PM Norwaay - Golf Par vs Xg

At the abstract level I get your point but par is far more objective and standardised based upon distance to pin and allowance for hole complexity.

Xg in principle has a similar approach in terms of distance/angle from goal the shot/header is taken. However in golf you don't have multiple opponents between you and the hole trying to deflect your shot. If you did par would be a lot more difficult to estimate. Because of this and other factors various websites have different ways of calculating Xg, there isn’t a standard approach, and published stats are currently very subjective.

When trying to model real world performance all statistics are wrong but some can be useful. It all depends on how they are interpreted and used. In general no single statistic should be used on its own.

I believe why USAC has chosen this hill to die upon is because some people on here use statistics incorrectly without any reference to the limitations of how the underlying data is captured and manipulated. Rather like a drunken man uses a lamp post, for support rather than illumination.

Having said all that personally I have no issue with Xg if used with other statistics in terms of showing trends and potential areas for improvement. Just quoting Xg after every game as some like to do has more limited value.

Posted By: The Gaffer, Sep 1, 18:14:21