As the players have sought to hone their games in preparation for the Masters, the season’s first major, it seems like many have brought questions into discussion of their chances to win.
 Rickie Fowler .. hasn’t had a top-10 since the first event of 2018.
 Dustin Johnson .. lost three straight matches as defending champion in the Match Play.
 Jordan Spieth .. Oh my God, whatever happened to his putting?

Well, of course you can dig up these little nuggets endlessly, and there are plenty of strong points to consider or these guys would not be household names. Spieth ranks no. 1 in this computer analysis. In his four Masters appearances, he has one win (2015), was twice runner-up, and has never finished out of the top 20. His recent mediocre-to-poor performance putting is at least somewhat offset by other strong elements of his game. For instance, he is no. 1 on the Tour in scrambling and ranks well up the list in driving distance and greens in regulation.

Justin Thomas comes in as probably the hottest player in the field off his recent performance. He’s played four times in the last month and a half and won at the Honda, was second and fourth in the two WGC events, and finished in the top 10 at Riviera. Not bad. Johnson deserves strong consideration despite his leaky performance in the Match Play. Before that, he had a win (Champions), two seconds, two other top-10s, and two other top-20s in his preceding seven appearances.

The TV cameras undoubtedly will find it hard to move away from Tiger Woods as long as he is in contention. However Woods ranks only 20th on the computer list of favorites, largely because the computer considers his performance going back two or three years to be significant. But perhaps not. He’s certainly energized the fan base with back-to-back top-five finishes in the Palmer and Valspar as a 42-year-old coming off serious back surgery.

Analysis of the Hawley course fit statistics indicates that the beautiful Augusta National course is among the most neutral venues on the PGA Tour in terms of having a bias toward a certain type of player. Certainly it seems likely that those responsible for the course would be pleased that the stats show it tests all facets of a player’s game. Among the primary stats tracked on the Tour, driving distance and greens in regulation have correlated most strongly with success in the Masters over recent years, although the correlations are much softer than typical around the Tour. If you run the numbers, Johnson pops out as having the best game for the course. Not far behind are Thomas, Phil Mickelson, and Jon Rahm, all of whom rank in the upper echelon of long ball hitters.

Some guys from a little farther down the ratings who have looked good in recent events include Tommy Fleetwood, Adam Hadwin, Patrick Reed, and Xander Schauffele. Going back six months and 14 events, Fleetwood has been on a steady rise with one win (Abu Dhabi) and five other top-10 finishes, including a fourth at the Honda. Reed has two top-10s in his last three appearances, and advanced to the bracket round of the Match Play in the other. Hadwin has three top-10s and two other top-20s on the PGA Tour in 2018.

Hawley Ratings thru April 1, 2018

Paul Casey is rated the no. 1 player in the world in the Hawley Ratings, and if you check the Official World Golf Ranking, you need to look all the way down to no. 13 to find him. What gives?

Obviously the algorithms used in the two systems have some major differences. In both systems, the winner gets a certain number of points. Probably the largest difference is that in the OWGR, the second place golfer gets 60% of the winner’s amount, and then 40% for third, 30% for fourth, 24% for fifth, down to 7% for 20th and 1.5% for 60th. In the Hawley Ratings, the reduction from one finish position to the next is more gradual. The second place golfer gets 96% of the winner’s amount, and then 92.2% for third, 88.4% for fourth, 84.8% for fifth, down to 42.3% for 20th and the same 1.5% for 60th. The philosophy of the Hawley approach is that the skill difference between the winner and the runner-up is small; i.e. they are much closer in ability than a 40% drop in ratings points indicates.

What does this mean to Paul Casey? Well, Casey has been playing great for the last year or so but has won only once in that span, at the Valspar last month. His next-best finish was a fourth. Dustin Johnson, leader in the OWGR, has been playing great too, but he’s been up and down to some extent, with three wins, three seconds, and four finishes outside the top 50 in 22 events since the 2017 Match Play. Casey has the same number of events over the same timespan but no finishes outside the top 50. So in the Hawley system, Casey is rewarded for being consistently among the leaders and rarely out of contention. In the OWGR system, Johnson is heavily rewarded for being at the top or in the runner-up spot more frequently, even if there are a few clunkers elsewhere in the record.

There are other significant differences between the two systems.

Another point of comparison is Tiger Woods. Tiger is 14th in the Hawley Ratings and 103rd in the OWGR. You can decide for yourself which number you feel is more accurate, but in general the Hawley Ratings will be quicker to recognize an improving player.

From time to time (although not recently), I have done a dispassionate mathematical comparison of the Hawley Ratings with other published sources of pro golf info. On the last check, the Hawley Ratings were about 4.5% more accurate than the OWGR in predicting the finish of PGA and Euro Tour events.