Last year, for the third year in a row, my daughter picked the winner of the Kentucky Derby. I had bet $6 on it, $2 each win, place and show. Rich Strike was a long shot, and while we did not strike it rich, I ended up with almost $300 in my account. I cashed out ~$250 (and split the winnings with my daughter) and left $50 in there for her to pick the winner again this year. I told myself I’d bet all $50 on whatever horse she chose this year.
Last Saturday was the Kentucky Derby. My daughter picked Mage to win. Mage won. It was a 14-1 bet, so that $50 would have been an easy $700 had I bet it. Instead, I spent $30 on another Win, Place, Show bet. We ended up winning $280 on her ticket (as usual, nothing I picked without her guidance won money). As I look to next year, I wonder if my daughter can correctly pick the winner for the 5th year in a row. She is 10 and not a professional handicapper. Sitting here, a year from the next Kentucky Derby, I’m tempted to commit to going all in on whatever horse she picks.
$50 in winnings spends much differently when it’s freshly won. A year later, and it’s a little harder to bet $50 on a single bet, even with money that was won on a single bet. Our daily lives are filled with risk reward calculations, and we aren’t always rational in our calculations. This carries directly over to the golf course. One of the biggest things I notice in good golfers is they seem to have a better understanding of the risk and rewards on a golf course than higher handicap players.
As I improve, I find myself hitting less “hero” shots around the course. I wish this was because I am rarely in trouble on the golf course, but that’s simply not the case. My value proposition on the golf course has simply changed. As I dig more into golf strategy, I’m starting to realize that good golf strategy is understanding the risk reward of various situations.
Lou Stagner was recently on The Golfer’s Journal podcast with Tom Coyne. One of the things they discussed was the difference in chipping between a 10 handicap and a scratch handicap. The big difference that Lou noticed in the Arccos data was that the best players around the green at 10 handicap tended to use one club, and the worst used multiple clubs. At the scratch level, the better players around the green used more clubs, and the worst used one club.
I’ve been processing this information since I listened to the podcast. It’s an interesting juxtaposition. How does the value proposition change for wedge selection at a lower handicap? There are probably a number of reasons why it’s true, but I think the risk reward lens is a good way to understand the difference.
For a 10 handicap to be good for their handicap around the green, the biggest thing they need to do is get the ball on the green and not make a huge mistake. This is especially true when they are short sided or given the opportunity to hit a “hero” shot. The worst thing to do around the green, especially when short sided, is to leave the ball in the rough. Getting the ball on the green, on average, is a great result for a 10 handicap. Having one simple shot that gets the ball out of the rough and onto the green is enough for a 10 handicap to be above average chipping.
Scratch handicaps are better at golf. They have more shots in their arsenal, and need to do more than just get the ball on the green to be a better than average chipper for their handicap. Their skill level changes the risk reward calculation. A mediocre chip is in the center of the green, and a good chip leaves a good opportunity to make a putt. The risk of leaving the ball in the rough is lower, so they can chase more reward. This requires using a variety of clubs to accomplish a different result. The worst chippers at scratch use one club, and likely just get the ball on the green. The good chippers at that level are more aggressive, because they can be.
What is a risky shot for a 10 handicap is more a standard shot for a scratch golfer. They hit better shots, without adding more risk. The farther away we get from the green, the greater the difference. Most of the really good golfers I have played with tend to play to the middle of the fairway and the green. They simply don’t take on a ton of risk, regardless of the position they are in. When they do make a mistake, they tend to take a low risk shot that puts them back into play. They are never trying to “get one back” by taking on additional risk.
The other side of this is when they hit a great shot, they do not chase birdies. A big drive down the middle doesn’t mean they will take an aggressive line on their next shot. The reward they get from a good shot is that their next shot is a little bit easier. They do not start pin hunting just because they crushed a drive. They just keep banking the little wins, and at the end of the round have a lower score based on not making huge mistakes.
Maybe there is a lesson here with my daughter’s very specific ability to pick Derby winners. I should probably be happy she has won over $500 in the past two years. That does not mean I need to bet $500 next year on whatever horse has the name she likes the most. I may have missed out on a $700 win this year, but I also did not risk losing $50 for the day she inevitably misses. I should celebrate the little wins, and continue to bet amounts I am comfortable with. Hopefully, she will continue to pick winners.