an example but compares
the relative impact of each skill on earnings each year from 2006 to 2013.
4. The modified scramble variable is calculated as (Number of Greens Missed À Bank Hits)/
(Number of Pars Hit Missing the Green À Number of Sand Saves).
5. Sand ability was more important than driving average in 2007.
6. Increasing the width of the fairways would decrease the importance of driving accuracy.
Decreasing the width of the fairways would decrease the importance of driving distance.
Table A1. Standardized Coefficients on Regressions of Skills on Earnings Each Year.a
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
DRIVEAVG 0.33 0.255 0.184 0.428 0.543 0.623 0.577 0.528
DRIVEACC 0.146 0.042 0.062 0.148 0.335 0.329 0.408 0.432
IRON 0.274 0.064 0.074 À0.039 À0.014 0.225 0.001 0.112
PUTT À0.452 À0.432 À0.289 À0.478 À0.551 À0.59 À0.426 À0.401
SAND 0.224 0.261 0.143 0.175 0.181 0.211 0.18 0.056
CHIP À0.224 À0.182 À0.16 À0.139 À0.304 À0.206 À0.125 À0.097
R2
.42 .28 .12 .36 .42 .59 .47 .33
a
Earnings were not in constant dollars since each year was analyzed individually. These standardized coef-
ficients were obtained using an ordinary least squares regression on the log of the dependent variable of
earnings per event. When using the dependent variable of just earnings, driving average is more important
in 2009, 2012, and 2013. Driving accuracy is more important than putting in 2013.

References
Alexander, D. L., Kern, W. (2005). Drive for show and putt for dough? An analysis of the
earnings of PGA Tour golfers. Journal of Sports Economics, 6, 46-60.
Berry, S. (1999). Drive for show and putt for dough. Chance, 12, 50-55.
Brown, C. (2004, June 9). Golf; Hiding pins can level buick field. New York Times, Retrieved from
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/09/sports/golf-hiding-pins-can-level-buick-field.html
Callan, S. J., Thomas, J. M. (2007). Modeling the determinants of a professional golfer’s
tournament earnings a multiequation approach. Journal of Sports Economics, 8, 394-411.
Golf Predictor Blog. (2009). Average course length on the US/European PGA tours 2003-
2009. Retrieved December 23, 2013, from http://blog.golfpredictor.com/2009/03/aver-
age-course-length-on-useuropean-pga.html
Heiny, E. L. (2008). Today’s PGA tour pro: Long but not so straight. Chance, 21, 10-21.
Rinehart, K. L. (2009). The economics of golf: An investigation of the returns to skill of PGA
tour golfers. Major Themes in Economics, Spring.
Shmanske, S. (2009). Golf match: The choice by PGA tour golfers of which tournaments to
enter. International Journal of Sport Finance, 4, 114-135.
Shmanske, S. (2013). Gender and skill convergence in professional golf. In E. M. Leeds
M. A. Leeds (Eds.), The handbook of the economics of women’s sports (pp. 73-91).
Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar.
Sports, P. A. (2009, June 2). Nicklaus wants to challenge, not punish, players. Bleacher
Report, Retrieved from http://bleacherreport.com/articles/190999-nicklaus-wants-to-chal-
lenge-not-punish-players
Author Biographies
Carson D. Baugher is a master’s student in political science at Western Illinois University
with an emphasis on American politics.
Jonathan P. Day, PhD, is an assistant professor of political science at Western Illinois
University. He received his PhD in 2010 from the University of Iowa. He has co-authored
articles in Politics Policy, Journal of Black Studies, Public Organization Review, and
Communication Quarterly.
Elvin W. Burford, Jr. has played competitive golf for 42 years at the amateur level. He has
won several local tournaments in the Lynchburg, Virginia area. He has played to 0 handicap
and is currently a 4 at 58 years old.
Baugher et al. 9

Journal of Sports Economics-2014-Baugher-Day-Burford

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Journal of Sports Economics-2014-Baugher-Day-Burford

Similar to Journal of Sports Economics-2014-Baugher-Day-Burford (20)

Journal of Sports Economics-2014-Baugher-Day-Burford