Luke Hartcher

@JCAGOLFReport @AndrewKirbyGolf @LIVGolfComms @livgolf_league I noticed on the Team/Group View that some of the cameras on some holes were fogged up with a large circle in the middle of the screen disrupting the view. Surely it's not that hard to see that stuff and send someone to go fix it! Or use better equipment!

@AndrewKirbyGolf @LukeHartcher @LIVGolfComms @livgolf_league The individual leaderboard pylon was constantly shown in the groups streams. Still don't understand why it wasn't shown in the main stream. Was that by choice or technical difficulties? It was a big miss by the TV production team.

The LIV broadcast and pylon is way off at times today At times frozen on the leaderboard Has a PGAT vibe 🙄😬🤦🏻🤡 Someone is not doing their job @LIVGolfComms @livgolf_league

@mrmckee The lack of coverage by the CGM of this event - the reception and what it means for LIV and 🇿🇦 - says enough about how the traditional golf media are all owned by and bend to PGAT and cannot be trusted as true and unbiased reporting of golf.

Honest question for the mainstream golf pundits like Eamon Lynch or Evin Priest etc who hate LIV, can you explain to me why this is bad for golf but whats happening at the Valspar Championship this week is better for golf?

@flushingitgolf It would be great to see him play his National Open. 🤞

Richard T Lee turned pro in 2011 and has played almost exclusively on the Asian and Korean Tours. In January he qualified for LIV Golf by winning the Promotions Event and now he’s just forced a playoff with 2 time major champion Bryson DeChambeau. The solo 2nd place finish doubles his career earnings and he can be immensely proud of what he has achieved already this season 👏 @livgolf_league

@BobHarig @Robopz @ThorbjornOleZyn 🤦‍♂️

@Robopz @LukeHartcher @ThorbjornOleZyn You have done God’s work attempting to explain this system to people who are continually aggrieved about some perceived slight while blind to their own bias. It’s exhausting. But kudos to you.

the level of groupthink demonstrated RE: misconstruing the point of my post is astonishing... i'm talking about SG allocation difference between tours this isnt space jam, they didn't lose skill by signing a contract with LIV, though u might believe that looking at their ranks

@ThorbjornOleZyn @Robopz As for the double accounting - IMO its more a self feeding system where the OWGR is basically a closed feedback loop ie high rankings generate high tournament points, which mathematically ensures those same players keep their high rankings. It slows global advancement.

@ThorbjornOleZyn @Robopz That’s an OWGR problem, not an SG problem. SG events are a data point for that specific day. The SG flaw is the cross-tour bridge where models like DG & TUGR run a basic 'A vs B vs C' assumption connectivity model - IMO an oversimplification that ignores courses, conditions etc.

@Robopz @ThorbjornOleZyn Back to the original point - SG is only reasonably accurate at an event level. I get what you believe, but to say that is a factual representation of global golf is incorrect. Assumptions need to be made in order to align data across tours. You said I was incorrect, I'm not.

SG is an adjusted scoring average stat based on real results... that's all it is. I'm not sure I even understand what you are saying anymore... but it seems to me you expect it to be something, or do something, that it, nor any other type of ranking system can possibly do... My bottom line: IMO SG is a tremendous measure of relative talent levels across tours. And I believe the high correlation of output between SGWR, DG & TUGR demonstrates none of them are grossly inaccurate or putting a thumb on the scale. (Although SGWR is still "out there" on some LIV guys SG until enough LIV results are added to normalize them. But as a whole, the sum of SWGR LIV over/underranks still pretty much cancel each other out.) So i just don't see why so many LIV fans freak out over SG... especially seeing as how LIV itself has used both TUGR and DG ranks themselves. (For promotion event entries for instance). If it's good enough for them, then excuse me if I fail to see the problem... Now... I truly am done with this one...

@Robopz @ThorbjornOleZyn No. It depends on the model applied to bridge the gap in SG data. It's non-deterministic - you cannot guarantee the same outcome & you need to apply a bridge model. This is fact! All you're doing is trying to explain how you like the gap filled - it's your opinion only, not fact!

