More about winning on the LPGA
by tatkins on Aug 13, 2010 9:01 PM PDT
Email
Print
As an engineer, I could discern patterns and trends in large amounts of data. I used those trends and patterns to spend money to improve the process control of chemical processes. As a retired engineer and LPGA fan I look at the available player data to find patterns and trends. The problems is to explain those trends and patterns to non engineering types of LPGA fans in a sports blog without a ten page report, that nobody would read, because it would be too long. The second problem is to include enough information to explain the logic behind the conclusions, which I did not do. Then third, hope people don't read too much into what I write.
What I see are trends and patterns of data that the players that joined the LPGA in the 1990's were, as a whole, not as competitive as I would have expected. The table below looks at the Top 30 players from each year from 1990 through 2009. For each year it gives the number of players that started in each decade that made the Top 30 players list. Looking at the years from 1990 to 1999 it took until 1998 for the 1990 decade players to outnumber the 1980 decade players in the Top 30. The yearly average number of 1980's players in the Top 30 was 17.2 versus 8 for the 1990's players. Looking at the years from 2000 to 2009 it only took until 2005 for the 2000 decade players to outnumber the 1990 decade players in the Top 30. The yearly average number of 1990's players in the Top 30 was 12.9 versus 13.6 for the 2000's players. Looking at the table for number of players from the 1990's decade in the Top 30 for the years from 1990 through 1999 and comparing that to the number of players from the 2000's decade in the Top 30 for the years from 2000 to 2009 also shows the difference in competitiveness. Compare the year of 1999 to 2009, and year 1998 to 2008, etc. Starting with 2003 versus 1993 the 2000 decade players started to significantly exceed the 1990 decade players in taking over the Top 30 List.
This data plus the low number of 1990 decade players with at least 10 wins and their places on my Top 100 LPGA Players Of All Time List, all contribute to my questioning the competitiveness of the 1990 decade players as a whole. I do not question the competitiveness of the 1980 decade players or the 2000 decade players. I said the lack of 10 win players among the 1990 decade players made it easier for the best among them, I did not say it made it easy. Maybe there are 14 players with 10 wins instead of 18 that I would have expected that those players would be competiting against. 14 assuming another player from the 1990 decade wins their 10th and that 9 of the 2000 decade players make the 10 wins mark. There were 9 players from the 1980's decade with at least 10 wins.
I did not and do not propose 10 wins as any type of absolute borderline for a definition of a top player. It is more of the recognition that by the time the 2000 decade players finish their careers, the top 50 in victories and the Top 50 on the LPGA All Time Greatest List will probably take at least 10 wins to be on the two lists. Does anybody believe that none of the current top players (the top 10 of the Rolex Rankings without 10 wins) will win at least 10 times before their careers are over. I might be wrong, but I believe that most of those players will have at least 10 wins, since most of them are 25 years of age or less and their best days should be ahead of them. I have speculated in the past that a lot of the best players tend to really get their game together around age 25 (for example Sorenstam and Ochoa). Ai Miyazato turned 25 this year and has 4 victories this year and Cristie Kerr started to win consistantly around that age. I believe that the quality depth of the LPGA tour is getting deeper, but that it is not yet to the point that will prevent a bunch of players from the 10 win mark during their careers. I just believe that for some currently unknown reason enough of the 1990 decade players just did not compete at the level (number of wins) that I expected, based on the past player records. The 1990 decade players were squeezed between the 1980 decade players and the 2000 decade players whom I believe to be better as a whole, but maybe not individuallly as I do not expect anybody to overtake Annika Sorenstam as the #1 player.
YEAR # DECADE YEAR # DECADE
1990 7 1970's 2000 8 1980's
23 1980's 21 1990's
0 1990's 1 2000's
1991 8 1970's 2001 6 1980's
21 1980's 22 1990's
1 1990's 2 2000's
1992 7 1970's 2002 5 1980's
18 1980's 18 1990's
5 1990's 7 2000's
1993 6 1970's 2003 4 1980's
18 1980's 13 1990's
6 1990's 13 2000's
1994 7 1970's 2004 3 1980's
16 1980's 15 1990's
7 1990's 12 2000's
1995 5 1970's 2005 3 1980's
18 1980's 10 1990's
7 1990's 17 2000's
1996 3 1970's 2006 2 1980's
17 1980's 9 1990's
10 1990's 19 2000's
1997 2 1970's 2007 3 1980's
17 1980's 8 1990's
11 1990's 19 2000's
1998 2 1970's 2008 1 1980's
13 1980's 7 1990's
15 1990's 22 2000's
1999 1 1970's 2009 0 1980's
11 1980's 6 1990's
18 1990's 24 2000's
Average 4.8 1970's Average 3.5 1980's
17.2 1980's 12.9 1990's
8 1990's 13.6 2000's
2 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I assume the lists of Top 30 players for each season is figured via your rating system and not the money list or some other method. Either way, you’ve definitely supported your stance on the 1990s players. I’m wondering if some of the decline in the 90s players’ numbers post-2000 is because of the Korean boom (all but Pak and MH Kim should classify as 00s).
Thanks for the clarifications on the points that I misunderstood.
Top 30 is by my rating system..
and should not be much different than yours. I agree that the Korean boom does explain some of the decline in the 90’s players’ numbers post-2000. Another reason may be the fact that more younger players are winning when they first join the LPGA, because of their AJGA experience. The younger players (Creamer, Pressel, Lincicome, and others) have learned to win in junior golf.
I do long term projections based on historical data, but not predictions of individual players. Individual player predictions are often messed up by illness or injury or even life changing decisions.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