@LukeHartcher @ThorbjornOleZyn With a high degree of reliability, big data can rank players within the enormous dataset of past outcomes... but what it can't do is predict future ones with reliable specificity.

@Robopz @ThorbjornOleZyn I completely understand this is used to ATTEMPT to "bridge" the big data gap that exists, but your example is still only a subset. SG on its own cannot give you certainty and it is still all assumptions. They key: Big Data cannot be used to give a deterministic outcome!

Those 2 guys alone are not enough, but the fact a lot of LIV guys play 30-50% of their rounds outside of LIV is... It's because of that outside play LIV events are able to increase or decrease in value over the season. In fact it's why LIV events are starting out weaker this year than last... because as a group, returning LIV players underperformed in their outside play from summer of last year through the end of the year.

@Robopz @ThorbjornOleZyn Were these under the same courses and conditions?

@ThorbjornOleZyn @LukeHartcher Sebastian Munoz has faced over 350 different competitors over the last 18 months... Paul Casey over 400.

@Robopz @ThorbjornOleZyn Not sufficient overlap sorry. It's not the amount of data it's the quality and relevance of it. Back to my original point - SG is only accurate within a single event & conditions and then it fades away. It's a fact sorry. Big data can't fix it, only give a rough guesstimate.

@LukeHartcher @ThorbjornOleZyn More is always better, but all the major tours have enough overlap to make the connections... PGAT, DPWT, LIV, KFT, HPT, JPN, AUS, AFR, ASA.

@Robopz @ThorbjornOleZyn Correct. 👌

@LukeHartcher @ThorbjornOleZyn Got it... all "world" rankings systems are 🐃💩... Moving on....

@Robopz @ThorbjornOleZyn Ahhh "merge" is the magic word isn't it. It's how you "merge" them - It's not a fact there is an artificial "merge".

@LukeHartcher @ThorbjornOleZyn Because course fit (and other event by event adjustments) account for specific anticipated situations... whereas ranking systems (or any stat) merge/average all observed actual results from all situations.

@Robopz @ThorbjornOleZyn But they need consistent and trusted overlaps to join the data where the data cannot represent it. Just because there are separate data sets with billions of rows doesn't mean you can join them accurately.

@LukeHartcher @ThorbjornOleZyn Strokes gained rankings are derived from many, many thousands, if not millions of actual REAL results. None of them made up.

@Robopz @ThorbjornOleZyn If you're a true data guy, you know it's not 100% accurate - stop pretending. The "big data" cannot fill the gaps across courses, conditions, travel etc and any algorithm needs to make assumptions. Why would DG build a Courses Fit if SG was so accurate!

@ThorbjornOleZyn @LukeHartcher Which is also true of any rank of scoring averages, money lists, driving/putting statistics, points based ranking systems... etc, etc. But you can still accurately rank them because of the enormity of the big data.

@ThorbjornOleZyn @Robopz 💯 it is correct. People that like the current assumptions will defend it, and vice-versa. Removing courses from the equation, bridge players, assuming players skill will directly transfer across tour etc. It's all smoke and mirrors.

@Robopz @LukeHartcher It’s absolutely correct. The same round could be shot on the exact same course on two different tours and it becomes different SG simply based on who else is playing the same course.

@Robopz @ThorbjornOleZyn Please enlighten me! You literally can't make up something that didn't happen and say it's accurate.

@LukeHartcher @ThorbjornOleZyn That's incorrect.

@Robopz @ThorbjornOleZyn The golf Majors are the only true way to compare globally and get solid crossover data. But when the Major entrance criteria uses a system based on those assumptions above, we don't really get the opportunity and it's just heavily weighted one way.

@Robopz @ThorbjornOleZyn SG is only accurate within a single event - same course and conditions. The further you start to move away from that, eg tour level, global level etc, the less accurate it becomes and it needs to put in lots of mathematical assumptions and guess work.